* * * SC2 Mafia Thread * * * -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Thread : Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46902 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 1] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 01:33 AM Title : Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Aka libertarianism vs conservatism. A study I recently read made two claims: a) Social conservatism is linked to lower IQ b) Disgust sensitivity strongly linked to social conservatism This study said that this does not apply to ‘economic liberals’, who tend to vote for ostensibly conservative parties (like the Republican Party). I want to go further and argue that this means that economic liberals and conservatives have very little in common, and I have a very strong feeling the media has been trying to paint ALL right wingers as being conservative (and also racist nazis). I actually watch Tucker Carlson a lot and he has been attacked for ‘white nationalism’ even though the guy literally denounces racism every. fucking. minute. I really think this is indicative of the far left being very influential in our society. When being right wing is equated with being a racist, there is a HUGE problem in society. I don’t go around claiming all left wingers are communists... I absolutely hate how they’re tying to make decent right-wing liberals hate their own views and trying to insinuate that they may be racist. For the longest time I actually had a huge problem with my own political views because I didn’t fully understand them. I’m not a typical conservative but I am definitely not left wing, and at the same time I’m not some kind of Nazi, and never have been. I found it extremely problematic to explain my views even to myself as I’m very liberal but also very hard-right when it comes to economic issues, and I’m sympathetic to religion (although I’m not religious myself, and I don’t like bigots - I grew up in a religiously bigoted country, and let me tell you it’s no picnic man). Anyways, after having read that study I can no longer believe that right wing = conservative. Especially seeing as many left wingers were socially conservative (take a look at Che Guevara, or Stalin). Also, I remember reading that PC-authoritarians (basically people who try to stifle freedom of speech in the name of ‘equality’) are high in orderliness, which is linked to conservatism - far left ideologues as well as far right ideologues are actually conservative. I just want to say, I think this culture of painting right wingers as nazis (more precisely, I think it has to do with economic liberalism) needs to stop because it is incredibly dangerous. I find the move GitHub has made to change the master/slave branches an example of this; they LITERALY have nothing to do with racism, and trying to find racist undertones in everything isn’t not only counterproductive but I actually believe it to be immoral as well. Claiming that the West is a fundamentally racist civilization is not only absurd, it is immoral. We are LITERALLY the least racist society on the planet. And the left should really move back towards the center and worry about the poor, and stop pushing this absurd the-West-is-evil narrative. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 2] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 01:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is: What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism? A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 3] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 02:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Claiming that the West is a fundamentally racist civilization is not only absurd, it is immoral. We are LITERALLY the least racist society on the planet. And the left should really move back towards the center and worry about the poor, and stop pushing this absurd the-West-is-evil narrative. I take issue with this because I don't think there are people that claim that Western civilization is worse than any other, outside of fringe extremists. Obviously there are societies with far worse problems, like China with racism and many parts of the Arab world for sexism. The reason people focus on western society is because that's where the people that you pay attention to live. Do other societies have more to improve on? Absolutely. But what can I do about it? Basically nothing. Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is: What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism? A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis? Despite your post where you try to separate conservatism from right-wing ideologies, you're still falling for the American-centric view of left vs right. You say "the left" should really move back towards the center and worry about the poor, which makes very little sense because the left is more concerned with economic equality than centrists. I wonder how much you actually understand these terms and the ideas of the left when you say stuff like this. In fact, I see race issues as being largely outside of the scope of left/right. I agree that right-wing liberalism has very little to do with conservatism. In the US, however, both have been consolidated into support for Republicans, which are a right-wing, authoritarian, conservative party. The media is hardly trying to paint right-wingers as immoral Nazis, after all, Fox News is the most watched news network in the US by almost double, and I doubt they paint right-wingers as Nazis. In a comparison to the Nazi party, you find a lot of people in the US who disagree with the conservative Republican rhetoric who like the Republicans for economic reasons. Just like how, in the rise of the Nazi party, a lot of their support were from lower-middle class people such as teachers and farmers who didn't care as much about their social policy but supported them for economic reasons. In hindsight, does that give them a pass? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 4] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 22nd, 2020 02:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why are you all having the same arguements but starting at different points of the arguement. Can we just skip a couple of chapters like nation health a good idea and stuff? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 5] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 02:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is: What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism? A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis? Libertarians are socially liberal, right? Meaning pro gay marriage and such? Feel free to educate me or correct me here. I can respect libertarians. We can disagree on things like the economy and thats okay. No problem. As far a right wingers being painted as immoral nazis though. I mean, every white supremacist or neo nazi group is a far right conservative group. So while not all right wingers are going to fall into those categories obviously, theres a lot of common ground there. And if you defend the actions of such groups due to common ideals, its not a good look. Take the "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville a few years back. This rally was literally organized by white supremacist, white nationalist, and neo nazi groups. People in the rally were literally carrying flags or wearing clothes with swastikas and other nazi symbols. Its simple. Don't want to be associated with nazis or white nationalists or white supremacists? Reject them. But like actually reject them. Trump declared of this rally that there were "good people" at the rally on both sides. When a "good person" would a) not support, attend, or DEFEND a rally organized by white supremacists, or b) if they didnt realize that the rally was organized by these groups, once they see the symbols and hear the chants they turn around and go home. How can you reject nazis but stand side by side with them and chant what they chant? Actions speak louder than words. Saying "I reject white supremecy" means nothing if you then defend a white supremacist rally. This is just one example of course. There'a no painting needed here. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 6] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The thing is, those neo nazis are in the minority. Looking at the media you’d honestly get the feeling that everyone who is right wing is a nazi. People say that Niger Farage is a Nazi, and honestly until I actually checked him out I thought he was one too. He explicitly condemns nazis and commented in the Charlottesville incident by saying that he thought it was unbelievable Nazi salutes were happening in America; he also specifically stated he didn’t agree with Trump’s stance on immigration from Muslim countries, and feels that its okay to accept Muslim immigrants so long as they’re not extremist. He is no Nazi and yet he is touted as some huge racist... I think Trump has the same problem. He actually did specifically condemn white nationalists at Charlottesville, and clarified that he was referring to the people who didn’t want Robert E Lee statues torn down. Personally I actually agree with him but that’s beside the point: he specifically condemned them. And, everywhere I look if you don’t agree with the media or with hard left stances like white privilege and affirmative action, you’re instantly attacked and labeled a racist/xenophobe/white nationalist. Honestly that term has lost its meaning. My point is, the direction we are heading towards us worrisome. Sorry if my tone is a little extreme at times, I honestly am a bit of a bitch and I kind of enjoy being somewhat trolly, so that’s kinda why I’m so aggressive with these matters lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 7] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why are you all having the same arguements but starting at different points of the arguement. Can we just skip a couple of chapters like nation health a good idea and stuff? yes... pls can we tax the rich billionnaires just a little :(. I just want them to pay taxes too... I love Bill Gates he's such a GOOD PERSON for GIVING all that money FOR FREE but pls I just want him to pay his taxes... Why is this so hard DX And maybe fine them of all of their wealth for tax-evading their entire lives, selling out our country's economies to hire slaves abroad and spitting in the face of society? :3 Oh wait hold on they released a statement declaring racism is bad awwh wow they're so kind and brave nvm then I guess.. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 8] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:33 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why are you all having the same arguements but starting at different points of the arguement. Can we just skip a couple of chapters like nation health a good idea and stuff? What do you mean? Are you talking about health care? That’s an important discussion to have and I do support health care to some extent although I don’t think we should spend too much on it. I am not rich but I can’t see my good health being a right I am entitled to. I do think having a minimal public health care system is useful, but only to eliminate inequality for those who REALLY can’t afford private health insurance (e.g. those who explicitly cannot work for whatever reason). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 9] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly corporative malpractice is something I cannot really discuss because I don’t know enough about it, although my suspicion is that it’s exaggerated. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 10] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism There are some worrisome corporations out there, like Google. Or Facebook. Something needs to be done about the flow of information lol because it’s honestly not going in the right direction at all. Kind of ironic that a major corporation would essentially become a nexus of extremism and authoritarianism, but, weirder things have happened. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 11] Auteur : rumox Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ideological warfare needs to end and class warfare needs to begin. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 12] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It actually makes me think monopolies can be dangerous, although I suppose it depends on a case by case basis. The worst thing really is that they have a near monopoly on information, which is absolutely deplorable, it’s against free speech. I’m somewhat surprised they’ve lasted this long. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 13] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ideological warfare needs to end and class warfare needs to begin. American Revolution hype 2020 Workers of the world unite -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 14] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:44 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I take issue with this because I don't think there are people that claim that Western civilization is worse than any other, outside of fringe extremists. Obviously there are societies with far worse problems, like China with racism and many parts of the Arab world for sexism. The reason people focus on western society is because that's where the people that you pay attention to live. Do other societies have more to improve on? Absolutely. But what can I do about it? Basically nothing. Despite your post where you try to separate conservatism from right-wing ideologies, you're still falling for the American-centric view of left vs right. You say "the left" should really move back towards the center and worry about the poor, which makes very little sense because the left is more concerned with economic equality than centrists. I wonder how much you actually understand these terms and the ideas of the left when you say stuff like this. In fact, I see race issues as being largely outside of the scope of left/right. I agree that right-wing liberalism has very little to do with conservatism. In the US, however, both have been consolidated into support for Republicans, which are a right-wing, authoritarian, conservative party. The media is hardly trying to paint right-wingers as immoral Nazis, after all, Fox News is the most watched news network in the US by almost double, and I doubt they paint right-wingers as Nazis. In a comparison to the Nazi party, you find a lot of people in the US who disagree with the conservative Republican rhetoric who like the Republicans for economic reasons. Just like how, in the rise of the Nazi party, a lot of their support were from lower-middle class people such as teachers and farmers who didn't care as much about their social policy but supported them for economic reasons. In hindsight, does that give them a pass? I just find the politics that are being played right now worrisome. Maybe they are not on the left or their primary, defining characteristic isn’t their position on the left-right spectrum, but most of the people they’re attacking tend to be on the right (usually moderate right, too; nobody attacks the actual far right because nobody cares about them, they actually are extremists lol). Like, it’s mostly people on the right or people sympathetic to issues advanced by the right that are attacked. That leads me to think that the people doing the attacking are on the left (the RADICAL left, because they otherwise wouldn’t be painting right wingers as nazis). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 15] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If you want another example, many in the US have lost their jobs for criticizing BLM. This is something the right has had an issue with for years now; that’s why I think it’s an attack on the right. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 16] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sadly I feel that many of the people doing the attacking don’t really know what they’re doing and are probably thinking they’re doing the right thing lol. Doesn’t take much to indoctrinate someone who is young. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 17] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And that's why a national living wage is a good idea. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 18] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It’s just, I don’t know maybe I’m just too paranoid, but don’t you guys feel like there is a legitimate issue with how the moderate right is being attacked now, and specially how the West is being attacked? This white guilt narrative is a huge part of that. The idea that the west is a patriarchy is one, too. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 19] Auteur : rumox Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't want a communist state, I just don't want the rich having such a disproportionate amount of wealth compared to the majority. That is wealth in all forms - money, power, influence, opportunities. The game is glaringly rigged against the majority and attention is always being focused elsewhere, usually towards the ideological conflicts. Both "sides" are guilty of this. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 20] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:52 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And that's why a national living wage is a good idea. I’m not sure what that solves. This will be a very insensitive thing to say, (remember I’m not rich by any stretch of the imagination, I’m actually rather poor rn), but: I don’t think that people who don’t know what to do with money should be give any money. Free healthcare, schooling etc is a good idea, but only up to s point. I don’t think having a minimum wage is a good idea. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 21] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It’s just, I don’t know maybe I’m just too paranoid, but don’t you guys feel like there is a legitimate issue with how the moderate right is being attacked now, and specially how the West is being attacked? This white guilt narrative is a huge part of that. The idea that the west is a patriarchy is one, too. We don't have that feeling because we don't watch Fox News lmao. They're a partisan hack network bent on convincing their viewers that the "other side" hates them and wants to destroy their way of life. They're constantly caught twisting what people say and do, editing pictures and outright lying. MSNBC and CNN are the same except more PC. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 22] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't want a communist state, I just don't want the rich having such a disproportionate amount of wealth compared to the majority. That is wealth in all forms - money, power, influence, opportunities. The game is glaringly rigged against the majority and attention is always being focused elsewhere, usually towards the ideological conflicts. Both "sides" are guilty of this. That’s indeed an issue: relative inequality is actually related to crime. This is I believe mostly an issue in the US, although I’m not certain why. If you look at other high income countries like the Scandinavian countries, they don’t really have this issue of inequality, although it’s developing into a problem as well due to the number of immigrants from less well off countries they are taking in. i actually think that regulating immigration for a while until things stabilize again is a good idea, although I’m not sure what else might be done about it. I suppose that having things like free healthcare (up to a point), would help. The real issue is that America is a highly competitive place, and even though there’s plenty of work to be had for the less well off, with high pay, too, it’s not that simple. The relative differences matter a lot. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 23] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We don't have that feeling because we don't watch Fox News lmao. They're a partisan hack network bent on convincing their viewers that the "other side" hates them and wants to destroy their way of life. They're constantly caught twisting what people say and do, editing pictures and outright lying. MSNBC and CNN are the same except more PC. Maybe, but it’s not just Fox News here a lol. I’d have to assume that MANY people are lying about what’s happening and I can’t imagine that being the case. It would be extremely complicated; there’s multiple people who feel the same way as I do, and the majority aren’t public figures, or, at least, they’re heavily discredited. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 24] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not sure what that solves. This will be a very insensitive thing to say, (remember I’m not rich by any stretch of the imagination, I’m actually rather poor rn), but: I don’t think that people who don’t know what to do with money should be give any money. Free healthcare, schooling etc is a good idea, but only up to s point. I don’t think having a minimum wage is a good idea. Yeah and you think those people getting billions know what the hell to do with that either? The government and the mega-wealthy are always pedalling the notion that they know best, when time and time again they've demonstrated they do not. Some people may spend some of their wage on narcotics and shit, but they would still overall spend that money better than some massive institution actively funding political propaganda or toppling foreign regimes. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 25] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Canada has provinces with low income and low inequality, and the crime rate is very low there. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 26] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:05 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah and you think those people getting billions know what the hell to do with that either? The government and the mega-wealthy are always pedalling the notion that they know best, when time and time again they've demonstrated they do not. Some people may spend some of their wage on narcotics and shit, but they would still overall spend that money better than some massive institution actively funding political propaganda or toppling foreign regimes. They probably do for the most part, yes, although I cannot attest to that. Which companies and how many actually do the things you’ve accused them of? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 27] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’d have to assume that MANY people are lying about what’s happening and I can’t imagine that being the case. It would be extremely complicated; It's not. The individual disseminators of information overlook the misinformation or logic jumps they're spreading because they still believe their ideology is correct as a whole and assume others in their ideology are telling the truth. The vast majority of consumers of the disinformation do not need to be involved in any misinformation, they're just passing on what they heard. This is how massive groups of people espousing comically wrong statements come to fruition. Has Fox News ever shown you actual polling data of how many people think "The West is evil" or "The West is White Supremacist"? Of course not. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 28] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism They probably do for the most part, yes, although I cannot attest to that. Which companies and how many actually do the things you’ve accused them of? The toppling foreign regimes was about the government, though the defense industry and oil industry indirectly contribute to that through lobbying. When I said "political propaganda" I was specifically thinking of all the propaganda the Koch Brothers funds discrediting climate change. Though more broadly anyone who pours lots of money into mainstream media company's pockets through ad revenue is contributing "political propaganda". Mainstream media outlets are incentivized not to question economic power due to the source of their ad revenue. Just look out how soft all the left wing media outlets were on Michael Bloomberg, a racist, sexist oligarch who fundamentally opposes everything anyone remotely left wing stands for. They gave him a total free pass because he put 10s of millions into their pockets by paying for his political ads. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 29] Auteur : rumox Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Regulating immigration where? In Australia it is very bloody vital that we have immigration lol. Because of coronavirus, the loss of international students is set to blow a $30b-$60b hole in the economy and that's just foreign students. We have millions of empty homes that immigrants can get the cash flow rolling on. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 30] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The toppling foreign regimes was about the government, though the defense industry and oil industry indirectly contribute to that through lobbying. When I said "political propaganda" I was specifically thinking of all the propaganda the Koch Brothers funds discrediting climate change. Though more broadly anyone who pours lots of money into mainstream media company's pockets through ad revenue is contributing "political propaganda". Mainstream media outlets are incentivized not to question their economic power due to the source of their ad revenue. Just look out how soft all the left wing media outlets were on Michael Bloomberg, a racist, sexist oligarch who fundamentally opposes everything anyone remotely left wing stands for. They gave him a total free pass because he was 10s of millions into their pockets by paying for his political ads. I mean it's not only right-wing outlets funding political propaganda. That's just my bias showing. I oppose left wing billionnaires funding ads raising awareness for climate change. I just don't want oligarchs controlling our discourse lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 31] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My real issue to give you an example of what I’m talking about is the idea that white people should feel responsible for slavery - in and of itself, an okay idea but then you get into the issue of blaming ALL white people for something that happened ages back and that most had nothing to do with. I think this is a form of class war disguised as race war, because the ‘oppressed’in this new narrative are ethnic minorities with low average income. You almost never see the media talking about Asians for instance, nor about Jews, even though a) they were LITERALLY massacred not even a century ago and b) it’s mostly whites who did that, and Antisemitism was extremely popular in the west until the Second World War. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 32] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My real issue to give you an example of what I’m talking about is the idea that white people should feel responsible for slavery - in and of itself, an okay idea but then you get into the issue of blaming ALL white people for something that happened ages back and that most had nothing to do with. I think this is a form of class war disguised as race war, because the ‘oppressed’in this new narrative are ethnic minorities with low average income. You almost never see the media talking about Asians for instance, nor about Jews, even though a) they were LITERALLY massacred not even a century ago and b) it’s mostly whites who did that, and Antisemitism was extremely popular in the west until the Second World War. bro how many left wing people "blame white people for slavery". How many left wing people have you spoken to on here or in real life who actually think that? How many white people do you think would tick yes if polled on the question "do you blame yourself for the atlantic slave trade?" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 33] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It's not. The individual disseminators of information overlook the misinformation or logic jumps they're spreading because they still believe their ideology is correct as a whole and assume others in their ideology are telling the truth. The vast majority of consumers of the disinformation do not need to be involved in any misinformation, they're just passing on what they heard. This is how massive groups of being espousing comically wrong statements come to fruition. Has Fox News ever shown you actual polling data of how many people think "The West is evil" or "The West is White Supremacist"? Of course not. The overwhelming majority of people, I suspect, feel as I do. There’s a reason Fox News and conservative out lets tend to have high likes on YT, for instance, compared to CNN, say. And it’s not like this data is based solely off of FoxNews either: look at what GitHub is doing. Look at what Harvard is doing, look at what Cambridge is doing; look at what the various companies in the game industry are doing right now. Look at the comments political leaders in America (many of them Republican, many of them Democrat) are making on the George Floyd protests/riots. Look at how people are getting banned for not being left. Look at how Twitter is trying to censor Trump. Look at how coronavirus videos criticizing the lockdown are being taken down from YouTube. Look at how Trump’s rallies are attacked as ‘immoral’ because they endanger public safety, when the riots were actually given the geeen light by health experts because apparently racial inequality is a huge health risk. Look at how in Canada a prominent professor went to a University to talk about free speech and was attacked by a mob of mindless students who proceeded to call him a ‘transphobic piece of shit’. Its really not just Fox News lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 34] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism bro how many left wing people "blame white people for slavery". How many left wing people have you spoken to on here or in real life who actually think that? How many white people do you think would tick yes if polled on the question "do you blame yourself for the atlantic slave trade?" I don’t know, but that is what is being pushed right now lol. Look at Wolfenstein the New Colossus. It is one of the most woke games I’ve ever seen in my life. America is literally run by the KKK in that game and the only rebels you meet are the Black Panthers and the communists, and they literally say white American joined in with the nazis... and just look how white Americans in that game are okay with things as they are and they’re very sympathetic to the Nazi regime, with many preparing to learn German. One of the characters literally says, ‘come and get me you white ass fascist Nazi pigs’. I’ll actually ask you to try an experiment: say that you’re a Bernie supporter in some WhatsApp group chat, and then try to say that you’re actually a Trump supporter. And compare the reactions. Ibe actually done the latter and IRL I always claim to be neutral when it comes to politics because many people don’t like my views - which is fine but they take it to the extreme lol. Trust me, don’t say you’re a trump supporter if you don’t want some negative reactions from people. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 35] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’ve actually had a number of people talk about white privilege, someone in a WhatsApp chat (a friend of mine) got kicked over something related to that. Many people defended him but a lot just wanted to kick for no reason. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 36] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Canada has provinces with low income and low inequality, and the crime rate is very low there. That's unfair. We all know what Canadians are like. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 37] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism That's unfair. We all know what Canadians are like. Okay, true that. More seriously I feel that inequality is really what drives the crime rate up -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 38] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The overwhelming majority of people, I suspect, feel as I do. There’s a reason Fox News and conservative out lets tend to have high likes on YT, for instance, compared to CNN, say. And it’s not like this data is based solely off of FoxNews either: look at what GitHub is doing. Look at what Harvard is doing, look at what Cambridge is doing; look at what the various companies in the game industry are doing right now. Look at the comments political leaders in America (many of them Republican, many of them Democrat) are making on the George Floyd protests/riots. Look at how people are getting banned for not being left. Look at how Twitter is trying to censor Trump. Look at how coronavirus videos criticizing the lockdown are being taken down from YouTube. Look at how Trump’s rallies are attacked as ‘immoral’ because they endanger public safety, when the riots were actually given the geeen light by health experts because apparently racial inequality is a huge health risk. Look at how in Canada a prominent professor went to a University to talk about free speech and was attacked by a mob of mindless students who proceeded to call him a ‘transphobic piece of shit’. Its really not just Fox News lol. Dude these companies literally do whatever they need to satisfy the twitter mob of the day. Some right wing outlet published a video showing some CNN figure claiming to be a democratic socialist. The guy got fired within days. Some lady missing an arm got kicked off the BBC because parents were complaining she "was scaring their children". in the US, you could legally fire someone for being LGBTQ+ until very recently. The outlets you see concentrate on the cases that suit your ideology. Also, you can't use the likes on a youtube video to measure the cultural zeitgeist. The like/dislike suffers from a massive selection bias. Right wing people are happy with Fox News' content. No self-respecting leftist (or anyone) is happy with the bullshit CNN is pedalling. All of CNN's political videos get heavily disliked, irrespective of whether they're about economics or ideology, afaik. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 39] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism CNN is pretty cringe but let's not pretend it's quite as bad as Fox News lol. People who watch Fox News are significantly less informed than people who don't watch news at all, which isn't true of CNN: http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2012/confirmed/ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 40] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why would they need to satisfy the mob of the day if the mob of the day weren’t in favour of their views? And I don’t think they are. I think the silent majority doesn’t care about the BS that’s being pushed rn. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 41] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism To be clear I'm not trying to say "SJW"s don't exist". I'm saying they are a tiny minority of people with very little actual power and the sway they seem to hold over companies amounts to detatched companies pandering to whatever mob they see for PR. When "woke movies" or "woke video games" are made, it's meaningless symbolism that your outlets convince you is part of a grand cultural takeover rather than companies being goofy. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 42] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:43 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The perception of them is many times greater than their actual size. Everyone has seen that clip of the red-haired feminist woman from a few years back being super rude on camera. That means lots of people have now had an "SJW experience" even though only one SJW is behind that moment. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 43] Auteur : rumox Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Vox is cringe but this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ) piece on Tucker Carlson sums up the wool pulling over the eyes the media does. This tactic isn't exclusive to Tucker or FOX. Better for them that we are mad at each other or just generally ignorant to the pressing matters. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 44] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why would they need to satisfy the mob of the day if the mob of the day weren’t in favour of their views? And I don’t think they are. I think the silent majority doesn’t care about the BS that’s being pushed rn. PR is extremely important. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 45] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Vox is cringe but this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ) piece on Tucker Carlson sums up the wool pulling over the eyes the media does. This tactic isn't exclusive to Tucker or FOX. Better for them that we are mad at each other or just generally ignorant to the pressing matters. I have to admit that video looks pretty good. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 46] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism To be clear I'm not trying to say "SJW"s don't exist". I'm saying they are a tiny minority of people with very little actual power and the sway they seem to hold over companies amounts to detatched companies pandering to whatever mob they see for PR. When "woke movies" or "woke video games" are made, it's meaningless symbolism that your outlets convince you is part of a grand cultural takeover rather than companies being goofy. They are a minority all right, but I do think they’re very influential... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 47] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:56 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism They are a minority all right, but I do think they’re very influential... What tangible policies have these 19yo dyed-hair college kids managed to pass? Don't you dare mention that Canadian pronoun law :P -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 48] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 05:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What tangible policies have these 19yo dyed-hair college kids managed to pass? Don't you dare mention that Canadian pronoun law :P I kinda wanted to stay away from that but yeah that’s what was done. Don’t forget the Kathy Newman interview. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 49] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 05:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What tangible policies have these 19yo dyed-hair college kids managed to pass? Don't you dare mention that Canadian pronoun law :P The Canada pronoun law hit the country hard. I remember the one time I was going to Tim Hortons with my buddy, and they only added one cream instead of two to his coffee. Dude started bitching about it, and without thinking, I said "dude stop being such a wom-". Before I could even get the word out, the Pronoun Police had stopped right next to me and withdrew their guns, and screamed at me to get on the ground for misgendering someone who had clearly identified themselves as he/him as per the new mandatory pronoun name tags. Obviously, misgendering someone carries a penalty of immediate summary execution, so I started praying (to a non-denominational god, of course, as all deities except for Allah had been banned 2 years prior). Then, out of nowhere, both cops got run over by a mystery car. The door opened, and it was none other than Jordan Peterson, come to personally save me from tyranny. He told me to hop in and offered me a Xanax, then we drove off into the sunset to go trigger more college students. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 50] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 05:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lmao that is going in my signature -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 51] Auteur : rumox Date : June 22nd, 2020 05:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism So are we eating the rich? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 52] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 06:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not sure what that solves. This will be a very insensitive thing to say, (remember I’m not rich by any stretch of the imagination, I’m actually rather poor rn), but: I don’t think that people who don’t know what to do with money should be give any money. Free healthcare, schooling etc is a good idea, but only up to s point. I don’t think having a minimum wage is a good idea. Jebus. Christ. Poor people deserve to be poor because they don't know how to handle money. Yes I'm not shocked at all you only watch Cucker Carlson. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 53] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 06:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism So basically, Ganelon is in panic mode because of a handful of anecdotes and instances of ***THE LEFT*** doing things like change master/slave, putting a warning on Trump's manipulated media tweets, calling out Trump and others for saying "good people on both sides" - re: Charlottesville. This panic is brought on by Fox News consumption, which is doing exactly what it was intended and designed to do. What exactly are you scared of? Being fired for being a racist? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 54] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 06:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The Canada pronoun law hit the country hard. I remember the one time I was going to Tim Hortons with my buddy, and they only added one cream instead of two to his coffee. Dude started bitching about it, and without thinking, I said "dude stop being such a wom-". Before I could even get the word out, the Pronoun Police had stopped right next to me and withdrew their guns, and screamed at me to get on the ground for misgendering someone who had clearly identified themselves as he/him as per the new mandatory pronoun name tags. Obviously, misgendering someone carries a penalty of immediate summary execution, so I started praying (to a non-denominational god, of course, as all deities except for Allah had been banned 2 years prior). Then, out of nowhere, both cops got run over by a mystery car. The door opened, and it was none other than Jordan Peterson, come to personally save me from tyranny. He told me to hop in and offered me a Xanax, then we drove off into the sunset to go trigger more college students. HAHAHAHAHAH -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 55] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 06:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Speaking of the fraud known as Jordan Peterson, isn't he paralyzed from an experimental treatment for benzo addiction? Why didn't he just clean his room rather than pop benzos? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 56] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:13 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The thing is, those neo nazis are in the minority. Looking at the media you’d honestly get the feeling that everyone who is right wing is a nazi. People say that Niger Farage is a Nazi, and honestly until I actually checked him out I thought he was one too. He explicitly condemns nazis and commented in the Charlottesville incident by saying that he thought it was unbelievable Nazi salutes were happening in America; he also specifically stated he didn’t agree with Trump’s stance on immigration from Muslim countries, and feels that its okay to accept Muslim immigrants so long as they’re not extremist. He is no Nazi and yet he is touted as some huge racist... I think Trump has the same problem. He actually did specifically condemn white nationalists at Charlottesville, and clarified that he was referring to the people who didn’t want Robert E Lee statues torn down. Personally I actually agree with him but that’s beside the point: he specifically condemned them. And, everywhere I look if you don’t agree with the media or with hard left stances like white privilege and affirmative action, you’re instantly attacked and labeled a racist/xenophobe/white nationalist. Honestly that term has lost its meaning. My point is, the direction we are heading towards us worrisome. Sorry if my tone is a little extreme at times, I honestly am a bit of a bitch and I kind of enjoy being somewhat trolly, so that’s kinda why I’m so aggressive with these matters lol. See this is exactly what I'm talking about. Condemning something is meaningless if you then turn around and defend the very thing you are condemning. Words are cheap that way. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 57] Auteur : naz Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism ahhhh time to log in for my daily cringe https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/695721238349217943/723620699008401408/20200608_152403.jpg -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 58] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Galeon how can Trump condemn white nationalists and then defend white nationalists for not wanting confederate statues removed? How can someone really condemn white nationalism if they actually support white nationalist views? How can a good person who just wants to "defend a historical monument" or whatever in good conscience stay at that rally side by side with nazis? The rally was organized by white supremacists. If you defend a rally organized by white supremacists in any capacity, are you really condemning white supremacy? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 59] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism There were other people in Charlottesville who weren’t white nationalists and didnt want the statues removed -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 60] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I personally don’t think the statues should’ve been removed. They’re not strictly a symbol of slavery per se. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 61] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:20 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism There were other people in Charlottesville who weren’t white nationalists and didnt want the statues removed The rally was organized by white supremacists. How is it okay to attend a rally organized my white supremacists? Can't you at least see how attending a rally organized by nazis might make people think you're a nazi? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 62] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Like its one thing if the rally was organized by right wingers that arent nazis, and nazis then attend the rally and those who arent nazis publicly SHAMED and rejected the nazis But a rally organized by nazis. Cmon man. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 63] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I personally don’t think the statues should’ve been removed. They’re not strictly a symbol of slavery per se. Actually they kind of are. A lot of them were put up in response to the civil rights movement. Do the math there. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 64] Auteur : naz Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I personally don’t think the statues should’ve been removed. They’re not strictly a symbol of slavery per se. Mag....have u looked at them? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Emancipation_Memorial.jpg -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 65] Auteur : naz Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism oh love that broken link for me ^_^ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 66] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Mag....have u looked at them? https://miro.medium.com/max/1400/1*sQ80yFG0t-zk-MugzWTb2g.jpeg "Yeah but that doesn't fit the fox news narrative that the left is oppressing the right so imma ignore that!" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 67] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Two local groups who support preserving the Lee statue also condemned Saturday's protests. "We remain committed to preserving the Robert E. Lee Monument in its park through the legal process in the courts because of its historic and artistic value," said a group called Save the Robert E. Lee Statue (https://www.facebook.com/R.E.Leehistory/posts/471275936597530). "We soundly and completely reject racism, white supremacy, and any other identity-based groups that preach division and hate no matter which side of the issue they happen to support." -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 68] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I remember hearing the confederate flag in common use today isn't the original flag commonly used during the short-lived 5 year long confederacy. It's a flag that largely rose to prominence when it was flown as a middle finger to the civil rights movement. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 69] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Mag....have u looked at them? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Emancipation_Memorial.jpg The Robert E Lee has nothing to do with that. Its just a guy on horseback. The confederacy WAS racist, but these aren’t symbols of racism, theyre symbols of Southern culture. And that isn’t all about racism lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 70] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I remember hearing the confederate flag in common use today isn't the original flag commonly used during the short-lived 5 year long confederacy. It's a flag that largely rose to prominence when it was flown as a middle finger to the civil rights movement. It rose to prominence during the Civil War; the actual Confederate flag was too similar to the US flag. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 71] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Two local groups who support preserving the Lee statue also condemned Saturday's protests. "We remain committed to preserving the Robert E. Lee Monument in its park through the legal process in the courts because of its historic and artistic value," said a group called Save the Robert E. Lee Statue (https://www.facebook.com/R.E.Leehistory/posts/471275936597530). "We soundly and completely reject racism, white supremacy, and any other identity-based groups that preach division and hate no matter which side of the issue they happen to support." Where would you draw the line? Would you keep up a statue of Joseph Stalin in a public square, even if some of the taxpayers contributing to looking after that statue are descendants of refugees who fled from Stalinism? That statue would also certainly have historical and, potentially, artistic value. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 72] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism "Yeah but that doesn't fit the fox news narrative that the left is oppressing the right so imma ignore that!" I’ve been nothing but respectful so idk why y’all are trolling me like that lmao -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 73] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Where would you draw the line? Would you keep up a statue of Joseph Stalin in a public square, even if some of the taxpayers contributing to looking after that statue are descendants of refugees who fled from Stalinism? That statue would also certainly have historical and, potentially, artistic value. A statue of Stalin is completely different. Stalin killed millions; Robert Lee didn’t. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 74] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:33 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Two local groups who support preserving the Lee statue also condemned Saturday's protests. "We remain committed to preserving the Robert E. Lee Monument in its park through the legal process in the courts because of its historic and artistic value," said a group called Save the Robert E. Lee Statue (https://www.facebook.com/R.E.Leehistory/posts/471275936597530). "We soundly and completely reject racism, white supremacy, and any other identity-based groups that preach division and hate no matter which side of the issue they happen to support." ...did you read the whole post? You wanna quote the first part that you conveniently left out here? Or should I? It has come to our attention that several out-of-town groups associated with white supremacy and identarian beliefs conducted events and protests in both Lee and Jackson Parks today. Neither Save the Robert E. Lee Statue nor The Monument Fund were in any way involved in these events and only learned of them though media reports. 1) They acknowledge that these rallies were organized and conducted by white supremacist groups, rather than beat around the bush about that 2) They WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THE EVENTS. Meaning they did not tell people to go. They did not attend the rally. They are DISTANCING themselves from this event. They are not defending anyone at the event. THIS is how you reject nazis. There's no defense here of the people that attended the rally. lmfao. What are you doin man. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 75] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It rose to prominence during the Civil War; the actual Confederate flag was too similar to the US flag. https://gyazo.com/2a93da126f83dc851086411ae74945fe idk if this is reliable but I've heard it elsewhere... I can't recall a more reliable source right now -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 76] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways I think statues of Lenin and Stalin shouldn’t exist, not after a century of communist attrocities. Do I think a statue of George Zhukov should be removed? No, I don’t, again, it’s completely different. I think the line should be, I remember someone in the confederacy gave a speech about how the confederacy was based around the idea of white supremacy. Obviously that guy shouldn’t have any statues, anywhere. With politically non involved people however? Sure, whatever. You can even put up statues of Rommel - the only German officer who wasn’t a Nazi and didn’t kill Jews -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 77] Auteur : rumox Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Statues in public spaces should be left to the locals to determine whether they want them or not. If a majority does not want it, it should be relocated to somewhere private. I wouldn't want to destroy statues of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot but I certainly wouldn't want them in a public square. A museum would be my choice of their new location. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 78] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’ve been nothing but respectful so idk why y’all are trolling me like that lmao Probably because you are defending nazis. And no, I am not twisting anything you're saying. You're defending people that attended a nazi rally (aka nazis), that makes you a nazi defender. I don't know how else to put that simply. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 79] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyway, it depends a great deal. I don’t think it should be illegal per se, as I don’t think outlawing dangerous ideologies really helps, but I do think a statue of Georgy Zhukov would be appropriate and I would have no issues with it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 80] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Probably because you are defending nazis. And no, I am not twisting anything you're saying. You're defending people that attended a nazi rally (aka nazis), that makes you a nazi defender. I don't know how else to put that simply. Lol what, where did I defend Nazism? Honestly when you guys say shit like this I lose all willpower to keep debating, this is a very nasty thing to say to someorn -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 81] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism A statue of Stalin is completely different. Stalin killed millions; Robert Lee didn’t. Yeah, Stalin was much worse. I'm trying to guage how bad the man of the statue needs to be to justify being taken down in your eyes. Robert Lee fought for the preservation of slavery, but didn't personally own millions of slaves. Perhaps you'd be alright with some prominent Soviet general who didn't directly order the deaths of millions but was a nonetheless heroic general who defended Stalin's rule? If Stalin only enslaved millions of people rather than killing them would it be alright to put up a statue of Stalin then? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 82] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm not intentionally trying to sound like I'm strawmanning you I'm trying to make sense of where you draw the line. Putting up a statue of someone suggests you pedestalize them as an ideal. Or at least that's what I thought. That's why we don't put up statues of people that happen to have historical prominence but are terrible people, right? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 83] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Banana, I didn’t ANYWHERE say that nazis are good, I have never said such a thing and I eill never say it, because it completely goes against my beliefs. I’m not deciding Nazi defenders, I’m explaining why I think trump isn’t a white nationalist. He’s actually benefitted ethnic minorities, more so than Obsma, per se. Isnt this the initial ‘if you don’t agree with me you’re a nazi’ I was talking g about? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 84] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lol what, where did I defend Nazism? Honestly when you guys say shit like this I lose all willpower to keep debating, this is a very nasty thing to say to someorn You defended nazis here. There were other people in Charlottesville who weren’t white nationalists and didnt want the statues removed Bro it was a nazi rally. A white supremacist rally. It was organized by white supremacist groups for months and was sold as a white supremacy rally. If you attend a nazi rally, see all the nazi symbolism and hear the nazi chants and stay you are not someone worth defending. Yet here you continue to defend nazis. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 85] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Two local groups who support preserving the Lee statue also condemned Saturday's protests. "We remain committed to preserving the Robert E. Lee Monument in its park through the legal process in the courts because of its historic and artistic value," said a group called Save the Robert E. Lee Statue (https://www.facebook.com/R.E.Leehistory/posts/471275936597530). "We soundly and completely reject racism, white supremacy, and any other identity-based groups that preach division and hate no matter which side of the issue they happen to support." When declining an invitation to erect statues from the Gettysburg Battlefield Memorial Association, Lee said, "I think it wiser not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavoured to obliterate the marks of civil strife and to commit to oblivion the feelings it has engendered." What about the man himself saying NO to statues? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 86] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Banana, I didn’t ANYWHERE say that nazis are good, I have never said such a thing and I eill never say it, because it completely goes against my beliefs. I’m not deciding Nazi defenders, I’m explaining why I think trump isn’t a white nationalist. He’s actually benefitted ethnic minorities, more so than Obsma, per se. Isnt this the initial ‘if you don’t agree with me you’re a nazi’ I was talking g about? You are completely ignoring my points No where did I say "if you don't agree with me you're a nazi". I never called you a nazi. I said you were a nazi defender. It's empty to say "I reject nazis" and then defend people that attend a nazi rally. Like how do you even do that. What type of mental gymnastics does it take. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 87] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:43 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm not intentionally trying to sound like I'm strawmanning you I'm trying to make sense of where you draw the line. Putting up a statue of someone suggests you pedestalize them as an ideal. Or at least that's what I thought. That's why we don't put up statues of people that happen to have historical prominence but are terrible people, right? Right. How about we put up a statue of Georgi Zhukov? I have absolutely no problem with that. Just not Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Hitler. None of them deserve statues. Generals are completely different , however. It’s really not as if Southern culture is strictly about racism; even back then it wasn’t. I don’t particularly like it myself as it’s a bit backward in my eyes, but hey, if they want to be proud of their history sure. Nobody is exalting the virtues of slavery, apart from the white nationalists. Really nothing wrong with Southern culture, and it’s jot all racist -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 88] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:44 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You defended nazis here. Bro it was a nazi rally. A white supremacist rally. It was organized by white supremacist groups for months and was sold as a white supremacy rally. If you attend a nazi rally, see all the nazi symbolism and hear the nazi chants and stay you are not someone worth defending. Yet here you continue to defend nazis. i LITERALLY said there were other groups who weren’t Nazi. How am I defending nazis -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 89] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You are completely ignoring my points No where did I say "if you don't agree with me you're a nazi". I never called you a nazi. I said you were a nazi defender. It's empty to say "I reject nazis" and then defend people that attend a nazi rally. Like how do you even do that. What type of mental gymnastics does it take. okay fine but you can see how people might feel offended at being called Nazi defenders I hope -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 90] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Robert E. Lee wasn't an American war general, he fought for a traitor nation against the US. Maybe statues of Georgy Zhukov would be appropriate in Russia. How about statues of Zhukov in Eastern Germany, Poland, or any European country that fell to communism, though? Would that be appropriate? Do you think the people would be right in being upset with that? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 91] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah, Stalin was much worse. I'm trying to guage how bad the man of the statue needs to be to justify being taken down in your eyes. Robert Lee fought for the preservation of slavery, but didn't personally own millions of slaves. Perhaps you'd be alright with some prominent Soviet general who didn't directly order the deaths of millions but was a nonetheless heroic general who defended Stalin's rule? If Stalin only enslaved millions of people rather than killing them would it be alright to put up a statue of Stalin then? I’d be okay with a Soviet general, yes. No it wouldn’t. I don’t see the difference. But Robert Lee didn’t do that. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 92] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Like imagine putting up statues of Donald Rumsfeld in Iraq lmao. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 93] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Robert E. Lee wasn't an American war general, he fought for a traitor nation against the US. Maybe statues of Georgy Zhukov would be appropriate in Russia. How about statues of Zhukov in Eastern Germany, Poland, or any European country that fell to communism, though? Would that be appropriate? Do you think the people would be right in being upset with that? It would depend a great deal on why they’d be putting up the statues. Obviously with Mao and Stalin it’s tough to argue that it’s not a glorification of communism, but again it depends. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 94] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism i LITERALLY said there were other groups who weren’t Nazi. How am I defending nazis You are still beating around the bush about this rally man. How can you in good conscience do that? The whole rally was a white supremacist rally. It was sold as a white supremacist rally. The entire crowd was filled with people wearing nazi symbols and shouting nazi chants. You are ignoring this completely, putting your fingers in your ears and saying "there were other groups who weren't nazis!" as if showing up to a nazi rally and standing side by side with nazis is somehow okay. Let's say I am a right winger who does not support nazis. I see a flyer for "Unite the Right". Perfect I think, I show up to this rally to support my fellow right wingers. Uh oh, there's a lot of nazis here. I can tell by all the swastikas and other nazi symbols I see. Do I a) stay cause I'm uniting with the nazis, who I condemn, but they espouse ideals that I espouse therefore I'm fine with standing with them as they shout their nazi shouts, or b) turn around and go home, this is NOT the rally I realized it was? Anyone standing side by side with a nazi is not condemning nazis and is a nazi themselves as far as anyone is concerned. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 95] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It would depend a great deal on why they’d be putting up the statues. Obviously with Mao and Stalin it’s tough to argue that it’s not a glorification of communism, but again it depends. The timing of the confederate statues suggests it is a reminder to black people of their oppression at a time when they were fighting for their civil rights. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 96] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism okay fine but you can see how people might feel offended at being called Nazi defenders I hope I mean if you defend nazis you're a nazi defender. I don't know what else to tell you man. Maybe instead of taking offense you can maybe stop defending nazis? If you really reject nazi ideals. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 97] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism ‘How can you in good conscience’ I don’t understand this moralistic tone. It’s not as if the only people protesting were the nazis. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 98] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://www.splcenter.org/20190201/whose-heritage-public-symbols-confederacy 27179 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 99] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It would depend a great deal on why they’d be putting up the statues. Obviously with Mao and Stalin it’s tough to argue that it’s not a glorification of communism, but again it depends. Oh I agree. The reason they put up the Civil War general statues (in the early 1900s, and during the civil rights movement) was to intimidate black people moving into neighbourhoods and trying to fight for their civil rights. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 100] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Right. How about we put up a statue of Georgi Zhukov? I have absolutely no problem with that. Just not Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Hitler. None of them deserve statues. Generals are completely different , however. It’s really not as if Southern culture is strictly about racism; even back then it wasn’t. I don’t particularly like it myself as it’s a bit backward in my eyes, but hey, if they want to be proud of their history sure. Nobody is exalting the virtues of slavery, apart from the white nationalists. Really nothing wrong with Southern culture, and it’s jot all racist Sorry I hadn't read the earlier post you already made when I said this. Your perspective is consistent to be fair, I just don't see why we need to pedestalize any Soviet officials lol Rommel and Zhukov afaik didn't take part in any of their regime's atrocities, but Robert Lee did own slaves, nor did he treat them very well. https://gyazo.com/053e447ecd0430f2befa3fd3acf85278 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 101] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism ‘How can you in good conscience’ I don’t understand this moralistic tone. It’s not as if the only people protesting were the nazis. BRO IT WAS A RALLY ORGANIZED BY NAZIS How hard is it to understand that? Stop beating around that bush and acknowledge that. Stop ignoring the fact that a good person can't attend a nazi rally and stay. Unless you're saying nazis are good people. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 102] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The timing of the confederate statues suggests it is a reminder to black people of their oppression at a time when they were fighting for their civil rights. Why didn’t they put you statues of Jefferson Davis then? Or any other confederate leaders ebo specifically believed in White Supremacy -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 103] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:52 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This site sucks, I can't give rep to oops or renae again yet -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 104] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:52 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why didn’t they put you statues of Jefferson Davis then? Or any other confederate leaders ebo specifically believed in White Supremacy You are literally taking evidence given to you and discarding it and moving the goal posts here lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 105] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This site sucks, I can't give rep to oops or renae again yet GIMME REPPPP -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 106] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:54 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why didn’t they put you statues of Jefferson Davis then? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_memorials_to_Jefferson_Davis -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 107] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:54 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_memorials_to_Jefferson_Davis Watch him move the goal posts yet again. Watch. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 108] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You have some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group — excuse me, excuse me — I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 109] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_memorials_to_Jefferson_Davis Good, those should probably be taken down. I can see why one would remove that, but I can also see why they wouldn’t want to remove a statue of Robert E Lee. Think about it for a sec. Statues of William the Conqueror, right? He is admired by many in the English speaking world. One thing most people don’t know is that he was ABSOLUTELY BRUTAL. It’s a bad example but my point is, people who put up statues of William the Conqeueror aren’t celebrating that aspect of him, but rather, he is a symbol of cultural height and Englishry. R E Lee is a symbol of patriotism and defending ones homeland, even if he was a slave owner. Do I think slavery s good? No, but I think it’s perfectly reasonable to admire a multi-faceted personality like that for some of their virtues. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 110] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You have some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people on both sides. You had people in that group — excuse me, excuse me — I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name. Man you're still not acknowledging who organized this rally. This wasn't a rally organized by some conservative yet anti-nazi groups man. This rally wasn't promoted as such either. And no one at that rally was rejecting the nazis standing side by side with them. I don't get how you can blindly do that. And you're not flat out denying my point either. You're trying to spin it into "this wasn't a nazi rally" without actually saying the words. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHCsSnkXsAIwf9N?format=jpg&name=small How is this man not booed, hissed at and told to leave by everyone around him? Because they all support him. Because these people belong to white supremacist and white nationalist and nazi groups. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 111] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Good, those should probably be taken down. I can see why one would remove that, but I can also see why they wouldn’t want to remove a statue of Robert E Lee. Think about it for a sec. Statues of William the Conqueror, right? He is admired by many in the English speaking world. One thing most people don’t know is that he was ABSOLUTELY BRUTAL. It’s a bad example but my point is, people who put up statues of William the Conqeueror aren’t celebrating that aspect of him, but rather, he is a symbol of cultural height and Englishry. R E Lee is a symbol of patriotism and defending ones homeland, even if he was a slave owner. Do I think slavery s good? No, but I think it’s perfectly reasonable to admire a multi-faceted personality like that for some of their virtues. Told you he'd move the goal posts. He completely ignored the whole timing of the statues going up point that you guys brought by deflecting, and now that the deflection was beat down he's deflecting again. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 112] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Good, those should probably be taken down. I can see why one would remove that, but I can also see why they wouldn’t want to remove a statue of Robert E Lee. Think about it for a sec. Statues of William the Conqueror, right? He is admired by many in the English speaking world. One thing most people don’t know is that he was ABSOLUTELY BRUTAL. It’s a bad example but my point is, people who put up statues of William the Conqeueror aren’t celebrating that aspect of him, but rather, he is a symbol of cultural height and Englishry. R E Lee is a symbol of patriotism and defending ones homeland, even if he was a slave owner. Do I think slavery s good? No, but I think it’s perfectly reasonable to admire a multi-faceted personality like that for some of their virtues. How is someone who led a civil war to defend the tradition of keeping slaves a "patriot"? What facet of his personality is to be respected? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 113] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:05 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Man you're still not acknowledging who organized this rally. This wasn't a rally organized by some conservative yet anti-nazi groups man. This rally wasn't promoted as such either. And no one at that rally was rejecting the nazis standing side by side with them. I don't get how you can blindly do that. And you're not flat out denying my point either. You're trying to spin it into "this wasn't a nazi rally" without actually saying the words. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DHCsSnkXsAIwf9N?format=jpg&name=small How is this man not booed, hissed at and told to leave by everyone around him? Because they all support him. Because these people belong to white supremacist and white nationalist and nazi groups. I’ve honestly gotten extremely salty about this and I think I’ll watch a video of the rally, because I distinctly recall not everyone there being a Nazi. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 114] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism How is someone who led a civil war to defend the tradition of keeping slaves a "patriot"? What facet of his personality is to be respected? He defended his home state, not slavery. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 115] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism He defended his home state, not slavery. He fought for the Confederacy, which was a state founded to uphold the right for people to own slaves. Which makes him a defender of slavery. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 116] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’ve honestly gotten extremely salty about this and I think I’ll watch a video of the rally, because I distinctly recall not everyone there being a Nazi. Yes do your research on who organized the rally and what went down there man. Because I will accept that maybe your view of this rally has been twisted by others who have spun the same talking points as you. But if you do your research and somehow come back here saying the same things, man I dunno. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 117] Auteur : rumox Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism How is someone who led a civil war to defend the tradition of keeping slaves a "patriot"? What facet of his personality is to be respected? Not really the same but in Australia Ned Kelly the bushranger (outlaw) is regarded generally in good favour. A person can do shitty things but still be respected. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 118] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Eh i just read a little about him. He chastised Southerners for insulting freedmen after the war, but he was against granting blacks voting rights. He’s a complicated figure. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 119] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:13 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Eh i just read a little about him. He chastised Southerners for insulting freedmen after the war, but he was against granting blacks voting rights. He’s a complicated figure. ....................... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 120] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:14 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Eh i just read a little about him. He chastised Southerners for insulting freedmen after the war, but he was against granting blacks voting rights. He’s a complicated figure. He apparently also expelled students for insulting blacks. He really is a complex character. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 121] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism ....................... I obviously don’t agree with his stance on voting rights. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 122] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I obviously don’t agree with his stance on voting rights. Let me know once you do your research on Unite the Right -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 123] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Okay I’ve read a little and I guess I was wrong. Actually watched a few videos and uh, yeah they were literally chanting ‘Jews will not replace us’. I think Trump made a mistake by not condemning them properly; he probably assumed as I did that some rallies there weren’t Nazi, though. I sincerely doubt Trump is a white supremacist. Anyways, with regards to statues, I do think the statues shouldn’t be removed. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 124] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I would appreciate it though if you didn’t autonatically assume I was some kind of racist though... really none of the things I say are indicative of it. I have quite a few posts around discussing Nazism and eugenics, and I’d argue it’s oretty clear I’m not a nazi. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 125] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I would appreciate it though if you didn’t autonatically assume I was some kind of racist though... really none of the things I say are indicative of it. I have quite a few posts around discussing Nazism and eugenics, and I’d argue it’s oretty clear I’m not a nazi. I never called you a nazi lol, but a nazi defender. Since you're able to go back and realize that the rally was actually a nazi/white supremacist rally (and I'll believe you that you didn't know that) I'll withdraw that statement. I don't want to assume these things about you of course, but as you can now see that rally was fucked up, so when I see someone defending the "good people" at that rally it riles me up. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 126] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 09:05 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism As far as Trump goes, there's a difference between a rando on the internet and the fucking president. He needs to be held to a higher standard. He's done a piss poor job distancing himself from white supremacy so he can't cry foul when he is labeled as such. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 127] Auteur : Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Did you guys know League of Legends is owned by the communist party of china -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 128] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 12:08 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism League of Legends is cancer so that wouldn't surprise me -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 129] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 02:36 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't want a communist state, I just don't want the rich having such a disproportionate amount of wealth compared to the majority. That is wealth in all forms - money, power, influence, opportunities. The game is glaringly rigged against the majority and attention is always being focused elsewhere, usually towards the ideological conflicts. Both "sides" are guilty of this. This is smart. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 130] Auteur : theoneceko Date : June 22nd, 2020 03:56 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism ALREADY AT 7 PAGES LMFAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! uVu -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 131] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 22nd, 2020 04:59 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism i'd say it baffles me when I see people that proudly wave the confederate flag declare themselves patriots, but it really doesn't when I consider how uninformed and for lack of a better phrase, fuckin' stupid these people are. As oops said, the confederacy was literally a traitor state that rebelled against the U.S. for the right to keep the institution of slavery. Another comparison would be if a Russian national started waving around the soviet flag and declared themselves a freedom fighter. People in my state (Washington) wave the Stars & Bars, say somethin' about their heritage or what not, and hang their confederate flags on their trucks. Washington wasn't even a bloody state during the time of the civil war (and if it was it was too underdeveloped and removed from the conflict to have anything to do with it). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 132] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 05:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism i'd say it baffles me when I see people that proudly wave the confederate flag declare themselves patriots, but it really doesn't when I consider how uninformed and for lack of a better phrase, fuckin' stupid these people are. As oops said, the confederacy was literally a traitor state that rebelled against U.S. for the right to keep the institution of slavery. Another comparison would be if a Russian national started waving around the soviet flag and declared themselves a freedom fighter. People in my state (Washington) wave the Stars & Bars, say somethin' about their heritage or what not, and hang their confederate flags on their trucks. Washington wasn't even a bloody state during the time of the civil war (and if it was it was too underdeveloped and removed from the conflict to have anything to do with it). The Confederacy was never acknowledged by the Union. Also, I'm not sure why anyone in Washington would be hanging Confederate flags anyway. In Texas and other states, it's done mostly to show solidarity between other Southern states. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 133] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 22nd, 2020 06:07 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The Confederacy was never acknowledged by the Union. Also, I'm not sure why anyone in Washington would be hanging Confederate flags anyway. In Texas and other states, it's done mostly to show solidarity between other Southern states. No its done by racist dipshits to show how much they hate blacks lmao -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 134] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 22nd, 2020 06:11 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Vox is cringe but this (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ) piece on Tucker Carlson sums up the wool pulling over the eyes the media does. This tactic isn't exclusive to Tucker or FOX. Better for them that we are mad at each other or just generally ignorant to the pressing matters.I like Vox. Quite democratic party leaning though. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 135] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 22nd, 2020 06:17 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Did you guys know League of Legends is owned by the communist party of chinaEvery company that wishes to do business in China must pledge to be not against communism. Many companies are openly state-owned. Some companies claim to not be state-owned, but the majority of shareholders are of the communist party, which make them effectively state-owned (huawei and xiaomi). The world is an interconnected web, so one could also correctly claim that the NBA and Blizzard and EA are owned by China. :: League of Legends was bought by Tencent or something. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 136] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:10 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is: What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism? A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis? Right-wing liberalism and conservatism are inextricably linked, I mean, it's in the phrase. As right is: a grouping or political party favoring conservative views and supporting capitalist economic principles. (https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/right) I was trying to find out what exactly you meant by righ-wing liberalism, and it seems like your definition is different than that of other people. Wikipedia puts right-wing liberalism with conservative liberalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_liberalism) but Wikipedia also connects conservative liberalism with religious or philosophy grounding, in which it's supporters believe in man's common goodness as the warrant (warrant: the underlying reason "people" can agree upon) to expand social liberties... but you're not religious nor a philosophy student. Either way, I think most of this site is going to group you into the conservative pile because most of this site is very very liberal. Just don't count me in that group. smileyface The media paints right wingers as immoral nazis because they want to. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 137] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:13 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Speaking of the fraud known as Jordan Peterson, isn't he paralyzed from an experimental treatment for benzo addiction? Why didn't he just clean his room rather than pop benzos? Benzodiazepine Abuse Overview Benzodiazepines are a type of medication known as tranquilizers. Familiar names include Valium and Xanax. They are some of the most commonly prescribed medications in the United States. Doctors may prescribe a benzodiazepine for the following legitimate medical conditions: Anxiety Insomnia Alcohol withdrawal Seizure control Muscle relaxation Inducing amnesia for uncomfortable procedures Given before an anesthetic (such as before surgery) :: I'm sure being attacked on the internet for being a nazi and a troll takes it's toll of those with a strong mental disposition. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 138] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 22nd, 2020 07:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is smart. He's right because many parties are all about upholding the status quo, which makes the US's demo and repub parties both conservative parties. I'm going to give a good guess and say AUS's are the same. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 139] Auteur : naz Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:00 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The Robert E Lee has nothing to do with that. Its just a guy on horseback. The confederacy WAS racist, but these aren’t symbols of racism, theyre symbols of Southern culture. And that isn’t all about racism lol The flag is also known as the Stainless Banner, and the matter of the person behind its design remains a point of contention. On April 23, 1863, the Savannah Morning News editor William Tappan Thompson, with assistance from William Ross Postell, a Confederate blockade runner, published an editorial championing a design featuring the battle flag on a white background he referred to later as "The White Man's Flag."[6] In explaining the white background, Thompson wrote, "As a people we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause."[1][2][3][4][7][8][9][10] literally from wikipedia it's ALL about racism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America the previous versions had white for white supremacy sdjflsdfsdf then they changed it cuz it looked like a surrender flag -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 140] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:21 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism we've had countless of these threads now and it's always the same people on the same sides. A person on 1 side might say "oh okay I guess I was wrong about that" and yet in the next thread they are still projecting the same opinion. Rather than continuing to pointlessly do the one side vs. another thing, I'd like to shift the debate to: How can you actually get anybody on the "other side" to TAKE IN anything you have to say? What can be done to reduce the "us vs. them" mentality that is so rampant? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 141] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 22nd, 2020 08:35 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism we've had countless of these threads now and it's always the same people on the same sides. A person on 1 side might say "oh okay I guess I was wrong about that" and yet in the next thread they are still projecting the same opinion. Rather than continuing to pointlessly do the one side vs. another thing, I'd like to shift the debate to: How can you actually get anybody on the "other side" to TAKE IN anything you have to say? What can be done to reduce the "us vs. them" mentality that is so rampant? "Good people on both sides" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 142] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 10:12 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism we've had countless of these threads now and it's always the same people on the same sides. A person on 1 side might say "oh okay I guess I was wrong about that" and yet in the next thread they are still projecting the same opinion. Rather than continuing to pointlessly do the one side vs. another thing, I'd like to shift the debate to: How can you actually get anybody on the "other side" to TAKE IN anything you have to say? What can be done to reduce the "us vs. them" mentality that is so rampant? I don't know. But I know its possible. Some of my staunchly conservative family members that have previously said ridiculous things such as "blacks are the real racists" are now in agreement with BLM and some sort of police reform. And I'll I've ever done in the past is try to counter their arguments with data and sources. Since they never seem to have any lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 143] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:03 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No its done by racist dipshits to show how much they hate blacks lmao I've never reached that conclusion except with the occasional hillbilly in his Tonka Truck smoking meth. Anecdotes aside, I dont see it as an issue. How different is it than Antifa holding a sword and sickle flag? Who id add was a recognized nation. People have respect, animosity and some deep focus to regress to the past -- even if that past was not so great. This is seen in both left and right politics. I think the focus on the past, racially, politically and hell, globally is what sets us back from creating any real progress that people hope to achieve. I'm aware of the quote, when we don't learn from our past -- yes whatever. But what do we get as a society, anywhere, when we do not get past it and redeem ourselves eventually? If I'm half white and black, does that make me half slave owner? Do I owe half the money in reperations? Do I get half the money, cut it even? Do I have half white privilege? Half white guilt? When does it fucking stop? This is an unwinnable war for everyone. Its for these reasons that, its - difficult to come to a resolution. Because Racism, amongst others, is a complicated concept. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 144] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:12 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism But here's one solution: Combat the issue directly. Find the foundation of the problem and do your best to eliminate it. Thats it. This is certainly (as to the credit of Rumox) an economical issue. But that's half of the story that perpetuates the media. Because its a problem within our communites that nobody feels warranted enough to talk about. And it should not be. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 145] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:27 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And to elaborate, who am I as a human (or minority) to criticize you on your white priveledge? Why would I make the topic 'white vs everyone else?' That assumes I know every part of how extraordinary lucky (but omitting unlucky) you were and that I cannot attain it. Or rather that these are unattainable by minorities. It's flawed and its a demoralizing beacon. But now, we burn our history and our culture for what? To send a message that won't be recieved? How does this fix the issues of our communities? How does threatening the fabric of our safety of our children, family and friends fix these problems? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 146] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:32 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If you're incapable of some satire, what I'm saying is there are a few racial constructs that I do not believe in. (Also my views do not represent sc2mafia in any way omegalul) But if people wanna bring this up and go half hearted on what the problem of racism is, where it stems from and how we can work together to fix it, the dialogue needs to be open. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 147] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:33 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Mmrpt. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 148] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:39 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism DISCUSSION TAKEOVER DISCUSSION TAKEOVER DISCUSSION TAKEOVER -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 149] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:44 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism DISCUSSION TAKEOVER DISCUSSION TAKEOVER DISCUSSION TAKEOVER -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 150] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:45 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I've been biding my time tbh -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 151] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 22nd, 2020 11:53 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Renegade -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 152] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 12:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m surprised you agreed with Frinckles. What he said seemed to be akin to an “I don’t see race” type of argument. “Why do we get caught up in the past”. Because black people were slaves so they naturally had no money or eduction, hence why their descendants are less likely to have money or education. The past is 100% crucial here, considering the average bigot will use the same statistics I just mentioned to say that black people are stupid and violent. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 153] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 12:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If you wanna be like “well they’re just stupid! I like black people!” You’re hurting more than you’re helping. Just back off at that point. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 154] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 12:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism “It’s an economic issue”. Like no. The average black is poorer than the average white, yes. But people inherently fear blacks more than they fear whites. You can’t seriously pretend the whole issue is economic. The divide was created on purpose after this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Turner%27s_slave_rebellion Because if you convince poor white people that they’re superior to poor black people, then they can’t team up anymore. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 155] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m surprised you agreed with Frinckles. What he said seemed to be akin to an “I don’t see race” type of argument. “Why do we get caught up in the past”. Because black people were slaves so they naturally had no money or eduction, hence why their descendants are less likely to have money or education. The past is 100% crucial here, considering the average bigot will use the same statistics I just mentioned to say that black people are stupid and violent. Wait are you talking to me? I certainly didn't agree with Pringles. I'm playin warzone and he was tryna bait a response outta me so I gave him one lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 156] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Economics, socioeconomics whatever. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 157] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m surprised you agreed with Frinckles. What he said seemed to be akin to an “I don’t see race” type of argument. “Why do we get caught up in the past”. Because black people were slaves so they naturally had no money or eduction, hence why their descendants are less likely to have money or education. The past is 100% crucial here, considering the average bigot will use the same statistics I just mentioned to say that black people are stupid and violent. lol I do love the not so subtle callout tho of a certain someone at the end XD -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 158] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism lol I do love the not so subtle callout tho of a certain someone at the end XD That’s not a callout at all. I see that reasoning all the time. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 159] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Wait are you talking to me? I certainly didn't agree with Pringles. I'm playin warzone and he was tryna bait a response outta me so I gave him one lol You tricked me! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 160] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The flag is also known as the Stainless Banner, and the matter of the person behind its design remains a point of contention. On April 23, 1863, the Savannah Morning News editor William Tappan Thompson, with assistance from William Ross Postell, a Confederate blockade runner, published an editorial championing a design featuring the battle flag on a white background he referred to later as "The White Man's Flag."[6] In explaining the white background, Thompson wrote, "As a people we are fighting to maintain the Heaven-ordained supremacy of the white man over the inferior or colored race; a white flag would thus be emblematical of our cause."[1][2][3][4][7][8][9][10] literally from wikipedia it's ALL about racism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America the previous versions had white for white supremacy sdjflsdfsdf then they changed it cuz it looked like a surrender flag The civil war wasn’t only about slavery. Id argue the civil war was a result of the economic differences between the North and the South. The Soutn was mostly agricultural, while the North was more industrialized. I’d argue that even the Jim Crow laws passed in the South after the war were motivated primarily by resentment and were the South’s way of ‘getting back’ at the freedmen. Kinda comparable to how Hitler and the nazis became hugely popular due to German revanchism and the Great Depression. i just don’t think an entire people would be so anal about slavery when it was widely seen as immoral if it hadn’t been for the economic aspect. Remember that only 25% of Southern (white) families owned slaves. It wasn’t even a majority of the population. It was mostly the elites who were against, along with bigoted whites. Hence why I don’t think it’s fair to paint the Confederacy as a primarily racist society. The confederate flag is viewed as a symbol of pride for southerners in much the same way national flags are around the world. Yes, it has been used by white nationalists as well, but they aren’t the only ones who used it, and I’d argue that most people who don’t want the confederate flag removed aren’t nazis. If you look at the KKK, they have around 5,000 members today. In the ‘20’s they had a whooping 6 MILLION. Btw incidentally 20% of the white male (enfranchised?) population of Indiana were members of the KKK. Wtf happened to Indiana, they weren’t even in the South lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 161] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:13 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism anyway I agree with Frinckles about the past. We should worry about the present. Honestly as someone who isn’t in the States I’m actually quite curious how prevalent racism is there, as my suspicion is that it isn’t, but as I obviously don’t live there I can’t aay for sure. If it’s anything like the Netherlands then it’s probably not particularly racist. I am not 100% certain about this but I suspect racism is still quite the issue in Germany. I’ve had many bad experiences in Germany with Germans; I’ve only had this twice here in two years lol. It’s really a wonderful country, probably the best in Europe. Anyway, I do think race is a bit too politicized nowadays and racist is now more or less a buzzword than the media likes to use to paint people they don’t like. Not to say that racists don’t exist, but it’s overused. Funny how the media never talks about the Klan or about Richard Spencer. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 162] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m surprised you agreed with Frinckles. What he said seemed to be akin to an “I don’t see race” type of argument. “Why do we get caught up in the past”. Because black people were slaves so they naturally had no money or eduction, hence why their descendants are less likely to have money or education. The past is 100% crucial here, considering the average bigot will use the same statistics I just mentioned to say that black people are stupid and violent. So were Asians, Latinos and immigrants. Many people who first emigrated to the colonies were indentured servants; they were not free. How do you propose we correct that historic injustice, by the way? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 163] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And to elaborate, who am I as a human (or minority) to criticize you on your white priveledge? Why would I make the topic 'white vs everyone else?' That assumes I know every part of how extraordinary lucky (but omitting unlucky) you were and that I cannot attain it. Or rather that these are unattainable by minorities. It's flawed and its a demoralizing beacon. But now, we burn our history and our culture for what? To send a message that won't be recieved? How does this fix the issues of our communities? How does threatening the fabric of our safety of our children, family and friends fix these problems? I actually agree with this so much lol. It’s probably the most sensible thing uttered in this thread. Playing racial politics is a bad idea, no matter who’s playing it - people on the left or in the right. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 164] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyway I’m also part of a minority, one that btw isn’t well seen. I’ll stand by Frinckles and say, who am I to hate people for their ‘privilege’? I’m poor, lazy and quite resentful, doesn’t mean I want to stay that way lol. I really don’t think this way of thinking helps minorities. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 165] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This reminds me of the Gender pronoun Canadian law. Man, I’ve thought about it and if I were transgender, I would so hate it. Second, the thought of having been accepted to university just because of my group affiliation literally makes me shiver. I really hope we’re not pursuing that kind of policy here in the Netherlands. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 166] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh. Are we on the race and gender part now? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 167] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This reminds me of the Gender pronoun Canadian law. Man, I’ve thought about it and if I were transgender, I would so hate it. Second, the thought of having been accepted to university just because of my group affiliation literally makes me shiver. I really hope we’re not pursuing that kind of policy here in the Netherlands. Bro it's time to stop repeating this because it's factually incorrect and makes you look really fucking gullible. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 168] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My last shtick about myself wasn’t about race, it was about ethnicity, but I think they’re very strongly related to transgender issues as well. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 169] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My last shtick about myself wasn’t about race, it was about ethnicity, but I think they’re very strongly related to transgender issues as well. I meant race as in Formula 1. This is a pure example of how my argument is right and how you're always just twisting my words. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 170] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think its a bit disingenuous to say the civil war wasn't only about slavery. Sure some other elements were at play but they are all either directly or indirectly linked to slavery. Who do you think worked the agriculture sectors? Why do you think the south were upset over the northerners (abolitionists) making claims to new territory gains? Why do you think the final nail was the election of Abraham Lincoln? It's all linked to slavery. The fruits of the labor from slaves, the tradition of owning slaves, the battle to determine the survival of slavery itself. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 171] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Nice -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 172] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I wonder where Jordan Peterson was when the US supreme court put into law the exact same thing he criticized Canada for doing so in the last week (with a conservative majority btw): https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-expanding-gay-rights/index.html Oh wait, he was in a coma with severe brain damage lmfa0 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 173] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If there is a box of 100 apples. 99 of these apples are poisonous. And will kill you if eaten. 1of these apples are not poisonous. And is safe too eat. Would you call it a box of poisonous apples? Would you eat from the Boxes? Now. Please compare it to politics. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 174] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism wait SHIT, I accidentally posted an article from biased, mainstream media fake-news site CNN. Here's one from an unbiased, independent fringe news agency: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-rules-gay-workers-protected-from-job-discrimination-in-big-win-for-lgbt-rights -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 175] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think its a bit disingenuous to say the civil war wasn't only about slavery. Sure some other elements were at play but they are all either directly or indirectly linked to slavery. Who do you think worked the agriculture sectors? Why do you think the south were upset over the northerners (abolitionists) making claims to new territory gains? Why do you think the final nail was the election of Abraham Lincoln? It's all linked to slavery. The fruits of the labor from slaves, the tradition of owning slaves, the battle to determine the survival of slavery itself. I see slavery as an economic issue, as well as a social issue. I very much doubt abolitionism would’ve been so staunchly opposed by the south if their economy weren’t centered around it. Don’t forget that slavery used to be legal in the Union, too; I think the issue is that there were many cash crops in the south and that served to discourage industrialization. Slavery, as a social issue, was also part of it, though remember that Abe Lincoln was against giving blacks the right to vote. He saw them as inferior, and supported the colonization of Liberia by free blacks (off topic but one of the dumbest ideas ever put forward; why send American citizens to fucking africa lol). I don’t want to overstate the moral aspect of it, because I think the North was also pretty immoral, or at least certain elements in the North. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 176] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If there is a box of 100 apples. 99 of these apples are poisonous. And will kill you if eaten. 1of these apples are not poisonous. And is safe too eat. Would you call it a box of poisonous apples? Would you eat from the Boxes? Now. Please compare it to politics. I am not sure where this is going but I’d call it a box of poisonous apples, yes. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 177] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It's a good job that all the states can't just fire you without reason. Oh... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 178] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think there’s a real danger that my last post may be misinterpreted, i DO NOT think that slavery for economic issues is OKAY in the SLIGHTEST. It’s just that, I think the view that slavery was borne solely out of white supremacy isn’t completely true. It absolutely contributed, but it’s not the full story. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 179] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think its a bit disingenuous to say the civil war wasn't only about slavery. Sure some other elements were at play but they are all either directly or indirectly linked to slavery. Who do you think worked the agriculture sectors? Why do you think the south were upset over the northerners (abolitionists) making claims to new territory gains? Why do you think the final nail was the election of Abraham Lincoln? It's all linked to slavery. The fruits of the labor from slaves, the tradition of owning slaves, the battle to determine the survival of slavery itself. The South was afraid of abolitionism, but my point is slavery isn’t merely a social issue, it is also an economic one. Much like serfdom. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 180] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 04:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Economical, social, whatever. Slavery was heavily ingrained in every single reason why the south seceded so to say it's wasn't just about slavery is disingenuous because slavery literally encompasses every aspect for why the south seceded. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 181] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : June 23rd, 2020 05:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think its a bit disingenuous to say the civil war wasn't only about slavery. Sure some other elements were at play but they are all either directly or indirectly linked to slavery. Who do you think worked the agriculture sectors? Why do you think the south were upset over the northerners (abolitionists) making claims to new territory gains? Why do you think the final nail was the election of Abraham Lincoln? It's all linked to slavery. The fruits of the labor from slaves, the tradition of owning slaves, the battle to determine the survival of slavery itself. https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states Here's rather clear and direct evidence for anyone who would be contradicting Rumox there lmao ~~ Source for Ganelon about Canadian gender law thingy: http://sds.utoronto.ca/blog/bill-c-16-no-its-not-about-criminalizing-pronoun-misuse/ ~~ I love politics, but please keep it nice, everyone. Rules still apply ;) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 182] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 05:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You realize not every southerner felt the same way right? And Abraham Lincoln also said that he believed in the superiority of the white race. Cant we at least agree that the Confederate flag ISNT strictly racist? Not everyone who waves or likes it is a racist... it is a symbol of southern pride lol. Not just slavery Just because lots of white nationalists use it DOESNT mean everyone who does or even the majority or a significant plurality are white nationalists. 44% of white southerners are against doing away with the flag. I’m pretty sure 44% of the entire south isn’t racist lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 183] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 05:44 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The civil war wasn’t only about slavery. Id argue the civil war was a result of the economic differences between the North and the South. The Soutn was mostly agricultural, while the North was more industrialized. I’d argue that even the Jim Crow laws passed in the South after the war were motivated primarily by resentment and were the South’s way of ‘getting back’ at the freedmen. Kinda comparable to how Hitler and the nazis became hugely popular due to German revanchism and the Great Depression. i just don’t think an entire people would be so anal about slavery when it was widely seen as immoral if it hadn’t been for the economic aspect. Remember that only 25% of Southern (white) families owned slaves. It wasn’t even a majority of the population. It was mostly the elites who were against, along with bigoted whites. Hence why I don’t think it’s fair to paint the Confederacy as a primarily racist society. The confederate flag is viewed as a symbol of pride for southerners in much the same way national flags are around the world. Yes, it has been used by white nationalists as well, but they aren’t the only ones who used it, and I’d argue that most people who don’t want the confederate flag removed aren’t nazis. If you look at the KKK, they have around 5,000 members today. In the ‘20’s they had a whooping 6 MILLION. Btw incidentally 20% of the white male (enfranchised?) population of Indiana were members of the KKK. Wtf happened to Indiana, they weren’t even in the South lol. Mag. Where do you get your numbers from lmao & what is this second paragraph lool ofc the Jim Crow laws were passed to keep black people from equality, look at the 13th amendment and prisons its modern day slavery dhsjdns it never ended just took on a new name in this information day and age I doubt people want their names on a KKK register but I'm curious to know where u got 5000 members from lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 184] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 05:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways the reason I’m pushing so hard aginst this isn’t because I feel strongly about the civil war per se but rather about the idea that the confederate flag is fundamentally racist. 75% of Trump’s supporters believe the flag is fine and shouldn’t be removed; I don’t think you can make the case that they’re all racist bigots, it just doesn’t add up... Its a symbol of southern pride, NOT of slavery. Literally ask people in the south and I bet they’ll tell you they’re against slavery and racism, because they’re decent people. You guys don’t know what true racism is, I’ve had people tell me VERY NASTY things about various minorities in my home country - chiefly abut Jews (and to a lesser extent blacks, altho most people have never seen blacks there except on TV so it’s not an issue). Can we please STOP with calling everything racist. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 185] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 05:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Mag. Where do you get your numbers from lmao & what is this second paragraph lool ofc the Jim Crow laws were passed to keep black people from equality, look at the 13th amendment and prisons its modern day slavery dhsjdns it never ended just took on a new name in this information day and age I doubt people want their names on a KKK register but I'm curious to know where u got 5000 members from lol I’m suggesting that Jim Crow laws were a way of getting back at the North. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 186] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 05:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Wikipedia, not the most reliable source but whatever. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 187] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 05:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You realize not every southerner felt the same way right? And Abraham Lincoln also said that he believed in the superiority of the white race. Cant we at least agree that the Confederate flag ISNT strictly racist? Not everyone who waves or likes it is a racist... it is a symbol of southern pride lol. Not just slavery Just because lots of white nationalists use it DOESNT mean everyone who does or even the majority or a significant plurality are white nationalists. 44% of white southerners are against doing away with the flag. I’m pretty sure 44% of the entire south isn’t racist lol. Whether the average person felt the same or not is irrelevant to the point. The core principal of the secession was slavery, there is literally no other way to paint it. The link MM gave shows that each state put incredibly high emphasis on the reason for their secession being for the protection of slavery. My issue wasn't that idiots are using the confederate flag as a national identifier, I don't care about that. My issue was how you were framing the reason of the south's secession. It sounded like you were trying to downplay the deeply rooted and incredibly blatant racist aspect of the secession by saying it "wasn't all about slavery" when it irrefutably was. Also saying Abraham Lincoln was racist has no weight. It was mid 1800's. Every man and his dog was probably racist. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 188] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 06:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways the reason I’m pushing so hard aginst this isn’t because I feel strongly about the civil war per se but rather about the idea that the confederate flag is fundamentally racist. 75% of Trump’s supporters believe the flag is fine and shouldn’t be removed; I don’t think you can make the case that they’re all racist bigots, it just doesn’t add up... Its a symbol of southern pride, NOT of slavery. Literally ask people in the south and I bet they’ll tell you they’re against slavery and racism, because they’re decent people. You guys don’t know what true racism is, I’ve had people tell me VERY NASTY things about various minorities in my home country - chiefly abut Jews (and to a lesser extent blacks, altho most people have never seen blacks there except on TV so it’s not an issue). Can we please STOP with calling everything racist. You cannot say this to anyone. You don't know what any of us have experienced. Especially as someone so detached. I live in Utah, that is a midwestern state (you wouldn't think racism would be rampant here) yet is filled to the brim with mormons. Mormons, that until 1978 (only 42 years ago!) did not allow black men to receive the priesthood or black families enter the temple. This was a huge. Fucking. Deal. I grew up being taught things like "blacks were less worthy in the pre-existence (life before birth) and therefore were born into black families and for that reason couldn't receive those blessings", or "black skin is the curse of cain", hearing that stuff echo'd over the pulpit and in sunday school as recently as 2007ish. Only in the last few years has the church taken a different stance of "anything racist taught over the pulpit was not actually coming from god, so stop doing it". So many mormons that I know to this day are racist. My dad talks all the time about how in his day "they were always just niggers to us". In the MTC in 2009 (missionary training center) the white missionaries I roomed with (bunch of 19 year olds) would consistently put down a black sister missionary behind her back, laughing about things like how she looked like a monkey as she ate a banana at lunch. One of the leaders of the church (a member of the quorum of the 12 apostles) visited the MTC and told a story about some "big, black men" (putting emphasis on the adjective "black" as something scary) harassed some missionaries when some members stood up for them. Don't know what true racism is? You can't claim that at all. So yeah. I know a lot of racists. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 189] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 06:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways the reason I’m pushing so hard aginst this isn’t because I feel strongly about the civil war per se but rather about the idea that the confederate flag is fundamentally racist. 75% of Trump’s supporters believe the flag is fine and shouldn’t be removed; I don’t think you can make the case that they’re all racist bigots, it just doesn’t add up... Its a symbol of southern pride, NOT of slavery. Literally ask people in the south and I bet they’ll tell you they’re against slavery and racism, because they’re decent people. You guys don’t know what true racism is, I’ve had people tell me VERY NASTY things about various minorities in my home country - chiefly abut Jews (and to a lesser extent blacks, altho most people have never seen blacks there except on TV so it’s not an issue). Can we please STOP with calling everything racist. Oh my god I just wrote out a long response and pushed submit and I was logged out and it got ERASED AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH Mag, I live in Texas, & you have never even stepped a foot in America, and I cba to type all that fucking shit again omg I'm so annoyed lol anyway, sure there is probably a small minority of people who use the glag as southern pride, just like there is a small minority of 'gOoD cOpS' but what about thse people Mag https://twitter.com/sitneaturfood/status/1274904641076105219?s=19 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 190] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 06:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism That’s not a callout at all. I see that reasoning all the time. Yes there's just one particular person here who stands out with these very same viewpoints lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 191] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 23rd, 2020 06:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My favorite part in all this is when a presumably non person of color comes up with all of these "confed flag isn't racist, I doubt there is racism in america, blah blah" instead of asking and listening to the LIVED EXPERIENCES of actual people of color in the USA. And even when they are exposed to it (BLM, etc), they soundly reject it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 192] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 06:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My favorite part in all this is when a presumably non person of color comes up with all of these "confed flag isn't racist, I doubt there is racism in america, blah blah" instead of asking and listening to the LIVED EXPERIENCES of actual people of color in the USA. And even when they are exposed to it (BLM, etc), they soundly reject it. This is why I voted you ...for President :charmander: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 193] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 23rd, 2020 06:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Just because lots of white nationalists use it DOESNT mean everyone who does or even the majority or a significant plurality are white nationalists. 44% of white southerners are against doing away with the flag. I’m pretty sure 44% of the entire south isn’t racist lol. 75% of Trump’s supporters believe the flag is fine and shouldn’t be removed; I don’t think you can make the case that they’re all racist bigots, it just doesn’t add up... Let's look at some actual numbers. I really like the midterm results of the Illinois 3rd congressional district. https://ballotpedia.org/Illinois%27_3rd_Congressional_District In 2014, a Republican ran for the house in this district and got 35.4% of the vote. In 2016 the district was uncontested. Then, in the 2018 midterms, the Republican nominee was a genuine neo-Nazi. As in, his campaign site talked about how the holocaust was fake. The guy was literally a part of the American Nazi party. In 2018, he got 25.9% of the vote. He got more absolute votes than the Republican candidate in 2014. That was despite the Republican party actively disavowing him and telling people not to vote for him. If we assume that the proportion of Dems to Republicans in that district has remained the same, that means that percentage-wise, about 73% of the Republican constituency in that district voted for an actual neo-Nazi. Now you may argue that they might have had reasons such as economic, religious, etc. to vote for him. But surely him being someone who holds rallies commemorating Hitler, supporting reinstating segregation and interracial marriage bans, and saying that Trump is bad because he's a "Jew-loving fool" would give Republican voters pause, right? Maybe your 44% and 75% numbers aren't too absurd after all? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 194] Auteur : Toad Date : June 23rd, 2020 06:52 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Can we please STOP with calling everything racist. Snowflake. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 195] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 07:32 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You cannot say this to anyone. You don't know what any of us have experienced. Especially as someone so detached. I live in Utah, that is a midwestern state (you wouldn't think racism would be rampant here) yet is filled to the brim with mormons. Mormons, that until 1978 (only 42 years ago!) did not allow black men to receive the priesthood or black families enter the temple. This was a huge. Fucking. Deal. I grew up being taught things like "blacks were less worthy in the pre-existence (life before birth) and therefore were born into black families and for that reason couldn't receive those blessings", or "black skin is the curse of cain", hearing that stuff echo'd over the pulpit and in sunday school as recently as 2007ish. Only in the last few years has the church taken a different stance of "anything racist taught over the pulpit was not actually coming from god, so stop doing it". So many mormons that I know to this day are racist. My dad talks all the time about how in his day "they were always just niggers to us". In the MTC in 2009 (missionary training center) the white missionaries I roomed with (bunch of 19 year olds) would consistently put down a black sister missionary behind her back, laughing about things like how she looked like a monkey as she ate a banana at lunch. One of the leaders of the church (a member of the quorum of the 12 apostles) visited the MTC and told a story about some "big, black men" (putting emphasis on the adjective "black" as something scary) harassed some missionaries when some members stood up for them. Don't know what true racism is? You can't claim that at all. So yeah. I know a lot of racists. I’m sorry you have lol, I don’t mean to downplay that in any way, I just don’t think racism is as big of a problem as it’s usually made out to be. I hope I’m not being insensitive here and I’ll just say what happened to you was wrong, and honestly horrific a major religious organization has essentially been racist for so long and until very recently didn’t allow blacks into their temples. I actually did not know that and it’s sad. The more I hear about Mormons the less and less I like that faith, so I can understand why you left. Its just, Ive not seen the things you’ve talked about even in more racist countries, or in the Netherlands, which as a whole is almost certainly less tolerant than the US. This is something I haven’t said before but a close family member of mine said something to me before I left that was racist and HILARIOUSLY stupid (about non whites, I believe he was referring to blacks/Muslims specifically), which’s is absurd because he’d literally never seen one in his life. I find people like that ridiculous. Clearly what yoyee saying shows that racism still exists, but maybe we can agree on that and move elsewhere. How many people do you think are racist? Secondly, given that the Mormon church is so influential in Utah, do you think that might account in part for your experience? I’m just saying, maybe it’s just Mormons. It was dumb of me to say you didn’t know true racism, I take that back. It’s just, people have said incalculably stupid things to me about race where I’m from, ridiculous racist things that you probably wouldn’t hear in the West, and especially bigoted remarks. If you’re Protestant where I’m from you’re literally seen as the devil. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 196] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 07:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes there's just one particular person here who stands out with these very same viewpoints lol I don’t appreciate this slander and if you have something to say just say it lol. I realize what I say can be pretty offensive, but I’m not racist, I really am not lol. Two of my four-five best friends are not white. I seriously don’t look at skin colour; the only thing that matters to me is if the other person is cool, and my friends are all cool. But, I realize I may have probably dug a grave for myself that I didn’t intend to, as I’ve said previously the temptation is just to deny everything your opposition says. I am willing to admit racism exists, but I believe the following things: a) The US, as a whole, is not a racist country. This is evident as the US has arguably done more for racial harmony than most other countries. b) The white privilege thing isn’t the way to solve current racial issues. I don’t want to be labeled as racist but I mean, look at South Africa. It’s one of the most racist countries in the world. I have friends who lived in RSA and they all informed me blacks and whites generally don’t help each other there; I fear the US is headed down that pathway right now, and that doesn’t help anyone, least of all minorities. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 197] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 07:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Let's look at some actual numbers. I really like the midterm results of the Illinois 3rd congressional district. https://ballotpedia.org/Illinois%27_3rd_Congressional_District In 2014, a Republican ran for the house in this district and got 35.4% of the vote. In 2016 the district was uncontested. Then, in the 2018 midterms, the Republican nominee was a genuine neo-Nazi. As in, his campaign site talked about how the holocaust was fake. The guy was literally a part of the American Nazi party. In 2018, he got 25.9% of the vote. He got more absolute votes than the Republican candidate in 2014. That was despite the Republican party actively disavowing him and telling people not to vote for him. If we assume that the proportion of Dems to Republicans in that district has remained the same, that means that percentage-wise, about 73% of the Republican constituency in that district voted for an actual neo-Nazi. Now you may argue that they might have had reasons such as economic, religious, etc. to vote for him. But surely him being someone who holds rallies commemorating Hitler, supporting reinstating segregation and interracial marriage bans, and saying that Trump is bad because he's a "Jew-loving fool" would give Republican voters pause, right? Maybe your 44% and 75% numbers aren't too absurd after all? As someone who has a very huge problem with antisemitism, among other things, I would definitely not have voted for him. Was he the only republican candidate? How do they decide who gets to run? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 198] Auteur : Renegade Date : June 23rd, 2020 07:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don’t appreciate this slander and if you have something to say just say it lol. I realize what I say can be pretty offensive, but I’m not racist, I really am not lol. Two of my four-five best friends are not white. I seriously don’t look at skin colour; the only thing that matters to me is if the other person is cool, and my friends are all cool. https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SomeOfMyBestFriendsAreX https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/16/sunday-review/ralph-northam-blackface-friends.html -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 199] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m surprised you agreed with Frinckles. What he said seemed to be akin to an “I don’t see race” type of argument. “Why do we get caught up in the past”. Because black people were slaves so they naturally had no money or eduction, hence why their descendants are less likely to have money or education. The past is 100% crucial here, considering the average bigot will use the same statistics I just mentioned to say that black people are stupid and violent. I didn’t explain away the problem with "I don't see race." I made it a point that a lot of concepts brought up in the discussion commonly are at thier core, demoralizing, flawed and polarizing. Talking points that do not remedy the issue from doctors who do not want the patient to get well. “It’s an economic issue”. Like no. The average black is poorer than the average white, yes. But people inherently fear blacks more than they fear whites. You can’t seriously pretend the whole issue is economic. The divide was created on purpose after this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nat_Turner%27s_slave_rebellion Because if you convince poor white people that they’re superior to poor black people, then they can’t team up anymore. You literally just pointed out in your post before this that it was an economic issue or socioeconomic. That’s established. A 2009 poll showed Blacks make more on average than Hispanics, they make less than Whites who make less than Asians. In fact, this was a trend that Booker T. Washington recognized early on. He argued that sacrificing voting rights and submitting to racism in the short term, for education and Healthcare for Southern Blacks - would position the black community to be be able to finally push for a more comprehensive civil rights act. And they did. What is disingenuous is this trend of portraying civil rights as Black men in chains and then pivoting right up to MLK. If you want to make it about the past, there is far too much in between that's left forgotten. My argument is that overcoming these issues starts at the foundation of Black communities and the rhetoric that mainstream and social media uses to incorrectly portray the topic of race. Antiquated 'white vs X' does not work. It cannot work and it will not work. There is a difference between learning from our past and having an unhealthy obsession with it. It holds you back. Give sauce on the fear statistic though please. <3 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 200] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism As someone who has a very huge problem with antisemitism, among other things, I would definitely not have voted for him. Was he the only republican candidate? How do they decide who gets to run? He was uncontested in the Republican primaries for that district, and in their defence, lost the nomination quite badly the next year (though he still got 10% of the vote in that nomination, which is worrying if you take that as 10% of Republicans being literal Nazis when given a choice). I'm not saying that the voters for him are all Nazis of course. Just that roughly 73% of Republicans in that district were at the very least okay with voting in an actual Nazi. Which I don't think is very flattering at all, and I think you'd probably agree with me that voting for a Nazi pretty unambiguously makes you at least a little bit racist. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 201] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It's anecdotal for sure (x race is scared/uncomfortable of y race). I've heard it from different people from different races. It's not unique to white people. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 202] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I didn’t explain away the problem with "I don't see race." I made it a point that a lot of concepts brought up in the discussion commonly are at thier core, demoralizing, flawed and polarizing. Talking points that do not remedy the issue from doctors who do not want the patient to get well. You literally just pointed out in your post before this that it was an economic issue or socioeconomic. That’s established. A 2009 poll showed Blacks make more on average than Hispanics, they make less than Whites who make less than Asians. In fact, this was a trend that Booker T. Washington recognized early on. He argued that sacrificing voting rights and submitting to racism in the short term, for education and Healthcare for Southern Blacks - would position the black community to be be able to finally push for a more comprehensive civil rights act. And they did. What is disingenuous is this trend of portraying civil rights as Black men in chains and then pivoting right up to MLK. If you want to make it about the past, there is far too much in between that's left forgotten. My argument is that overcoming these issues starts at the foundation of Black communities and the rhetoric that mainstream and social media uses to incorrectly portray the topic of race. Antiquated 'white vs X' does not work. It cannot work and it will not work. There is a difference between learning from our past and having an unhealthy obsession with it. It holds you back. Give sauce on the fear statistic though please. <3 I don't know about the fear statistic, but here's a couple of surprising ones: Americans (not just white Americans, also black Americans) are more likely to underestimate black people's pain: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048546 This could partially explain why black people are less likely to receive pain medication than white people (medical bias and racism is an important topic that a lot of people forget about btw): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196064400700990 Black people are also more likely to be seen by white people as superhuman. This could partially explain the difference in use of force by police, as they view black people are more physically capable than they really are: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550614553642 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 203] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don’t appreciate this slander and if you have something to say just say it lol. Do you still want to argue the points that ami brought up specifically? that black people are stupid and violent. You've argued before these exact points. And then deflect with "higher iq =/= more moral" and shit like that. It's only slander if you aren't arguing or never argued those points. Do I need to go grab some quotes? a) The US, as a whole, is not a racist country. This is evident as the US has arguably done more for racial harmony than most other countries. The US has a long way to go still to combat systemic racism. Yes it has made strides. But here a talented black man can get blacklisted from the NFL for protesting peacefully by kneeling during the national anthem. That's fucked up. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 204] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It's anecdotal for sure (x race is scared/uncomfortable of y race). I've heard it from different people from different races. It's not unique to white people. My best friend's mom is terrified of black people and she is an illegal immigrant (Mexican.) Lol Thats why I wanted the sauce on it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 205] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lol oops thinking about it the last paragraph is actually kinda true, at least for me. I would definitely find e.g. a lanky black guy peculiar. For some reason the stereotype is that they’re stronger. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 206] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m sorry you have lol, I don’t mean to downplay that in any way, I just don’t think racism is as big of a problem as it’s usually made out to be. Then start listening. Like I said, you're so detached. You have no idea how things are like here, you just know what you've seen on shows like... Tucker Carlson, ew. Secondly, given that the Mormon church is so influential in Utah, do you think that might account in part for your experience? I’m just saying, maybe it’s just Mormons. It's definitely not just mormons. Like I said, I live in the midwest, which usually has a reputation for being more "chill" about these things. In other parts of the country its far worse. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 207] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Do you still want to argue the points that ami brought up specifically? You've argued before these exact points. And then deflect with "higher iq =/= more moral" and shit like that. It's only slander if you aren't arguing or never argued those points. Do I need to go grab some quotes? The US has a long way to go still to combat systemic racism. Yes it has made strides. But here a talented black man can get blacklisted from the NFL for protesting peacefully by kneeling during the national anthem. That's fucked up. Blame the study, not me. It was done fairly well too, so it’s tough to argue against. It is also an incredibly dangerous and difficult conversation to have because... well. lol Id be happy to discuss anything else, apart from that, because that is one HUGE can of worms that really shouldn’t be opened. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 208] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't know about the fear statistic, but here's a couple of surprising ones: Americans (not just white Americans, also black Americans) are more likely to underestimate black people's pain: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048546 This could partially explain why black people are less likely to receive pain medication than white people (medical bias and racism is an important topic that a lot of people forget about btw): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196064400700990 Black people are also more likely to be seen by white people as superhuman. This could partially explain the difference in use of force by police, as they view black people are more physically capable than they really are: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550614553642 I personally can vouch for seeing black people as superhumans. Their skeletal muscle composition in comparison to everyone else is very superhuman. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 209] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The US has a long way to go still to combat systemic racism. Yes it has made strides. But here a talented black man can get blacklisted from the NFL for protesting peacefully by kneeling during the national anthem. That's fucked up. Systemic Racism PogChamp What exactly is systemic racism to you? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 210] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Blame the study, not me. It was done fairly well too, so it’s tough to argue against. It is also an incredibly dangerous and difficult conversation to have because... well. lol Id be happy to discuss anything else, apart from that, because that is one HUGE can of worms that really shouldn’t be opened. ...you were given sources pointing out the controversies surrounding the study. Either way we don't have to get back into that again. But as you see, there's no slander here. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 211] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Systemic Racism PogChamp What exactly is systemic racism to you? "To you", what's the point of this question? Do you disagree with systemic racism existing? Or are you just trying to quiz me here? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 212] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I was watching some YouTube channel (OxfordUnion??? idk something pretentious like that) and they talked specifically about systemic racism. The room is divided left and right with people that agree and disagree with the topic of the day, and they speak. Really great listen I'll try and find it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 213] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yup https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv7hsiUirUU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGpdVvn19eI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=80xr5btjmDY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PM868CR0Mw4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4TIU0Ucxig -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 214] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Blame the study, not me. It was done fairly well too, so it’s tough to argue against. It is also an incredibly dangerous and difficult conversation to have because... well. lol Id be happy to discuss anything else, apart from that, because that is one HUGE can of worms that really shouldn’t be opened. sweaty nooo,,ur opening the cans why not open all of them -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 215] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism "To you", what's the point of this question? Do you disagree with systemic racism existing? Or are you just trying to quiz me here? I disagree with it yes. But I was curious what you thought of the concept and how it relates to a black man taking a knee. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 216] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't know about the fear statistic, but here's a couple of surprising ones: Americans (not just white Americans, also black Americans) are more likely to underestimate black people's pain: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0048546 This could partially explain why black people are less likely to receive pain medication than white people (medical bias and racism is an important topic that a lot of people forget about btw): https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196064400700990 Black people are also more likely to be seen by white people as superhuman. This could partially explain the difference in use of force by police, as they view black people are more physically capable than they really are: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1948550614553642 Those studies are bizarre but interesting. Much of this looks like general stereotypes. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 217] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I was watching some YouTube channel (OxfordUnion??? idk something pretentious like that) and they talked specifically about systemic racism. The room is divided left and right with people that agree and disagree with the topic of the day, and they speak. Really great listen I'll try and find it. I watched all of those yesterday incidentally. David Webb is fantastic. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 218] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:43 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I disagree with it yes. But I was curious what you thought of the concept and how it relates to a black man taking a knee. Okay, so you're trying to quiz me lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 219] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah David Webb's speech resonated with me the most. Well spoken. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 220] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah David Webb's speech resonated with me the most. Well spoken. Here's a related one as well I enjoyed. https://youtu.be/oi0jN-y6vfY -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 221] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh my god. That is incredibly hilarious and sad -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 222] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Okay, so you're trying to quiz me lol. The cliché that I'm always up to somethings is greatly exaggerated. I'm simply asking how you're tying the two together. Systemic Racism broadly explains away the shortcomings of communities of color and frames the world as against you at every level. It pushes you down. Systemic Racism is a boogie-man with no face because it is not tangible. Police brutality is tangible. Police brutality has a face. Thats my point. Also he totally got a confidential settlement and is fine with it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 223] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh my god. That is incredibly hilarious and sad It's fucking gold. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 224] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The cliché that I'm always up to somethings is greatly exaggerated. I'm simply asking how you're tying the two together. Systemic Racism broadly explains away the shortcomings of communities of color and frames the world as against you at every level. It pushes you down. Systemic Racism is a boogie-man with no face because it is not tangible. Police brutality is tangible. Police brutality has a face. Thats my point. Also he totally got a confidential settlement and is fine with it. And in the same vein, what else is tangible? Black communities living impoverished paying taxes to public schools who get less than white schools is not an issue of white privilege or Systemic Racism. It is an issue of economics. It is an issue of black children growing up without a father. Hell, one of the best platforms that the BLM movement has is the desire to help children in these situations grow up with communal guidance. To find an alternative to the nuclear family because it has become more and more uncommon. This is another complicated issue, but people do not talk about it. People don't feel warrant or authority to talk about it. A child's failures are left up to this wistless idea that they were destined to fail. That is wrong, and its what we're teaching them. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 225] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Damn I always wanted to use an archaic word in a sentence. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 226] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The cliché that I'm always up to somethings is greatly exaggerated. I'm simply asking how you're tying the two together. Systemic Racism broadly explains away the shortcomings of communities of color and frames the world as against you at every level. It pushes you down. Systemic Racism is a boogie-man with no face because it is not tangible. Police brutality is tangible. Police brutality has a face. Thats my point. Also he totally got a confidential settlement and is fine with it. Kaepernick was blackballed from the league for protesting systemic racism. Teams like my favorite team (the Steelers) played fucking "Duck" Hodges over taking a chance on Kaep. Fucking Duck Hodges. It was bad. That would have not happened to a talented white player protesting "gun rights" or whatever. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 227] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Kaepernick was blackballed from the league for protesting systemic racism. Teams like my favorite team (the Steelers) played fucking "Duck" Hodges over taking a chance on Kaep. Fucking Duck Hodges. It was bad. That would have not happened to a talented white player protesting "gun rights" or whatever. Protesting police brutality is fine. That is the name of the issue. Your second example does not make sense, by the way. Perhaps you could phrase it, "would this happen to a talented white player protesting police brutality?" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 228] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Protesting police brutality is fine. That is the name of the issue. Your second example does not make sense, by the way. Perhaps you could phrase it, "would this happen to a talented white player protesting police brutality?" Sure, if I wanted to ask a rhetorical question. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 229] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Personally I think it's more brand protection than systemic racism. When it comes to the commercial world it all comes down to protecting that $, hence why no other team took him on. I haven't read much into the situation so I won't pretend I am an expert, that's just my face value interpretation. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 230] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sure, if I wanted to ask a rhetorical question. So you don't think the response from the NFL would be the same? I just dont see the point in comparing apples to oranges that don't exist in your question. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 231] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism So you don't think the response from the NFL would be the same? I just dont see the point in comparing apples to oranges that don't exist in your question. No, it would not be the same. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 232] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Personally I think it's more brand protection than systemic racism. When it comes to the commercial world it all comes down to protecting that $, hence why no other team took him on. I haven't read much into the situation so I won't pretend I am an expert, that's just my face value interpretation. This is exactly why he got a tasty confidential settlement. Similar things have happened in the NBA. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 233] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I do like that Pringles has stopped lurking and started playing btw -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 234] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I do like that Pringles has stopped lurking and started playing btw rage quit rage quit rage quit!! lol the settlement wasn't that tasty? less than 10 mil, split btwn another player, and heaps of lawyer fees(they take a fuckton) & the end of his career. dont football players make way more than that in a year? unless u have more tea sprinkles👀 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 235] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism rage quit rage quit rage quit!! lol the settlement wasn't that tasty? less than 10 mil, split btwn another player, and heaps of lawyer fees(they take a fuckton) & the end of his career. dont football players make way more than that in a year? unless u have more tea sprinkles If you're a star, yes. For example, Kaep, who was a star, signed a six-year contract extension with the 49ers, worth up to $126 million, including $54 million in potential guarantees, and $13 million fully guaranteed back in 2014. He didn't get all of that since he opted out of his contract in 2017 to become a free agent. But yeah, QB's make a lot if they are good. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 236] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I dunno. I thought it was really dumb people freaked out over him respectfully taking a knee, when people break the US Flag Code on the reg: (d)The flag should never be used as wearing apparel, bedding, or drapery. (i)The flag should never be used for advertising purposes in any manner whatsoever. It should not be embroidered on such articles as cushions or handkerchiefs and the like, printed or otherwise impressed on paper napkins or boxes or anything that is designed for temporary use and discard. Advertising signs should not be fastened to a staff or halyard from which the flag is flown. (j)No part of the flag should ever be used as a costume or athletic uniform. 😭 also football is dumb, can we bring back the gladiators -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 237] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism also football is dumb, We are not friends anymore. You have crossed a line and said something you can't take back. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 238] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We are onto sports now? Cool. FIFA is corrupt. Football starts are overpaid. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 239] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We are not friends anymore. You have crossed a line and said something you can't take back. Football is dumb. Whatever your sport that you incorrectly call football is dumber. Isn't it basically the pussy version of rugby? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 240] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:13 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We are onto sports now? Cool. FIFA is corrupt. Football starts are overpaid. http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/customavatars/avatar8508_20.gif -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 241] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:14 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Football is dumb. Whatever your sport that you incorrectly call football is dumber. Isn't it basically the pussy version of rugby? https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/691762996036370545/709799933812670515/avatar8508_19.png -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 242] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:14 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I do like that Pringles has stopped lurking and started playing btw I'm at work moving everything into boxes because our office is moving. :P despite the fact that we will be working from home anyway. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 243] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:14 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I agree, football is incredibly cringe. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 244] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We are not friends anymore. You have crossed a line and said something you can't take back. omg I'm one more friend loss from permaban nooOOIOKodhdbsnmsxn pls take it back im on thin ice Also I'm wheezing at u posting SJ's avatars who are these ugly men I thought it was Walter white djdbsmsm -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 245] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Snooker and golf are best sports don’t change my mind -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 246] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism omg I'm one more friend loss from permaban nooOOIOKodhdbsnmsxn pls take it back im on thin ice Also I'm wheezing at u posting SJ's avatars who are these ugly men I thought it was Walter white djdbsmsm Wow you have a poor taste in men. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 247] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Wow you have a poor taste in men. :sad: i know............ :sad::sad::sad: i get roasted enough on this pls -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 248] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Absolutely derailed. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 249] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Cunts fucked -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 250] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Absolutely derailed. who are they!!!!!! blame banana -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 251] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism who are they!!!!!! blame banana No u -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 252] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism All those that blame Nose, say aye -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 253] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I do like that Pringles has stopped lurking and started playing btw Oh I understand what you mean now. Lol Yeah well the last two political threads felt like circlejerks as opposed to discussion/debate. Plus as we learned last time I'm pretty politically neutral. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 254] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism But Race, Culture, Patriotism, Foreign Policy -- those are things I like to talk about. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 255] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The reason I made this thread was because of a study I read. I for the longest time didn’t understand my political views, because according to psychology I have the temperament of a liberal, but I’m right leaning so it made no sense to me lol. And then it turns out that apparently liberal is meant as a blanket term that lumps both economic and social (I.e. left wing) liberals. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 256] Auteur : Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I guess Eastern Europe will turn even the staunchest socialist into a right winger -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 257] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism In Australia the Liberal party is the conservative party. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 258] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh I understand what you mean now. Lol Yeah well the last two political threads felt like circlejerks as opposed to discussion/debate. Plus as we learned last time I'm pretty politically neutral. I thought there was a serious discussion board on here too ooopppppssieeeee. I still stand by american football being dumb tho😛 borders are dumb too whats the point of being patriotic ;3 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 259] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I thought there was a serious discussion board on here too ooopppppssieeeee. I still stand by american football being dumb tho😛 borders are dumb too whats the point of being patriotic ;3 Borders are awesome. And you know we like NBA around here. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 260] Auteur : naz Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Borders are awesome. And you know we like NBA around here. only awesome borders were the bookstores RIP pick one: hakeem olajuwon or yao ming -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 261] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism only awesome borders were the bookstores RIP pick one: hakeem olajuwon or yao ming barnes n noble >> borders -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 262] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 12:05 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism only awesome borders were the bookstores RIP pick one: hakeem olajuwon or yao ming Non-question. Hakeem. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 263] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 12:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I thought there was a serious discussion board on here too ooopppppssieeeee. I still stand by american football being dumb tho😛 borders are dumb too whats the point of being patriotic ;3 Yeah borders are dumb, we're all people -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 264] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 12:38 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And in the same vein, what else is tangible? Black communities living impoverished paying taxes to public schools who get less than white schools is not an issue of white privilege or Systemic Racism. It is an issue of economics. It is an issue of black children growing up without a father. Hell, one of the best platforms that the BLM movement has is the desire to help children in these situations grow up with communal guidance. To find an alternative to the nuclear family because it has become more and more uncommon. This is another complicated issue, but people do not talk about it. People don't feel warrant or authority to talk about it. A child's failures are left up to this wistless idea that they were destined to fail. That is wrong, and its what we're teaching them. Systemic racism is indeed real, but the poor outcomes of a black person growing up are less because of systemic racism and more because of culture, upbringing, victimization, and other stuff like it. The Black Lives Matter movement ended quite a few things in my state, a neighboring city's governor stepped down, our police chief stepped down, they defunded school police in troubled districts, so the movement has been successful(?) in getting stuff done; however, this does not solve the moral gap people lack. America, including black people, are left with a moral gap after the rejection of organized religion. I'm not saying those religions were "good", but they did have a societal function. Those regions (mainly Christianity) kept families together, got fathers to work for the welfare of the family, assigned roles to each member, and promoted the educating of the children by parents. People are free to reject religion, it's their choice, but people still need families, communities, and a sense of belonging. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 265] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 12:52 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Systemic racism is indeed real, but the poor outcomes of a black person growing up are less because of systemic racism and more because of culture, upbringing, victimization, and other stuff like it. The Black Lives Matter movement ended quite a few things in my state, a neighboring city's governor stepped down, our police chief stepped down, they defunded school police in troubled districts, so the movement has been successful(?) in getting stuff done; however, this does not solve the moral gap people lack. America, including black people, are left with a moral gap after the rejection of organized religion. I'm not saying those religions were "good", but they did have a societal function. Those regions (mainly Christianity) kept families together, got fathers to work for the welfare of the family, assigned roles to each member, and promoted the educating of the children by parents. People are free to reject religion, it's their choice, but people still need families, communities, and a sense of belonging. This is biased conjecture. Morality does not depend on religion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 266] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:22 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is biased conjecture.Morality does not depend on religion. Not entirely no, but religion can and did give people morals to live by. But it still stands that rejection of religion is one of the reasons why people get divorced more often. You don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced as often? Who will tell people that? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 267] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:25 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm not saying we should all convert to be Mormons, but if we can get black fathers to take care of their kids, the number of black kids leaving school, joining gangs, killing other black kids, going to jail, and being poor will be lower. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 268] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:25 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Systemic racism is indeed real, but the poor outcomes of a black person growing up are less because of systemic racism and more because of culture, upbringing, victimization, and other stuff like it. The Black Lives Matter movement ended quite a few things in my state, a neighboring city's governor stepped down, our police chief stepped down, they defunded school police in troubled districts, so the movement has been successful(?) in getting stuff done; however, this does not solve the moral gap people lack. America, including black people, are left with a moral gap after the rejection of organized religion. I'm not saying those religions were "good", but they did have a societal function. Those regions (mainly Christianity) kept families together, got fathers to work for the welfare of the family, assigned roles to each member, and promoted the educating of the children by parents. People are free to reject religion, it's their choice, but people still need families, communities, and a sense of belonging. I'm not going to re-argue my point on why the legitimacy of Systemic Racism is questionable at best. Besides, you seemed to have gotten some of the point by actually posting problems and even offering a solution. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 269] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:32 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Not entirely no, but religion can and did give people morals to live by. But it still stands that rejection of religion is one of the reasons why people get divorced more often. You don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced as often? Who will tell people that? Religion has its own moral code. That moral code does not apply to everyone. So you can say "religion can and did give people morals to live by" but all it's doing is enforcing its own moral code. Why is divorce an immoral act? You know what's immoral? A religious leader telling an abused wife to give her husband another chance and stay in the marriage to avoid a divorce. You know what else is immoral? Someone breaking their marital vows and betraying their spouse's trust by going behind their spouses back to cheat on them for years. Wanna know another one? Staying in a loveless marriage because marriage is "moral". "Marriage" is not a moral act. It is neither moral nor immoral. Same with divorce. Unless you're religious, and your belief is that marriage is ordained of god, and that divorce is a sin. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 270] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 01:39 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm not saying we should all convert to be Mormons, but if we can get black fathers to take care of their kids, the number of black kids leaving school, joining gangs, killing other black kids, going to jail, and being poor will be lower. Without getting too much into this topic, in 2015 77% of black babies were born to a single mom This has nothing to do with "divorce" https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/77-black-births-to-single-moms-49-for-hispanic-immigrants -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 271] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:21 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Religion has its own moral code. That moral code does not apply to everyone. So you can say "religion can and did give people morals to live by" but all it's doing is enforcing its own moral code. Why is divorce an immoral act? You know what's immoral? A religious leader telling an abused wife to give her husband another chance and stay in the marriage to avoid a divorce. You know what else is immoral? Someone breaking their marital vows and betraying their spouse's trust by going behind their spouses back to cheat on them for years. Wanna know another one? Staying in a loveless marriage because marriage is "moral". "Marriage" is not a moral act. It is neither moral nor immoral. Same with divorce. Unless you're religious, and your belief is that marriage is ordained of god, and that divorce is a sin. I'm not saying religion hasn't commanded people to make horrible decisions based on a bad moral code. It has, I agree. My point is still valid though. I'll just repost it. "You don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced as often? Who will tell people that?" Without getting too much into this topic, in 2015 77% of black babies were born to a single mom This has nothing to do with "divorce" https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/77-black-births-to-single-moms-49-for-hispanic-immigrants Well, perhaps I was a bit careless with my wording. It definitely has to do with divorce rates though, but the problem of non-equal black outcomes also stems from black children growing up without both of their parents. One could chalk that up to divorce (like I did) or talk about lack of education on contraception or talk about black culture and it's influence on young males unwilling to pay child support or being sexually promiscuous or violent crimes creating widows and widowers, or victimization taking it's toll on the outlook of young males so they feel they should just do whatever. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 272] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:41 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm not saying religion hasn't commanded people to make horrible decisions based on a bad moral code. It has, I agree. My point is still valid though. I'll just repost it. "You don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced as often? Who will tell people that?" No, I don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced. They also don't need to be told to get married. I just made a big argument about how marriage and divorce are neither moral nor immoral. Well, perhaps I was a bit careless with my wording. It definitely has to do with divorce rates though, but the problem of non-equal black outcomes also stems from black children growing up without both of their parents. One could chalk that up to divorce (like I did) or talk about lack of education on contraception or talk about black culture and it's influence on young males unwilling to pay child support or being sexually promiscuous or violent crimes creating widows and widowers, or victimization taking it's toll on the outlook of young males so they feel they should just do whatever. If 77% of black babies are born to unmarried women, how does divorce have anything to do with it? The statistic isn't "77% of black babies' parents divorce". They are born to mothers who aren't even married in the first place. Divorce has nothing to do with whether a child has a father figure in their life or not. Do you have a source that you can use to argue that somehow this is a problem due to divorce? Or are you just "chalking it up to divorce" based off of nothing? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 273] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:50 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Well, perhaps I was a bit careless with my wording. It definitely has to do with divorce rates though, but the problem of non-equal black outcomes also stems from black children growing up without both of their parents. One could chalk that up to divorce (like I did) or talk about lack of education on contraception or talk about black culture and it's influence on young males unwilling to pay child support or being sexually promiscuous or violent crimes creating widows and widowers, or victimization taking it's toll on the outlook of young males so they feel they should just do whatever. I agree with your conclusions for the most part, but the way you've reached it is backwards. Fatherhood is simply a void in many black communities around the country and as Banana pointed out, a large number of black couples are not getting married at all. To the point where I would argue whether or not divorce is even as large a factor as your attributing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 274] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:50 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism [/B] No, I don't think people need to be told to stop getting divorced. They also don't need to be told to get married. If 77% of black babies are born to unmarried women, how does divorce have anything to do with it? The statistic isn't "77% of black babies' parents divorce". They are born to mothers who aren't even married in the first place. Divorce has nothing to do with whether a child has a father figure in their life or not. Do you have a source that you can use to argue that somehow this is a problem due to divorce? Or are you just "chalking it up to divorce" based off of nothing? Why are we arguing over my poor word choice? Just focus on the problem. The problem is black kids don't have a father and/or a mother. I'll leave out divorce. The black community could use some strengthening of the family bond. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 275] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:54 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why are we arguing semantics? Just focus on the problem. The problem is black kids don't have a father and/or a mother. I'll leave out divorce. The black community could use some strengthening of the family bond. Yeah like I said I am not diving too deeply into this topic right now. Mostly because I am not very well educated on it and I don't want to make statements that I can't back up with actual evidence. But this was never a semantics argument lol. "America, including black people, are left with a moral gap after the rejection of organized religion." was never a semantics argument. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 276] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 02:58 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You guys can debate this topic for a bit, I'll step aside. I had to interject at the religion stuff though, which is something that I am well versed in and feel comfortable holding my own in an argument lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 277] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:00 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You guys can debate this topic for a bit, I'll step aside. I had to interject at the religion stuff though, which is something that I am well versed in and feel comfortable holding my own in an argument lol Not really a debate, we agree. Lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 278] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:01 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Well, ami is here. Maybe she has something to say -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 279] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:02 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism DEBATE TAKEOVER -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 280] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:12 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/image/png;base64,iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAARYAAABPCAYAAAAuu rEAAAbfklEQVR4Ae1dS3dUR5KujcUgXipV6VEq8TLGQAMtyQJ7bO/BPwLmHwzmB3Rb2zYPAZ5/wPFuQILu3tNnVgjRO3spac yvGEXcyIyv8zIvHnrcaskkEjOyZP35o2MiIyM G5k3ixRm5qaounpaWq1WlSr1ejKlSs9y6VLl j777/PJdsg 0D2gaQP1BhQZmdnBVwGAZbvvvuOdqU8eUt/kPm3889dklFV9z3V7R 0Y 0g1R9v6X q6p377Y6vZruW2lWABeAyCLB823NFBRQanjJbz g97 nwaWAWUMqtOg9GoMO/9M6/bLvwGL4cjK6NM2/IXeWjZ//PuXwew86Jh2md7b4w96 yRts7QNMu1 tkut2WwSF14SDQIs33zzDVUvL/3buLNJTzSvx5vUsTG5849hZOxC37516zI Pday677l7MIYy3Tq0f7krZs1eqlofXuHNh9/PPpW9908hn5sV2s0GoQyCLBcv36dqpcw8B5rXo8UsPx9GBm70Ldv3bqMT4 17PrvWAR1aPPRLoyjTO4Q7Y81sAzBp7pP7Q87fSrjc0uhQTdvhzNQl8DTwfvWg4wkMTsvHZiFjgx O/TSOvVLxKZbkaggVTLcY75Q/M34wDegkpudrqCn nU2yQOnb83fRZG3MEnQMVLVPpnniudSm3S7nsztvHdD2yibSV2lIUdqDnZWqdiZiHf bnhm1bnJ S551N2gzmUtkiA5iLh HicfSgXHnzdnl5maqXF7QNH y8oUea18M3bilEePbSUdP2SyP30SZSbzDiepteLD iN/YRaJdd/w69ebhMyywDvEW20mfnhR2Xb tsPjJtSjfHW vurn1fN4ZYjuhqdbFDcHKcvuTGy7Z2Y3a6ezno62i0WUSWpzV2WiZvFwY2Ow9OtrXV8jK92CnRgzyNl8tz4H2j2O7nBzp7PTw/lol/xta n9NVyanui17XzGN0tqjxp aZmRn5MjTIUmhpaYmql/UAWFY1rwceWLZfQoan77xZFbmrQA/apnXd3wWGbi/2j3VfhyN33hDrk Sf1A066trL4yDw4/PtGMfS0qoDQtpZNzZ1Y CABt9U36KeSb3FPon ajxOH9XmZUMHWydoyuQW2t3YOvTmAfgWbRDPB89XgZee93w9RDxiHkZX16qeY1lcXKTqxTs5dTbooeb1YMNlLNsvIMPTd948FLkPNbCo/s4h8bqLavRfVHICEtHnIW0gIdL6qT5eN ioa69vOD7f7vRYVLJ21o1NX6gMDTZItS0ukrdDhzYe6PttWld2WVxMyFbjcfqoNj3GMruCxusRyo3bPR9Np2xg7e3olP1jXtX9T89Vvt4NO1bOWBYWFqh6WVMZywY91Lzua2CBDE/PAcBytZOtqf5rLia3SbdrXX1fou0XRobrx468EDk6 Cd1g4669voKsKD/gm/HOBa0rO01Y9MARCzfVFtghw5t3C 3y0JKthqP00e1Gdt4nd1YCjTlcr2tzXw4O5Oen6K9HZ3Mh7FBzEvPab7W/vfhryvvsVy9epWql e0hTShs0EPNK97Hli21iHD03c2HojcBy6l2KLnuv86OHdo4x766/pBkI1A9nMAktXH3ZPin9RN88a115eDETKuXvXtGMfVq0qf7efGpm4MRN1swPaP7RDf zlKyFbjcfqoNpGd0iWmSegBuQV9HD89P0UbOPsr xV46XnP10PEI/x2dHXlr0KXL1 m6sU7OXVe033N6 fXbim0tQYZnr6zcV/k3tfAovtfvk v3TIm5M3Oyv2d0zJoSF/P3 mT0MPLJPK6QUddJ/hFcjCOy1rf7efGpmsAx1COk 9s5uWAn6NxY4NeRdrLaozor9tkjAkaL0Pp53Tu0OufIfMyeVrY2s Pk5no6 bIjTXFy8up7ouZx27YrvI5Fv69UPXyTGUsr me5vU3DSyQ4ek7rJ3HsOPbbome5vr/1zpEamNv3vefCR5i3aQix3lD7O4W3frS0FetAtrMvkbq0xXXEcly4pXbaeGZsquaafkqGeYWSaxsuP7ZKQrWwNu15SbY5vJLNTYodnsKFVjHmW6RPTEoX6uudqPsp4VfdDZdeED2W 1e1T eTtxYsXKZdsg wD2QdSPuCWQvxDxEE N1 4cIFyyTbIPpB9IOUDlTdvz58/T7lkG2QfyD6Q8oHK51jOnTtHuWQbZB/IPpDygcrAcvbsWcol2yD7QPaBlA/U Dg/yiB7LGfOnKFcsg2yD2QfSPmA22NhcBkEWE6fPk25ZBtkH8g kPKBGn8NQhkEWE6ePEm5ZBtkH8g kPKBWr1eJ5RBgCUfHqp eCjbLtvuoPuA/AgRfzqhX2A5deq0y3KQ7eTaZ37ZFtkWn7oPVNpjycCSA dTD5w8/u4xIHssvHHLWUvOWLobKztTtk/2gf58oNI5lpyx9Gfc7ITZTp qD2RgUV/FPlUnyOPOADhqH8hLoQwseSM8DIfSBv3manGrlTjfrtl/ntv4wqf27OwJKBJfvAyH2g0gG5apu3C3RrZZVWV7uXH2/O0uzNH2l19Ue6kSd85BO J2//xVu0cueG033h1gqtrtyihWHmk3lq31H892RMw jeZ98bd1aHt1Ofsoa2WY8YrXSkn4GF/ fE4coNuru6Siu3Fop8bt6l1dW7dGNoGcPqmPsPPscLdJtfIHduuHk1wHKbFirPZ wr5l7LGFzPj29uDbAMY6ePZ0yV91iGn8jYWZRRMrC4oBzezsqulQN7EB6jBxYBpvhFcwB95EABC/5kwiC/bt6zjEWcxy d7t6MHdy uZAir8Roz89X6PYtzoCYzwrdXjI8jLN24x3LalFr6XaYjq uUqjTiOW1ovEFwWWehfLjoE7rI2O/c9tkFmwXl11E8pL25DFHdGX9rb46Y0kHj GXzF5LwDAJNgGtsUXMsyC/MKeJTDmmceNVvpSwp8iCb5Zl50pn6Habl0ToF81B dy1KJbnfSNl30RbBNYxv8CWES3m AYve1dXqfI5luHfpImBwcgAFGVUM0g96aa/DwoYNkETBGSLjFN6kAFgBIaDLqitc/nJSvBxQKB1SNBZXv3I0zRhMJnxa31arRSwsJOm9ImXoYPYU9nOzpXXI9bBjh9zKfSqP9s31Qa7J suvuPo wCWxJwiuN2yrTBXdnwYTwvzG9qzjI 3U/HF5QLZAVd/sty863mO5kV4O76wuX6phPPUU3/h7/3K Kbn9xEDS R8kROEQYZJih0uvme6VBucwxsqBk6Rp5xJnkc6pXmPUJ4LGj O0FHjoO5fdnV7xjLj 9BhUzYqOHEwTswt15a3vM3L58rMnaHVwMztgaw AC2gh17RvBdtV7RB7E pe5GlwYHl9ZQFkIjiJRprrCPLWlnhTXVk dpefeifBBY/J26PZdDfCqUMM1hb2umFR6S0tAUGLh 4TI5DZiMjCL4yZxL xclJjclMkk9XPf9RySsfn9cnIQuB1238eMM6h1IB6/r5YO5pz4LMou5iLyVPeLr7Ln6AQE7VZfPoaI0eXYHFZZhhthHbOOYBgEN7PD7u733EB5vn6 2r20JbgyYcR7mshBxto8C/mecK3b7JS3vr88HzPvSPYjTWS4CFB8efnwb5EaI2SLXrLg4VKS38U8CCdWhcuwBJBJ/w9qDg1rLCowuwWPmgFzAJdGJHGJW80JnS9k3IKgR5iibOIFhvIw9jK9Td7Im jsbycvcJedqJtfM7UEBQdauLckI7pW0Yglp67PGLomAP62/dgEV0iX3NgWl6XEMBS4p3YFtlD7a/0Js2GS/Txjy66S/PPJgVgKXZbBKXqamp/QcsynlDp8LEJQIrMDboetdFhyymqeXA0gWwksHUK2hY38TYCkGeokkEeqFfmT1S/GJd4/tyeRyYSbsmbRLrVJQT oB5juDHs 7yLE 8xUuWzeCFOg4qtAc1grSLz6aBxdgc40jJkrZ4CcU2jILf8ed2qwfaUAc663mI9Y94x3pV i9W9 yrkB5YlB2IIWKEtQGCSUgGX8THGTIylGsXHdJOaiZUfxlKBF4ledFegLaDuw4dzuhr2uA0yfEjTY9sV9meBVAqBnzsdKyrabtLd1fKliEeSNK6pcbv 7gsLAhkq1s09nCu9RwWx6LtjMwmNb6Qp9GrF11ynJH/JHmI7xZfXgV 1sfv3vE a/ityNdOjCelO7cFsqN4CZ61WuSWQtxx/yyFeKLiILIDD5BbO4l3OjGCeyt5Xh6QPC2MLJOkedsJ5zTZ9xudPGzaed54A8GBikFidPQ787BR7DCxE5gxVrVnHHzxfeSQAEZnP4ynaHPYPmWLwnyAr6pjGjPvfLrVblgmAtLQ BS/VDZ4xAEn8os2wFwE86l05bEW5684x m5s3TaP2VsHkCCOda 7 ZBjbnwskjESD/Awvsr 2vzFk5og8HtsWjjeGPEgcVGdk4WrZedM0eT7t6AThYHRByMaWCpJs/r79f4cRCG42enFed0b m0PmnnTMnrx56JILJOjXNDaXnFoCm3vV92OluowC7vh4Cze2p3boRvXZ5jpyv23WIb95bddXzOXzTgw3/DGnPnAIb7urk0tGlZ5lnQT4OH8 WUzWMfhk6R7WJdegEL/t7t3m/eYgC5Lg Mg2wb49Dd3uCfpl0Oxpx/wHMsB8OA2fkrzmP0xst2rGhHl418XP3lzybwcf6csXxcE3NgA82t6RNLjo80SA7sXOyivSsfkJubm6Ncsg2yD2QfSPlA5a9CKWa5LTtZ9oHsA wDlc xZAfKDvQhfKA9N0coH0J ltmf39eqnrzNBu7PwNlOw9sJQNKtznYe3s6jtKFbCg26eTtKJTKvj8spus1HP8Hdi6bbc/1sfm6OUHS7vsZz1Himx4A2rnU7rvVzfY3nuU7brZtd8uZtibN1M9qn9kwHW9k1Aht1TId2XbdbLUKZb7UIhdtw7ehbLTqZKEKnAOikukbfWBe xzPUKZq47VOb92HGW/kcyzBCc9/B3wAfwmZxYKVAAMHugMCCgm7X10yHe65PRfdo0 2nZmfpJJdWi06rEvCZnRVe6OcAR4FUL8CKxyDjVXs6bI8PMQ/7UWYGluwsyWAJQEUFZxDMFhg4mKVwcKPYNgYCPD9tn7lagYTrNztL/NwByOwsnYlLq0VnbRvT4jn6aV0ASNzGPAP9LWBBP9Sg0UCj7bEfA32vda5V/Zu3e61olrd3b0sdRAguBBuCFgGNGsGNGu0AAG7HNddnZ2bozMyMtMm9ff65rUHDdHx9bnaW NnnMzN0bnpaarmO zFf2yZAY4HqTKtFrqAtqjW9BhnYQGcw2R 7 6PbYxn0j2lnw3Y37H62D4AFAcWgwoEGsODAlSDngJ ZMcHOAW LBDzaY5rpaUcn9NPT9MXMjBS x/UX3G6fnZ ZofO4tu18/6VqBy8GHbm2IMS6MDhxDWASsFL38szSAeR4jDxeyaRspsP2yODSn99X/n FqgXOT/Tq3Xt6/z5R3r2inw7SsuQvr hdNM7ffu1vUgay7a /0fv3v9HTEdkOoIL9CAEVG2QcdByELvhtYEuQc6BPTwsA6Psvp6aknZ9dmJqiC5aO79HGNNweFEV7Ec npuh/j9SIajWiI3Xhd9H2E15KvgARwEgBEMBKxgB6PLegxc8YnHi8DmA0uNh9l4HmaUTzs19kVv6fEKsN0ALL70 jdb1tPyDg8vR3Bs539OovCkgANIWxK5oqzrdLwMJvZ2QqWFogo0AQc8Bf6lH 1GwKzZ8sHddBaTaJaYI2pilpezZugWV8gi4zzfS01JesHOjDIMX6QVcBLQtQAka4npoSOqYVALN9OEvi8TKQanDJWUt//lr5/25ut9s0eFkxGcvvT4t9ESCV FbRZZf6yDje0au/JvjLs/f026 JZ1XHPUK7zbfbJGVujviz7em5OdmX4CXEF7OzxMF2YWaGLk1Pm4CemqIrXJpNujo1RVdR8zUKtzWb9Gc8s9d/npqSNm6PywLo0VfRQo70tzL5mtuvTE LPnx9mQvraWu RpvUVne 5jGgjekZnC7asfK4eX/nrN38PWVtA1sNHgMjnPuqPrMH/SrvsVQz6IDA8tfUckJNDILKBiyWWIXAHRWfttVfL3ECkOwyPpnMp/RUgwr01xNtdQ3H8JR 0zJ56YM 4NHLBu0uPCwvBAuDCgcQf0XhgOLA8qDSpNeHbNbASxIu4ydosdk0pdGgpUad3iRolhoNQ1M/Sh3pO07r7pp5jdM694/bmDf3bTRoXWUsS9w eczyGqOt8TGjT22MNhoTtGX125qwQNds0oPjhwzNoeP0sNkkBrGFpqeV8dRqtFWfFgDlfRwGFwZX3vxlsHVnZTAHuS4kCrLHwhu3g/4FudECiwnIIJgSAbbyr3dmiYFsAMH07hWt2Mk1yxAVeKPiA1DRQGJ5v/vXijWsCd5gHN2cDqCgaWJ9CzLaZOxgxziADd4r3Qt2QrbSbiezFZOpJEDFBm/n6AQtNxq0zKAyFgGPppmcpOUAOCLasTELFKp97CitTk7SVwGwnJD7pQmAlKKvjdNac4K2rdztCQ9MD49Z8Bk7KsCy1Djh6AAqqBlceNkkyyJkLRZ0BVyszarFgnpB6vk/INeVz7FUM2bija/exD5AbfAowBB5cdBJUEXLjohGgnAEfNrCN5IVg00ku6eN gCWpP7a fqwgYBIbAObwWibx8sgZCv81uYAu9w4boL 0DEJ9OXJSXpx2Ab04eN0vV6n6yeOGJqxo/SkXqevJyfppaK5xjQKDBiQmObxkc9stlGjzpETdI3bjiIDGacXDEgaWA4fp2sMZIoXZ04MPpwZacDYPtGgr7j/5CStgufYUXrEba7/OK3H4HVkIsxa7CfrvBzqDYofBljUmxPB5zY8kY2o4DFvaP8lyWUEfQQm HM9Kj4GZLw LhMYObD0Wlq1qd3TBuU8YsABsMgyaG5OlkG8DGBg4X0V3ovgpQMH7rXjhx0QyBv 8DH6ul6nb p1 k/UR/ jQMPg8zXAp/YZbZ4w4OPbxqRNQEoFPYBFAxkDyzVHM0ZvJgz4MIB8pTKR7eMGVLj9kQKWx5OTdG3yeJSxmOXYQqMh za8OczZGmctWA5lYOkDWPjHhx9 KcSKmmWEe4PaIA32TeLA7RlUbYpBQECpCh9kJ8iwBBzjoB31UsjwdzZRYOsAs6cNynmkgCXeXwmBxS8vsFxw9eFjAirf1I/Rjl2CuGe4t DjQeQwvbRZTdyWAhbOYroCS52XYiY7 UoBBgML972us6Cxo8TAInKORSCJpdvxhmz YjkEYHH7LHkpVNhbgV9 PJu3EbDETi8KVwCEUfExmUGPpRDAJ5GRGYNHQNQnKLiMaAhgSfEQ2yhdOWPpBiz3sfFZM9kBB6pf5piM5Ylb0nxGm8cnJHvRNCFgHKaXNuD98siADQOBXqakMhYBEZ2x1BtmKRRnLCcaAizB8grAIlmLAR3OaML9nyP0LJGxZGDpI2PhTVv8pf5B/l8hINNgdRRYQaDot336LYulTP9LoVHx6b7nEwStgEUMQHYi5Jn63JyijWiSwKjtJvRqs5qfRQCc5hFliNi8xRehxFLoOQ6njU/IfkWwjLDZiAYRszRSGczhYybAHRgclr2TFIjwnshXbpM3sf8xfoL4q5CnGaONuvlyZL4g U3ZztG63WNRyx7ssZwYt8u1w26PZdHJPUSvm2YppL8M5aVQH8BSr9cJ5UMCS z8cq8/q9pg4aWRWxr0G1Qj4GMyFgUKyE54aRRtjBrdI3CB/ipDAAC48ahPwg48bT9Pg30Vy78PG0COBsCCfRWwcNbCb2Vs3vL Ai8H7rmMRX B8Zu3/Mb3G64JGru56sHAfl7mT8kumE2bgIP7lDxO6/aT85r63Mz7Pb7fGG1M jMx/Mx9msZSTNf8pQmfxku YtGh4/Sz/ekAA0s y9IbUJBoVD7SDwaD1TZjwT6FrqPgbOvAFToOJPOWdQHST1CNjE9x85eDPRWgYhPRTW3wvtegpCYooPNjdMAi2Ykdt7OXAq2 bMDyIh4Fe7fphzsP6OF/30x bsaXIZe1cJCOT9CSDn77RSYIaM4sItBYUH3WcEDOtR2h5/bg21XVxnR88O05gOXIhDmEhy9VtUP0uuHPq5iDdJO0oc/THDpGa/jcfOiYOcfSaNBCM6LjsR2py4Y1Nm7dIbn8ubl0X0VjwR7vsaiA0ul8vu5rsvTE7cb1fPsm3bXAIl GogNyABc5Rm9P3OIELWcI8QlafubaARb2pCtOu8rJXXvMn0/H8ulZ8JdTsPb0rJygZTr 7D1tDq/xNU4By7V9zidn R5FZExPm9O5Sj5ODEMH6MSyOEOLQSUfkOs/fiv/2YTdcOzMs/ J2w1bzf/wI63cWpS/roblEAcTlkT4QsTH3blwAErwqiPxOBovtT1GjwCX3/FYMGBA4OBF4SDGMXq dj9ItEfr5bc/ll6e2 UZrl1tAQG8wP S/WTOcgWMIhDS rAsBlEer/y5Bnt hZeHeX lPx/d43Ms/Sm1G0GTefa2/Q8//kT/tWR L S DtnfCzG4uN8M2bMtCHYAgQSxDXgENj9DOwcr/yhQar6250P418Tn WcDcbG/pA7aoz4c/FLwq2v8rolrS/vl7KxkH6wLy3QgZK/RxntJfA2ePF4eNzIVBypzc Y3VTnTLs20KwPL/Pw85XLwbHByfp6ktNt0qt2m0 02nWm36ezcHH1uyxetFqFI0LdadJ4LgKHVoi 58L19xvR8jX7n9PXcHJ1T/PlaCv9OydJxrds t/dfoB8Dn2oTetxHsqGL6MMApJ472bx5bQuPn 3A9uACG2X/L/d/t8cy6G FslHLjbrfbYPAOanABQBzxgYbQEaC2QY1t3Fgok0HKbdxAUAhaHXNvMFf2i2ocRvzBq0sz5Qe0s CH9MwrebjdI1ACLR4jnuuwZPHnQIVttF n fd1F Ahf9v2kH/ 4/dVCrz/vBOG4MLshcEmgMaDn682VXNb3nJdAAOtuZ9CqbnWvPQfEvbbR9Hy3seNvB1G66hQ3wv7QAP6Kz0BD3XLktRmUoGld7 Wfk/LMvB39u4 91GDlx4eaSCDMEWB7V8SYoCvUDDfObnXcDq4NV8g2umt X0/DyhoI1rbtP3kBvwSeiG5wAT3KPmcQd2yJlKX5la5f9idb8HTda/P2CMgyp1HwS0DfB 6FI0ZW1aBmjQhnuuuU3fB9cKJNBX1wFtgk/2mf58hu3klkK8HBrk5G02cv9GPii26hV4/T7X9ujVR9MOet2LNz9nnt3oBpWZ6Y1NK2/enjp1mnLJNsg kH0g5QPyN2/5zyYMsnl75coVyiXbIPtA9oEyH6h0jqWMWW7PjpZ9IPsA 8D/A6axG26rZCPhAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC She still readin -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 281] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:16 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Well, ami is here. Maybe she has something to say I feel like I can only say: "but is that trend you're talking about due to current black people being black or is it perhaps because their ancestors were slaves; getting emancipated with no money, education, and being forced to live in the worst communities; laws setup to put them in prison so they could continue to be used as slave labor.. etc..." so many times. Brown vs. Board of education was only in 1954. Even if you were to believe the system was 100% equal for everyone from that point onwards, you can't really argue that blacks should have regressed to the mean by now. It's been only a few generations... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 282] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:17 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism http://www.sc2mafia.com/forum/image/png;base64,iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAARYAAABPCAYAAAAuu rEAAAbfklEQVR4Ae1dS3dUR5KujcUgXipV6VEq8TLGQAMtyQJ7bO/BPwLmHwzmB3Rb2zYPAZ5/wPFuQILu3tNnVgjRO3spac yvGEXcyIyv8zIvHnrcaskkEjOyZP35o2MiIyM G5k3ixRm5qaounpaWq1WlSr1ejKlSs9y6VLl j777/PJdsg 0D2gaQP1BhQZmdnBVwGAZbvvvuOdqU8eUt/kPm3889dklFV9z3V7R 0Y 0g1R9v6X q6p377Y6vZruW2lWABeAyCLB823NFBRQanjJbz g97 nwaWAWUMqtOg9GoMO/9M6/bLvwGL4cjK6NM2/IXeWjZ//PuXwew86Jh2md7b4w96 yRts7QNMu1 tkut2WwSF14SDQIs33zzDVUvL/3buLNJTzSvx5vUsTG5849hZOxC37516zI Pday677l7MIYy3Tq0f7krZs1eqlofXuHNh9/PPpW9908hn5sV2s0GoQyCLBcv36dqpcw8B5rXo8UsPx9GBm70Ldv3bqMT4 17PrvWAR1aPPRLoyjTO4Q7Y81sAzBp7pP7Q87fSrjc0uhQTdvhzNQl8DTwfvWg4wkMTsvHZiFjgx O/TSOvVLxKZbkaggVTLcY75Q/M34wDegkpudrqCn nU2yQOnb83fRZG3MEnQMVLVPpnniudSm3S7nsztvHdD2yibSV2lIUdqDnZWqdiZiHf bnhm1bnJ S551N2gzmUtkiA5iLh HicfSgXHnzdnl5maqXF7QNH y8oUea18M3bilEePbSUdP2SyP30SZSbzDiepteLD iN/YRaJdd/w69ebhMyywDvEW20mfnhR2Xb tsPjJtSjfHW vurn1fN4ZYjuhqdbFDcHKcvuTGy7Z2Y3a6ezno62i0WUSWpzV2WiZvFwY2Ow9OtrXV8jK92CnRgzyNl8tz4H2j2O7nBzp7PTw/lol/xta n9NVyanui17XzGN0tqjxp aZmRn5MjTIUmhpaYmql/UAWFY1rwceWLZfQoan77xZFbmrQA/apnXd3wWGbi/2j3VfhyN33hDrk Sf1A066trL4yDw4/PtGMfS0qoDQtpZNzZ1Y CABt9U36KeSb3FPon ajxOH9XmZUMHWydoyuQW2t3YOvTmAfgWbRDPB89XgZee93w9RDxiHkZX16qeY1lcXKTqxTs5dTbooeb1YMNlLNsvIMPTd948FLkPNbCo/s4h8bqLavRfVHICEtHnIW0gIdL6qT5eN ioa69vOD7f7vRYVLJ21o1NX6gMDTZItS0ukrdDhzYe6PttWld2WVxMyFbjcfqoNj3GMruCxusRyo3bPR9Np2xg7e3olP1jXtX9T89Vvt4NO1bOWBYWFqh6WVMZywY91Lzua2CBDE/PAcBytZOtqf5rLia3SbdrXX1fou0XRobrx468EDk6 Cd1g4669voKsKD/gm/HOBa0rO01Y9MARCzfVFtghw5t3C 3y0JKthqP00e1Gdt4nd1YCjTlcr2tzXw4O5Oen6K9HZ3Mh7FBzEvPab7W/vfhryvvsVy9epWql e0hTShs0EPNK97Hli21iHD03c2HojcBy6l2KLnuv86OHdo4x766/pBkI1A9nMAktXH3ZPin9RN88a115eDETKuXvXtGMfVq0qf7efGpm4MRN1swPaP7RDf zlKyFbjcfqoNpGd0iWmSegBuQV9HD89P0UbOPsr xV46XnP10PEI/x2dHXlr0KXL1 m6sU7OXVe033N6 fXbim0tQYZnr6zcV/k3tfAovtfvk v3TIm5M3Oyv2d0zJoSF/P3 mT0MPLJPK6QUddJ/hFcjCOy1rf7efGpmsAx1COk 9s5uWAn6NxY4NeRdrLaozor9tkjAkaL0Pp53Tu0OufIfMyeVrY2s Pk5no6 bIjTXFy8up7ouZx27YrvI5Fv69UPXyTGUsr me5vU3DSyQ4ek7rJ3HsOPbbome5vr/1zpEamNv3vefCR5i3aQix3lD7O4W3frS0FetAtrMvkbq0xXXEcly4pXbaeGZsquaafkqGeYWSaxsuP7ZKQrWwNu15SbY5vJLNTYodnsKFVjHmW6RPTEoX6uudqPsp4VfdDZdeED2W 1e1T eTtxYsXKZdsg wD2QdSPuCWQvxDxEE N1 4cIFyyTbIPpB9IOUDlTdvz58/T7lkG2QfyD6Q8oHK51jOnTtHuWQbZB/IPpDygcrAcvbsWcol2yD7QPaBlA/U Dg/yiB7LGfOnKFcsg2yD2QfSPmA22NhcBkEWE6fPk25ZBtkH8g kPKBGn8NQhkEWE6ePEm5ZBtkH8g kPKBWr1eJ5RBgCUfHqp eCjbLtvuoPuA/AgRfzqhX2A5deq0y3KQ7eTaZ37ZFtkWn7oPVNpjycCSA dTD5w8/u4xIHssvHHLWUvOWLobKztTtk/2gf58oNI5lpyx9Gfc7ITZTp qD2RgUV/FPlUnyOPOADhqH8hLoQwseSM8DIfSBv3manGrlTjfrtl/ntv4wqf27OwJKBJfvAyH2g0gG5apu3C3RrZZVWV7uXH2/O0uzNH2l19Ue6kSd85BO J2//xVu0cueG033h1gqtrtyihWHmk3lq31H892RMw jeZ98bd1aHt1Ofsoa2WY8YrXSkn4GF/ fE4coNuru6Siu3Fop8bt6l1dW7dGNoGcPqmPsPPscLdJtfIHduuHk1wHKbFirPZ wr5l7LGFzPj29uDbAMY6ePZ0yV91iGn8jYWZRRMrC4oBzezsqulQN7EB6jBxYBpvhFcwB95EABC/5kwiC/bt6zjEWcxy d7t6MHdy uZAir8Roz89X6PYtzoCYzwrdXjI8jLN24x3LalFr6XaYjq uUqjTiOW1ovEFwWWehfLjoE7rI2O/c9tkFmwXl11E8pL25DFHdGX9rb46Y0kHj GXzF5LwDAJNgGtsUXMsyC/MKeJTDmmceNVvpSwp8iCb5Zl50pn6Habl0ToF81B dy1KJbnfSNl30RbBNYxv8CWES3m AYve1dXqfI5luHfpImBwcgAFGVUM0g96aa/DwoYNkETBGSLjFN6kAFgBIaDLqitc/nJSvBxQKB1SNBZXv3I0zRhMJnxa31arRSwsJOm9ImXoYPYU9nOzpXXI9bBjh9zKfSqP9s31Qa7J suvuPo wCWxJwiuN2yrTBXdnwYTwvzG9qzjI 3U/HF5QLZAVd/sty863mO5kV4O76wuX6phPPUU3/h7/3K Kbn9xEDS R8kROEQYZJih0uvme6VBucwxsqBk6Rp5xJnkc6pXmPUJ4LGj O0FHjoO5fdnV7xjLj 9BhUzYqOHEwTswt15a3vM3L58rMnaHVwMztgaw AC2gh17RvBdtV7RB7E pe5GlwYHl9ZQFkIjiJRprrCPLWlnhTXVk dpefeifBBY/J26PZdDfCqUMM1hb2umFR6S0tAUGLh 4TI5DZiMjCL4yZxL xclJjclMkk9XPf9RySsfn9cnIQuB1238eMM6h1IB6/r5YO5pz4LMou5iLyVPeLr7Ln6AQE7VZfPoaI0eXYHFZZhhthHbOOYBgEN7PD7u733EB5vn6 2r20JbgyYcR7mshBxto8C/mecK3b7JS3vr88HzPvSPYjTWS4CFB8efnwb5EaI2SLXrLg4VKS38U8CCdWhcuwBJBJ/w9qDg1rLCowuwWPmgFzAJdGJHGJW80JnS9k3IKgR5iibOIFhvIw9jK9Td7Im jsbycvcJedqJtfM7UEBQdauLckI7pW0Yglp67PGLomAP62/dgEV0iX3NgWl6XEMBS4p3YFtlD7a/0Js2GS/Txjy66S/PPJgVgKXZbBKXqamp/QcsynlDp8LEJQIrMDboetdFhyymqeXA0gWwksHUK2hY38TYCkGeokkEeqFfmT1S/GJd4/tyeRyYSbsmbRLrVJQT oB5juDHs 7yLE 8xUuWzeCFOg4qtAc1grSLz6aBxdgc40jJkrZ4CcU2jILf8ed2qwfaUAc663mI9Y94x3pV i9W9 yrkB5YlB2IIWKEtQGCSUgGX8THGTIylGsXHdJOaiZUfxlKBF4ledFegLaDuw4dzuhr2uA0yfEjTY9sV9meBVAqBnzsdKyrabtLd1fKliEeSNK6pcbv 7gsLAhkq1s09nCu9RwWx6LtjMwmNb6Qp9GrF11ynJH/JHmI7xZfXgV 1sfv3vE a/ityNdOjCelO7cFsqN4CZ61WuSWQtxx/yyFeKLiILIDD5BbO4l3OjGCeyt5Xh6QPC2MLJOkedsJ5zTZ9xudPGzaed54A8GBikFidPQ787BR7DCxE5gxVrVnHHzxfeSQAEZnP4ynaHPYPmWLwnyAr6pjGjPvfLrVblgmAtLQ BS/VDZ4xAEn8os2wFwE86l05bEW5684x m5s3TaP2VsHkCCOda 7 ZBjbnwskjESD/Awvsr 2vzFk5og8HtsWjjeGPEgcVGdk4WrZedM0eT7t6AThYHRByMaWCpJs/r79f4cRCG42enFed0b m0PmnnTMnrx56JILJOjXNDaXnFoCm3vV92OluowC7vh4Cze2p3boRvXZ5jpyv23WIb95bddXzOXzTgw3/DGnPnAIb7urk0tGlZ5lnQT4OH8 WUzWMfhk6R7WJdegEL/t7t3m/eYgC5Lg Mg2wb49Dd3uCfpl0Oxpx/wHMsB8OA2fkrzmP0xst2rGhHl418XP3lzybwcf6csXxcE3NgA82t6RNLjo80SA7sXOyivSsfkJubm6Ncsg2yD2QfSPlA5a9CKWa5LTtZ9oHsA wDlc xZAfKDvQhfKA9N0coH0J ltmf39eqnrzNBu7PwNlOw9sJQNKtznYe3s6jtKFbCg26eTtKJTKvj8spus1HP8Hdi6bbc/1sfm6OUHS7vsZz1Himx4A2rnU7rvVzfY3nuU7brZtd8uZtibN1M9qn9kwHW9k1Aht1TId2XbdbLUKZb7UIhdtw7ehbLTqZKEKnAOikukbfWBe xzPUKZq47VOb92HGW/kcyzBCc9/B3wAfwmZxYKVAAMHugMCCgm7X10yHe65PRfdo0 2nZmfpJJdWi06rEvCZnRVe6OcAR4FUL8CKxyDjVXs6bI8PMQ/7UWYGluwsyWAJQEUFZxDMFhg4mKVwcKPYNgYCPD9tn7lagYTrNztL/NwByOwsnYlLq0VnbRvT4jn6aV0ASNzGPAP9LWBBP9Sg0UCj7bEfA32vda5V/Zu3e61olrd3b0sdRAguBBuCFgGNGsGNGu0AAG7HNddnZ2bozMyMtMm9ff65rUHDdHx9bnaW NnnMzN0bnpaarmO zFf2yZAY4HqTKtFrqAtqjW9BhnYQGcw2R 7 6PbYxn0j2lnw3Y37H62D4AFAcWgwoEGsODAlSDngJ ZMcHOAW LBDzaY5rpaUcn9NPT9MXMjBS x/UX3G6fnZ ZofO4tu18/6VqBy8GHbm2IMS6MDhxDWASsFL38szSAeR4jDxeyaRspsP2yODSn99X/n FqgXOT/Tq3Xt6/z5R3r2inw7SsuQvr hdNM7ffu1vUgay7a /0fv3v9HTEdkOoIL9CAEVG2QcdByELvhtYEuQc6BPTwsA6Psvp6aknZ9dmJqiC5aO79HGNNweFEV7Ec npuh/j9SIajWiI3Xhd9H2E15KvgARwEgBEMBKxgB6PLegxc8YnHi8DmA0uNh9l4HmaUTzs19kVv6fEKsN0ALL70 jdb1tPyDg8vR3Bs539OovCkgANIWxK5oqzrdLwMJvZ2QqWFogo0AQc8Bf6lH 1GwKzZ8sHddBaTaJaYI2pilpezZugWV8gi4zzfS01JesHOjDIMX6QVcBLQtQAka4npoSOqYVALN9OEvi8TKQanDJWUt//lr5/25ut9s0eFkxGcvvT4t9ESCV FbRZZf6yDje0au/JvjLs/f026 JZ1XHPUK7zbfbJGVujviz7em5OdmX4CXEF7OzxMF2YWaGLk1Pm4CemqIrXJpNujo1RVdR8zUKtzWb9Gc8s9d/npqSNm6PywLo0VfRQo70tzL5mtuvTE LPnx9mQvraWu RpvUVne 5jGgjekZnC7asfK4eX/nrN38PWVtA1sNHgMjnPuqPrMH/SrvsVQz6IDA8tfUckJNDILKBiyWWIXAHRWfttVfL3ECkOwyPpnMp/RUgwr01xNtdQ3H8JR 0zJ56YM 4NHLBu0uPCwvBAuDCgcQf0XhgOLA8qDSpNeHbNbASxIu4ydosdk0pdGgpUad3iRolhoNQ1M/Sh3pO07r7pp5jdM694/bmDf3bTRoXWUsS9w eczyGqOt8TGjT22MNhoTtGX125qwQNds0oPjhwzNoeP0sNkkBrGFpqeV8dRqtFWfFgDlfRwGFwZX3vxlsHVnZTAHuS4kCrLHwhu3g/4FudECiwnIIJgSAbbyr3dmiYFsAMH07hWt2Mk1yxAVeKPiA1DRQGJ5v/vXijWsCd5gHN2cDqCgaWJ9CzLaZOxgxziADd4r3Qt2QrbSbiezFZOpJEDFBm/n6AQtNxq0zKAyFgGPppmcpOUAOCLasTELFKp97CitTk7SVwGwnJD7pQmAlKKvjdNac4K2rdztCQ9MD49Z8Bk7KsCy1Djh6AAqqBlceNkkyyJkLRZ0BVyszarFgnpB6vk/INeVz7FUM2bija/exD5AbfAowBB5cdBJUEXLjohGgnAEfNrCN5IVg00ku6eN gCWpP7a fqwgYBIbAObwWibx8sgZCv81uYAu9w4boL 0DEJ9OXJSXpx2Ab04eN0vV6n6yeOGJqxo/SkXqevJyfppaK5xjQKDBiQmObxkc9stlGjzpETdI3bjiIDGacXDEgaWA4fp2sMZIoXZ04MPpwZacDYPtGgr7j/5CStgufYUXrEba7/OK3H4HVkIsxa7CfrvBzqDYofBljUmxPB5zY8kY2o4DFvaP8lyWUEfQQm HM9Kj4GZLw LhMYObD0Wlq1qd3TBuU8YsABsMgyaG5OlkG8DGBg4X0V3ovgpQMH7rXjhx0QyBv 8DH6ul6nb p1 k/UR/ jQMPg8zXAp/YZbZ4w4OPbxqRNQEoFPYBFAxkDyzVHM0ZvJgz4MIB8pTKR7eMGVLj9kQKWx5OTdG3yeJSxmOXYQqMh za8OczZGmctWA5lYOkDWPjHhx9 KcSKmmWEe4PaIA32TeLA7RlUbYpBQECpCh9kJ8iwBBzjoB31UsjwdzZRYOsAs6cNynmkgCXeXwmBxS8vsFxw9eFjAirf1I/Rjl2CuGe4t DjQeQwvbRZTdyWAhbOYroCS52XYiY7 UoBBgML972us6Cxo8TAInKORSCJpdvxhmz YjkEYHH7LHkpVNhbgV9 PJu3EbDETi8KVwCEUfExmUGPpRDAJ5GRGYNHQNQnKLiMaAhgSfEQ2yhdOWPpBiz3sfFZM9kBB6pf5piM5Ylb0nxGm8cnJHvRNCFgHKaXNuD98siADQOBXqakMhYBEZ2x1BtmKRRnLCcaAizB8grAIlmLAR3OaML9nyP0LJGxZGDpI2PhTVv8pf5B/l8hINNgdRRYQaDot336LYulTP9LoVHx6b7nEwStgEUMQHYi5Jn63JyijWiSwKjtJvRqs5qfRQCc5hFliNi8xRehxFLoOQ6njU/IfkWwjLDZiAYRszRSGczhYybAHRgclr2TFIjwnshXbpM3sf8xfoL4q5CnGaONuvlyZL4g U3ZztG63WNRyx7ssZwYt8u1w26PZdHJPUSvm2YppL8M5aVQH8BSr9cJ5UMCS z8cq8/q9pg4aWRWxr0G1Qj4GMyFgUKyE54aRRtjBrdI3CB/ipDAAC48ahPwg48bT9Pg30Vy78PG0COBsCCfRWwcNbCb2Vs3vL Ai8H7rmMRX B8Zu3/Mb3G64JGru56sHAfl7mT8kumE2bgIP7lDxO6/aT85r63Mz7Pb7fGG1M jMx/Mx9msZSTNf8pQmfxku YtGh4/Sz/ekAA0s y9IbUJBoVD7SDwaD1TZjwT6FrqPgbOvAFToOJPOWdQHST1CNjE9x85eDPRWgYhPRTW3wvtegpCYooPNjdMAi2Ykdt7OXAq2 bMDyIh4Fe7fphzsP6OF/30x bsaXIZe1cJCOT9CSDn77RSYIaM4sItBYUH3WcEDOtR2h5/bg21XVxnR88O05gOXIhDmEhy9VtUP0uuHPq5iDdJO0oc/THDpGa/jcfOiYOcfSaNBCM6LjsR2py4Y1Nm7dIbn8ubl0X0VjwR7vsaiA0ul8vu5rsvTE7cb1fPsm3bXAIl GogNyABc5Rm9P3OIELWcI8QlafubaARb2pCtOu8rJXXvMn0/H8ulZ8JdTsPb0rJygZTr 7D1tDq/xNU4By7V9zidn R5FZExPm9O5Sj5ODEMH6MSyOEOLQSUfkOs/fiv/2YTdcOzMs/ J2w1bzf/wI63cWpS/roblEAcTlkT4QsTH3blwAErwqiPxOBovtT1GjwCX3/FYMGBA4OBF4SDGMXq dj9ItEfr5bc/ll6e2 UZrl1tAQG8wP S/WTOcgWMIhDS rAsBlEer/y5Bnt hZeHeX lPx/d43Ms/Sm1G0GTefa2/Q8//kT/tWR L S DtnfCzG4uN8M2bMtCHYAgQSxDXgENj9DOwcr/yhQar6250P418Tn WcDcbG/pA7aoz4c/FLwq2v8rolrS/vl7KxkH6wLy3QgZK/RxntJfA2ePF4eNzIVBypzc Y3VTnTLs20KwPL/Pw85XLwbHByfp6ktNt0qt2m0 02nWm36ezcHH1uyxetFqFI0LdadJ4LgKHVoi 58L19xvR8jX7n9PXcHJ1T/PlaCv9OydJxrds t/dfoB8Dn2oTetxHsqGL6MMApJ472bx5bQuPn 3A9uACG2X/L/d/t8cy6G FslHLjbrfbYPAOanABQBzxgYbQEaC2QY1t3Fgok0HKbdxAUAhaHXNvMFf2i2ocRvzBq0sz5Qe0s CH9MwrebjdI1ACLR4jnuuwZPHnQIVttF n fd1F Ahf9v2kH/ 4/dVCrz/vBOG4MLshcEmgMaDn682VXNb3nJdAAOtuZ9CqbnWvPQfEvbbR9Hy3seNvB1G66hQ3wv7QAP6Kz0BD3XLktRmUoGld7 Wfk/LMvB39u4 91GDlx4eaSCDMEWB7V8SYoCvUDDfObnXcDq4NV8g2umt X0/DyhoI1rbtP3kBvwSeiG5wAT3KPmcQd2yJlKX5la5f9idb8HTda/P2CMgyp1HwS0DfB 6FI0ZW1aBmjQhnuuuU3fB9cKJNBX1wFtgk/2mf58hu3klkK8HBrk5G02cv9GPii26hV4/T7X9ujVR9MOet2LNz9nnt3oBpWZ6Y1NK2/enjp1mnLJNsg kH0g5QPyN2/5zyYMsnl75coVyiXbIPtA9oEyH6h0jqWMWW7PjpZ9IPsA 8D/A6axG26rZCPhAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC She still readin lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 283] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I feel like I can only say: "but is that trend you're talking about due to current black people being black or is it perhaps because their ancestors were slaves; getting emancipated with no money, education, and being forced to live in the worst communities; laws setup to put them in prison so they could continue to be used as slave labor.. etc..." so many times. Brown vs. Board of education was only in 1954. Even if you were to believe the system was 100% equal for everyone from that point onwards, you can't really argue that blacks should have regressed to the mean by now. It's been only a few generations... Well said. Cheerio mate -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 284] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:21 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to aamirus again. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 285] Auteur : Ash Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:30 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Mag....have u looked at them? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Emancipation_Memorial.jpg This one seems to be taken out of context. It clearly says "EMANCIPATION" on the statue. For a time where slavery was indoctrinated into American tradition, Abraham Lincoln could be seen as a symbol of social progressiveness for that era. That African-American male in that statue is Archer Alexander, a runaway slave that hid in the Northern states with the help of another abolitionist until the the 13th Amendment was ratified. That abolitionist (William Greenfield Eliot) included Alexander into the statue to reflect Abraham Lincoln's Emancipation of slaves. It might look a bit wrong, but this statue isn't anywhere close in terms of racism compared to other statues. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 286] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:42 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I feel like I can only say: "but is that trend you're talking about due to current black people being black or is it perhaps because their ancestors were slaves; getting emancipated with no money, education, and being forced to live in the worst communities; laws setup to put them in prison so they could continue to be used as slave labor.. etc..." so many times. Brown vs. Board of education was only in 1954. Even if you were to believe the system was 100% equal for everyone from that point onwards, you can't really argue that blacks should have regressed to the mean by now. It's been only a few generations... I don’t know what the context of this is. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 287] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 03:43 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Well said. Cheerio mate Cheerleader. KappaRoss -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 288] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 08:49 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism A child in a single parent household is a lot more susceptible to a life of poverty or general lower quality life. I think the evidence of this is overwhelming. When it comes to the black community, the single parent household number is incredibly high compared to others. Is this the defining reason for low socioeconomic standing for the black community? Debatable. There is definitely other factors to consider but I think this angle is important simply because you can look at single parent households across all races and see the trend of low socioeconomic standing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 289] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : June 23rd, 2020 09:05 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If there's a statue of Robert E. Lee somewhere in a public space for "commemorating a great historical man who is a model for society", which there very probably is, off with its head, definetly. That stuff belongs in a museum to preserve history without glorifying persons directly associated and known mostly for slavery and for its defense. However... Mag....have u looked at them? https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/42/Emancipation_Memorial.jpg That is a celebration of Lincoln's abolition of slavery... it depicts a reality: slaves who were under their masters, and then Lincoln giving them freedom (yes, that is a very pompous and propangandist sentence, but it's still exactly what this statue represents). It's not glorifying slavery, it's glorifying its ABOLITION, and that is definetly something worth glorifying. It may not have been perfect, but it was a pretty damn good improvement. ~~ As for "confederates are not racist", uhm, sorry, they are. Perhaps a reminder of the Declaration of Causes of Seceding States (https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states) would be useful... Mississippi A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union. In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course. Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove. The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory. The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France. The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico. It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction. It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion. It tramples the original equality of the South under foot. It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain. It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst. It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice. It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists. It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better. It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives. It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security. It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system. It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause. It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood. Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England. Our decision is made. We follow their footsteps. We embrace the alternative of separation; and for the reasons here stated, we resolve to maintain our rights with the full consciousness of the justice of our course, and the undoubting belief of our ability to maintain it. Whoever supports that cause cannot be anything but racist, or at least completely uncaring about people being literally ENSLAVED, treated as PROPERTIES only because of their origins, which isn't exactly better. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 290] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:37 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism A child in a single parent household is a lot more susceptible to a life of poverty or general lower quality life. I think the evidence of this is overwhelming. When it comes to the black community, the single parent household number is incredibly high compared to others. Is this the defining reason for low socioeconomic standing for the black community? Debatable. There is definitely other factors to consider but I think this angle is important simply because you can look at single parent households across all races and see the trend of low socioeconomic standing. What other factors did you have in mind? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 291] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:39 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What other factors did you have in mind? also, not a trap Rumox. Just genuinely wanted to know your thoughts. <3 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 292] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:49 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Besides single parent households... culture, education and health are the next important topics to address. I'm probably missing something else important but these are the ones that jump to mind right now. Also this isn't just in regards to the black community, this is for everyone in low socioeconomic standings. All these topics are universal. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 293] Auteur : rumox Date : June 23rd, 2020 10:58 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'd also clarify that I believe a loooot of issues that plague communities are intertwined. Just a big ol web of fuck. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 294] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism mmmm web of fuck -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 295] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:23 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ah I'm out of gas tonight, just lurking btw -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 296] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:28 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ah I'm out of gas tonight, just lurking btw Wanna join my fuck web? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 297] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:31 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Wanna join my fuck web? Umpah umpah umpah umpah Umpah umpah umpah umpah Here we go now! Umpah-pah huh yeah, uh yeah 경고하는데 조심해야 돼 깊을지도 몰라 여럿 봤는데 못 나오던데 왜? 나도 몰라 내게 묻지 마 얼마나 깊은지 내 눈은 못 보니까 (hoo hoo) 허우적대는 저 다른 애들과 넌 다르길 바라 막 답답하고 숨이 막히고 내게 빠진 거 맞지? 너무 겁먹지 마 난 바로 너야 넌 숨만 쉬어도 내 짝이 될 테니까 Feel the rhythm 몸이 기억하는 대로 좋아 Something unforgettable 바로 지금 맘이 흘러가는 대로 좋아 수평선 위를 나는 거야 Umpah umpah umpah umpah 호흡을 맞추고 Umpah umpah umpah umpah 두 눈을 맞추고 Umpah umpah umpah umpah 너와 나 좋아 something unforgettable Let the beat drop 기분 so so hot hot, ooh yeah yeah -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 298] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:32 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is also my stance on economic and religious issues, -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 299] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:44 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Wanna join my fuck web? This sounds like a Ram Ranch lyric -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 300] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:51 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The problem with fighting for education reform is that one would need to fight against people's active choices. School funding in a large part is from local taxes on the surrounding property. Which makes schools that have poor surrounding neighborhoods generally worse, and around rich neighborhoods good. People play a large part in segregation and move to nicer neighborhoods. As history would have it, rich people move to rich suburbs and are often majority white. Since moving is often a choice, letting good schools be in good neighborhoods does promote that those who want to succeed be placed in an environment that would promoted it. For example, schools in the Bay Area are known to be exceptional. The parents who moved into there are often Yellow and Brown, and their kids did exceedingly well in school. My class had like 3? Black kids, the last class that graduated had 0. The outcomes of having good schools is it is a huge bonus to the entire economy. The Bay Area has a lot of startups. So what could be the solution? We can't really prevent people from choosing what house to buy or what neighbors to have, but we could de-localize how property tax is distributed. That, however, causes another whole slew of problems. Emergency services, parks, and sometimes roads are funded locally. De-localizing property tax could require a greater need for government workers, as one would now need more civil engineers and accountants and what-not to redistribute the money to vital services. Another option would be to increase investment in low-income housing. Aside from the obvious problem of needing money, it also creates wrong incentives (externalities). Companies that build low-income housing are incentivized to use cheaper materials, and the people that live in them may not feel the same economic pressure that the people around them have to pay for rent. So sometimes they become addicted to drugs. What do you guys think about the education problem? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 301] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 23rd, 2020 11:53 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Umpah umpah (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y30GoDYpjzU) Good song. Saving this. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 302] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 24th, 2020 02:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If there's a statue of Robert E. Lee somewhere in a public space for "commemorating a great historical man who is a model for society", which there very probably is, off with its head, definetly. That stuff belongs in a museum to preserve history without glorifying persons directly associated and known mostly for slavery and for its defense. However... That is a celebration of Lincoln's abolition of slavery... it depicts a reality: slaves who were under their masters, and then Lincoln giving them freedom (yes, that is a very pompous and propangandist sentence, but it's still exactly what this statue represents). It's not glorifying slavery, it's glorifying its ABOLITION, and that is definetly something worth glorifying. It may not have been perfect, but it was a pretty damn good improvement. ~~ As for "confederates are not racist", uhm, sorry, they are. Perhaps a reminder of the Declaration of Causes of Seceding States (https://www.battlefields.org/learn/primary-sources/declaration-causes-seceding-states) would be useful... Mississippi A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union. In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course. Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin. That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove. The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory. The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France. The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico. It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction. It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion. It tramples the original equality of the South under foot. It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain. It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst. It has enlisted its press, its pulpit and its schools against us, until the whole popular mind of the North is excited and inflamed with prejudice. It has made combinations and formed associations to carry out its schemes of emancipation in the States and wherever else slavery exists. It seeks not to elevate or to support the slave, but to destroy his present condition without providing a better. It has invaded a State, and invested with the honors of martyrdom the wretch whose purpose was to apply flames to our dwellings, and the weapons of destruction to our lives. It has broken every compact into which it has entered for our security. It has given indubitable evidence of its design to ruin our agriculture, to prostrate our industrial pursuits and to destroy our social system. It knows no relenting or hesitation in its purposes; it stops not in its march of aggression, and leaves us no room to hope for cessation or for pause. It has recently obtained control of the Government, by the prosecution of its unhallowed schemes, and destroyed the last expectation of living together in friendship and brotherhood. Utter subjugation awaits us in the Union, if we should consent longer to remain in it. It is not a matter of choice, but of necessity. We must either submit to degradation, and to the loss of property worth four billions of money, or we must secede from the Union framed by our fathers, to secure this as well as every other species of property. For far less cause than this, our fathers separated from the Crown of England. Our decision is made. We follow their footsteps. We embrace the alternative of separation; and for the reasons here stated, we resolve to maintain our rights with the full consciousness of the justice of our course, and the undoubting belief of our ability to maintain it. Whoever supports that cause cannot be anything but racist, or at least completely uncaring about people being literally ENSLAVED, treated as PROPERTIES only because of their origins, which isn't exactly better. IMO only racists and smoothbrains say that the Confederacy was about state rights or whatever. The VP of the Confederacy had an entire speech about slavery: https://iowaculture.gov/history/education/educator-resources/primary-source-sets/civil-war/cornerstone-speech-alexander "[I]ts foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 303] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 24th, 2020 02:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism also how can you say that black people are inferior when you permanently look like you died 5 days ago lmao https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Alexander_Stephens.jpg/800px-Alexander_Stephens.jpg -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 304] Auteur : Helz Date : June 24th, 2020 07:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism IMO only racists and smoothbrains say that the Confederacy was about state rights or whatever. The VP of the Confederacy had an entire speech about slavery: https://iowaculture.gov/history/education/educator-resources/primary-source-sets/civil-war/cornerstone-speech-alexander I started reading this thread but felt like going through 15 pages of a debate on categorization would give me cancer so I skipped here. To throw some thought provoking bullshit out there I think the truth on the civil war is a bit of a middle ground. In any war the winner always frames their fight with a bunch of post hoc stuff to make them out to be the morally justified champions who conquered evil regardless of the motivations or evils they committed. I pretty much believe this to be a consistent regardless of context that has a parallel to the civil war. So I am going to take an unpopular position of pointing out how the civil war was not about human rights but please take a moment to understand what I am saying before screaming I am a racist. Keep in mind that the ideas of human rights and slavery have to be separated to have an intelligent conversation on the subject. To preface- 100% the civil war was about slavery. But it was an economic weapon that is now framed as some kind of moral selfless fight. To anyone who would like to argue that it was about human rights I would point out a few questions- 1- Why did the emancipation proclamation postdate the end of the war? If it was about providing humane treatment to slaves why not give them equal rights when creating a war over it (if it was about human rights) 2- Corollary to 1- Even if slaves were not given equal human rights why were they not given freedom in areas that were taken by the north from the south? They were given a chance to fight for the north to earn their freedom but freedom was not treated as something inherent to their human condition. They had to serve for it and were often treated as cannon fodder serving in the most brutal of conditions to insulate the non-slave fighters from casualties. 3- Confiscation. We understand it now as a drug dealer who gets his car snatched up by cops because it was part of his drug business and it then gets sold by the cops or used as an undercover vehicle to support anti-drug operations. But it was also used on slaves. The north 'confiscated' slaves from the south who would not serve for their freedom and put them to work on railroads until the emancipation proclamation re-classed them as the 'freed men.' Theres journals of that time from railroad foremen detailing how they had business formulas to pay the freed men just enough to get by but avoid paying them enough that they could afford returning to the east coast to reconnect with their familys and they even worked to create an infrastructure for them to send money back with the idea that they would keep working to help their family if they specifically saw it as their only option. Sure that is post civil war but kinda pointing to the mindset. There is quite a few other points I could make but I am lazy : ) Sure those questions are something of note but consider the nature of power. Over the last what.. 20 years or something we have had those struggles with North Korea, Syria, and many others but without declaring war we have pressured them to do whatever. This is the preface to any war. War is viewed as some huge change but really its just another way to exert power. Prior to any war there is usually a long struggle that centers around economic pressure. In context to the civil war there was an evolution of the economy in the industrial revolution. The south was an agrarian society while the north became industrialized. A power struggle evolved as the country developed centered around taxation and spending of taxed funds. (Back then they didnt run up the national debt like a 16 year old with daddys credit card, they actually had to fund the things they wanted to do.) The south got pissy about being taxed with their tax money being spent to develop the Norths infrastructure and raised prices and thus an economic war was created. The north needed the souths raw goods to feed their industrial machine while the south saw the north as an overbearing government on par with England which they had fought to separate from. Yes slavery was a key factor in the war but it came with the timing of uncle toms cabin as the most viable justification. I believe that human rights is just the moral post hoc stance taken on the war and that its the pretty bow put on an ugly war. In our day now we argue about the left or the right or CNN vs FOX but its all the same. Its just another power struggle where the rich take whatever socially acceptable platitude to push for a greater share of power. I think the fact this thread is titled "Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism" is a bit telling of that nature. To push it a bit further I have a belief that this draws on human nature in more ways than one. I think we have a lot of trouble separating morality from power structures but whatever. Tell me I am wrong if you want but this was more of a power struggle than it was a fight for human rights. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 305] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 24th, 2020 08:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ah yes, the "you guys are cancerous, but let me drop what I think" post. Thanks Helz. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 306] Auteur : Helz Date : June 24th, 2020 08:59 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ah yes, the "you guys are cancerous, but let me drop what I think" post. Thanks Helz. Totally fair. Its hypocritical of me. I just have a terrible habit of reading a debate and thinking that the debate has the wrong focus. In this specific one I read 2 pages and kind of invalidated the argument in my mind as semantic categorization that held little real meaning. I guess its a character flaw of mine and I should be more considerate. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 307] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 24th, 2020 09:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I started reading this thread but felt like going through 15 pages of a debate on categorization would give me cancer so I skipped here. To throw some thought provoking bullshit out there I think the truth on the civil war is a bit of a middle ground. In any war the winner always frames their fight with a bunch of post hoc stuff to make them out to be the morally justified champions who conquered evil regardless of the motivations or evils they committed. I pretty much believe this to be a consistent regardless of context that has a parallel to the civil war. So I am going to take an unpopular position of pointing out how the civil war was not about human rights but please take a moment to understand what I am saying before screaming I am a racist. Keep in mind that the ideas of human rights and slavery have to be separated to have an intelligent conversation on the subject. To preface- 100% the civil war was about slavery. But it was an economic weapon that is now framed as some kind of moral selfless fight. To anyone who would like to argue that it was about human rights I would point out a few questions- 1- Why did the emancipation proclamation postdate the end of the war? If it was about providing humane treatment to slaves why not give them equal rights when creating a war over it (if it was about human rights) 2- Corollary to 1- Even if slaves were not given equal human rights why were they not given freedom in areas that were taken by the north from the south? They were given a chance to fight for the north to earn their freedom but freedom was not treated as something inherent to their human condition. They had to serve for it and were often treated as cannon fodder serving in the most brutal of conditions to insulate the non-slave fighters from casualties. 3- Confiscation. We understand it now as a drug dealer who gets his car snatched up by cops because it was part of his drug business and it then gets sold by the cops or used as an undercover vehicle to support anti-drug operations. But it was also used on slaves. The north 'confiscated' slaves from the south who would not serve for their freedom and put them to work on railroads until the emancipation proclamation re-classed them as the 'freed men.' Theres journals of that time from railroad foremen detailing how they had business formulas to pay the freed men just enough to get by but avoid paying them enough that they could afford returning to the east coast to reconnect with their familys and they even worked to create an infrastructure for them to send money back with the idea that they would keep working to help their family if they specifically saw it as their only option. Sure that is post civil war but kinda pointing to the mindset. There is quite a few other points I could make but I am lazy : ) Sure those questions are something of note but consider the nature of power. Over the last what.. 20 years or something we have had those struggles with North Korea, Syria, and many others but without declaring war we have pressured them to do whatever. This is the preface to any war. War is viewed as some huge change but really its just another way to exert power. Prior to any war there is usually a long struggle that centers around economic pressure. In context to the civil war there was an evolution of the economy in the industrial revolution. The south was an agrarian society while the north became industrialized. A power struggle evolved as the country developed centered around taxation and spending of taxed funds. (Back then they didnt run up the national debt like a 16 year old with daddys credit card, they actually had to fund the things they wanted to do.) The south got pissy about being taxed with their tax money being spent to develop the Norths infrastructure and raised prices and thus an economic war was created. The north needed the souths raw goods to feed their industrial machine while the south saw the north as an overbearing government on par with England which they had fought to separate from. Yes slavery was a key factor in the war but it came with the timing of uncle toms cabin as the most viable justification. I believe that human rights is just the moral post hoc stance taken on the war and that its the pretty bow put on an ugly war. In our day now we argue about the left or the right or CNN vs FOX but its all the same. Its just another power struggle where the rich take whatever socially acceptable platitude to push for a greater share of power. I think the fact this thread is titled "Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism" is a bit telling of that nature. To push it a bit further I have a belief that this draws on human nature in more ways than one. I think we have a lot of trouble separating morality from power structures but whatever. Tell me I am wrong if you want but this was more of a power struggle than it was a fight for human rights. "The truth on the civil war is a bit of a middle ground" no it isn't and you agreed with me on it in your post. The truth on the civil war was that the Confederacy was fighting for the right to keep slaves. Were the Union's motives less than noble? Probably. Were the Confederacy's motives about economics? Partially, though once again I'd like to refer you to the speech by the Confederacy's VP where he mentions that the nation was founded around the idea that black people are inherently inferior in case you think economics is the entire reason. On both topics, I can't say I particularly care. One side was fighting for the right to keep slaves, the other was fighting to free slaves. I don't really give a shit if they had ulterior motives, so your post is an answer to a question that didn't really even come up. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 308] Auteur : Date : June 24th, 2020 09:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly the reasons I initially made this thread were: a) I suspect there are two different types of right wingers b) I feel neither are particularly well seen by the mainstream media. Its a bit bizarre you’d mention the title of the thread because I actually meant to contrast them to show that they weren’t the same thing, and didn’t say one was better than the other. I feel they shouldn’t be lumped together because they’re different. Bizarrely enough not all studies I’ve read make this distinction. So maybe it’s a contentious issue. Still it’s interesting to think that political leanings can be predicted on the basis of temperament. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 309] Auteur : Date : June 24th, 2020 09:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I do think politics is a dumb topic but one should give the devil his due. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 310] Auteur : rumox Date : June 24th, 2020 09:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Thread title has literally no connection to the discussion anyway we all just went off on a tangent -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 311] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 24th, 2020 09:32 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Thread title has literally no connection to the discussion anyway we all just went off on a tangent Well, we stayed in some scope of it when talking about viewpoints on actual issues. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 312] Auteur : Helz Date : June 24th, 2020 09:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism "The truth on the civil war is a bit of a middle ground" no it isn't and you agreed with me on it in your post. The truth on the civil war was that the Confederacy was fighting for the right to keep slaves. Were the Union's motives less than noble? Probably. Were the Confederacy's motives about economics? Partially, though once again I'd like to refer you to the speech by the Confederacy's VP where he mentions that the nation was founded around the idea that black people are inherently inferior in case you think economics is the entire reason. On both topics, I can't say I particularly care. One side was fighting for the right to keep slaves, the other was fighting to free slaves. I don't really give a shit if they had ulterior motives, so your post is an answer to a question that didn't really even come up. Theres a few things that I feel are contrived in this. Why does the fact that the confederacy treated slaves as "inherently inferior" equate to the union not also treating them as such? Is this not a false dichotomy? Why does the confederate rhetoric of slaves being "inherently inferior" translate to "black people being inherently inferior" in your mind? (are the Indian or Mexican slaves and debtors to be ignored?) Why do you believe the union was fighting to free slaves when they very specifically did not free slaves as they retook areas? This draws back to my first point that if it was about human rights the emancipation proclamation should have come with the start of the civil war. I feel like you are not separating the ideas of racism and slavery. I feel like you are not separating the ideas of slavery and human rights. I get that this is a touchy subject and you disagree with me but separating these concepts has value. The same bias exists to as much of an extreme level when trying to separate a religion from its power structure. Just try to get a Catholic to accept the evils of the Vatican and differentiate that with the Catholic religion. They are two very separate things but its hell to get someone who is indoctrinated with that belief system to stop seeing them as the same. So giving to God = Giving to the Pope and the Pope = God. Slavery is terrible but there will never be an intelligent conversation on any subject that touches it so long as it is treated as some hot button conversation ending absolute. Can a conversation exist without each side accepting a potential for changing their mind? Without that potential we are just waiting our turn to push our viewpoint on the other individual and its no longer a conversation but rather a debate. That said, I am open to you changing my mind. Tell me why I am wrong and I am totally willing to listen. Tell me that I am wrong and I just have to shrug. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 313] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 24th, 2020 09:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly the reasons I initially made this thread were: a) I suspect there are two different types of right wingers b) I feel neither are particularly well seen by the mainstream media. Its a bit bizarre you’d mention the title of the thread because I actually meant to contrast them to show that they weren’t the same thing, and didn’t say one was better than the other. I feel they shouldn’t be lumped together because they’re different. Bizarrely enough not all studies I’ve read make this distinction. So maybe it’s a contentious issue. Still it’s interesting to think that political leanings can be predicted on the basis of temperament. There are plenty of types of political views in general; It doesn't matter what side of the spectrum you're on. I'm progressive on some issues and conservative on others. A few of us just showed our results from a political survey that shows this. Not sure what you mean by temperament. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 314] Auteur : rumox Date : June 24th, 2020 09:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism How can you separate racism from slavery after reading the statements from the southern states in regards to their secession? They are deeply connected. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 315] Auteur : rumox Date : June 24th, 2020 09:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think Ganelon is saying something like, people with compassionate tendencies tend to lean left. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 316] Auteur : Date : June 24th, 2020 09:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think Ganelon is saying something like, people with compassionate tendencies tend to lean left. That’s one aspect of it but apparently ‘orderliness’ is too. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 317] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 24th, 2020 09:59 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Theres a few things that I feel are contrived in this. Why does the fact that the confederacy treated slaves as "inherently inferior" equate to the union not also treating them as such? Is this not a false dichotomy? Why does the confederate rhetoric of slaves being "inherently inferior" translate to "black people being inherently inferior" in your mind? (are the Indian or Mexican slaves and debtors to be ignored?) Why do you believe the union was fighting to free slaves when they very specifically did not free slaves as they retook areas? This draws back to my first point that if it was about human rights the emancipation proclamation should have come with the start of the civil war. I feel like you are not separating the ideas of racism and slavery. I feel like you are not separating the ideas of slavery and human rights. I get that this is a touchy subject and you disagree with me but separating these concepts has value. The same bias exists to as much of an extreme level when trying to separate a religion from its power structure. Just try to get a Catholic to accept the evils of the Vatican and differentiate that with the Catholic religion. They are two very separate things but its hell to get someone who is indoctrinated with that belief system to stop seeing them as the same. So giving to God = Giving to the Pope and the Pope = God. Slavery is terrible but there will never be an intelligent conversation on any subject that touches it so long as it is treated as some hot button conversation ending absolute. Can a conversation exist without each side accepting a potential for changing their mind? Without that potential we are just waiting our turn to push our viewpoint on the other individual and its no longer a conversation but rather a debate. That said, I am open to you changing my mind. Tell me why I am wrong and I am totally willing to listen. Tell me that I am wrong and I just have to shrug. I'll address your points one by one. 1) The union probably did treat slaves (and black people in general) as inherently inferior at least implicitly. However, I don't think that's relevant because gradual social progress can't be criticized because they didn't immediately solve all the problems at once. The Confederacy seceded over the issue of slavery, and while Lincoln and the Union didn't necessarily fight to abolish slavery, but rather to maintain the Union, that doesn't say anything about the Confederacy because their motives are entirely separate. 2) The Confederate rhetoric wasn't that slaves are inferior. Read the speech I posted, it was very specifically said that black people are inferior: "[I]ts foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition." 3) I don't think the Union was fighting to free slaves. I don't think I actually ever said that, though one of the end results was that the Union ended up ending slavery. But I do think the Confederacy is a slave state and was inherently found as a white supremacist nation. That's what I'm attacking. 4) The probable reason that the Union didn't immediately free slaves was because it's a complicated endeavour due to economics and public sentiment, but honestly I don't know. Perhaps the Civil War momentarily changed priorities? I'm not really sure what this conversation is trying to achieve, I'll be honest. I think bringing in the context of the Union's intentions and actions is muddying the conversation of the Confederacy being a nation founded solely because they wanted to maintain slavery. The Union wasn't a perfect model of a nation, but it wasn't founded on the pretext of owning slaves, while the Confederacy was. I don't know what alternative point you're proposing here, or what it has to do with my other arguments regarding statues and honouring traitors and whatnot. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 318] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 24th, 2020 10:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism That’s one aspect of it but apparently ‘orderliness’ is too. Well yeah. And even those foundations are used to polarize political positions more, especially by the media. For example, does having more empathy make you a better person? Does wanting to protect your country's interests first make you a bad person? As far as two types of conservative, I'm sure there are a lot more. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 319] Auteur : Date : June 24th, 2020 10:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Well yeah. And even those foundations are used to polarize political positions more, especially by the media. For example, does having more empathy make you a better person? Does wanting to protect your country's interests first make you a bad person? As far as two types of conservative, I'm sure there are a lot more. No. I am not very empathetic myself, but I do share many of the classical psychological markers they associate with the left - I am VERY disorderly, and (I believe) relatively high in openness to experience. That’s kinda why this dichotomy is important to me. It made me understand by own beliefs much better. For example I am definitely pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage, and pro-guns (my position on social issues is, if doesn’t constitute a security risk or an infringement upon someone else’s freedom, why not?), but I also believe that religion and culture are nice and important. I believe American laws are, at least in part, based on fundamental religious values. I also think the ideas that are at the core of our society (individualism foremost among them) are extremely important, and that we shouldn’t abandon them. Does that make me a conservative? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 320] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 24th, 2020 10:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No. I am not very empathetic myself, but I do share many of the classical psychological markers they associate with the left - I am VERY disorderly, and (I believe) relatively high in openness to experience. That’s kinda why this dichotomy is important to me. It made me understand by own beliefs much better. For example I am definitely pro-abortion and pro-gay marriage, and pro-guns (my position on social issues is, if doesn’t constitute a security risk or an infringement upon someone else’s freedom, why not?), but I also believe that religion and culture are nice and important. I believe American laws are, at least in part, based on fundamental religious values. I also think the ideas that are at the core of our society (individualism foremost among them) are extremely important, and that we shouldn’t abandon them. Does that make me a conservative? Sounds libertarian. Also I think pro-choice is a bit better sounding than pro-abortion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 321] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 24th, 2020 10:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism (my position on social issues is, if doesn’t constitute a security risk or an infringement upon someone else’s freedom, why not?), but I also believe that religion and culture are nice and important. Awesome man, this is very respectable (I think I said this in my first post?). I can be friendly with/engage in friendly banter/debate with someone on economic issues and not really have a problem with them. But people who are anti gay marriage for example can go jump in a ditch. Fuck those people. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 322] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 24th, 2020 10:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sounds libertarian. Also I think pro-choice is a bit better sounding than pro-abortion. Yeah pro-choice is the correct term/stance here. I know wifey would never get an abortion, even though we've taken measures to ensure she doesn't get pregnant again. But we respect that the choice is a personal one between nobody but a woman and her doctor. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 323] Auteur : Drizzt Date : June 24th, 2020 11:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Aka libertarianism vs conservatism. A study I recently read made two claims: a) Social conservatism is linked to lower IQ b) Disgust sensitivity strongly linked to social conservatism This study said that this does not apply to ‘economic liberals’, who tend to vote for ostensibly conservative parties (like the Republican Party). I want to go further and argue that this means that economic liberals and conservatives have very little in common, and I have a very strong feeling the media has been trying to paint ALL right wingers as being conservative (and also racist nazis). I actually watch Tucker Carlson a lot and he has been attacked for ‘white nationalism’ even though the guy literally denounces racism every. fucking. minute. I really think this is indicative of the far left being very influential in our society. When being right wing is equated with being a racist, there is a HUGE problem in society. I don’t go around claiming all left wingers are communists... I absolutely hate how they’re tying to make decent right-wing liberals hate their own views and trying to insinuate that they may be racist. For the longest time I actually had a huge problem with my own political views because I didn’t fully understand them. I’m not a typical conservative but I am definitely not left wing, and at the same time I’m not some kind of Nazi, and never have been. I found it extremely problematic to explain my views even to myself as I’m very liberal but also very hard-right when it comes to economic issues, and I’m sympathetic to religion (although I’m not religious myself, and I don’t like bigots - I grew up in a religiously bigoted country, and let me tell you it’s no picnic man). Anyways, after having read that study I can no longer believe that right wing = conservative. Especially seeing as many left wingers were socially conservative (take a look at Che Guevara, or Stalin). Also, I remember reading that PC-authoritarians (basically people who try to stifle freedom of speech in the name of ‘equality’) are high in orderliness, which is linked to conservatism - far left ideologues as well as far right ideologues are actually conservative. I just want to say, I think this culture of painting right wingers as nazis (more precisely, I think it has to do with economic liberalism) needs to stop because it is incredibly dangerous. I find the move GitHub has made to change the master/slave branches an example of this; they LITERALY have nothing to do with racism, and trying to find racist undertones in everything isn’t not only counterproductive but I actually believe it to be immoral as well. Claiming that the West is a fundamentally racist civilization is not only absurd, it is immoral. We are LITERALLY the least racist society on the planet. And the left should really move back towards the center and worry about the poor, and stop pushing this absurd the-West-is-evil narrative. I agree with almost everything you said-actually nothing you said I disagree with. Tucker Carlson is pretty cool, I listened to him back on Bubba the Love Sponge radio show. Any time you hear about stats relating politics to IQ, i.e. the right is dumber stats wise, you have to remember bias. Who exactly is administering these tests? Are the majority of them liberals due to higher education being linked to leftist views? And what is intelligence anyways? The Wright Brothers invented flight but there was no evidence they were 200 IQ geniuses. And Oppenheimer was responsible, in part, for the nuclear bomb, but was he smart enough not to make it? He gave it to the military for peace, lol? The subjectivity and hate divides, but at the end of the day we haven't had a real left or right president in a long time. They all tend to fall left center or right center, even Bush and Obama. TL;Dr: If you want to make yourself upset, argue politics or religion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 324] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 24th, 2020 11:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Tucker Carlon's a pretty cool dude, especially since he's not expected to report facts you know, just spew his diatribe that's protected by the 1st amendment. Facts don't matter. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fox-news-tucker-carlson-facts-trump-playboy-model-a9573436.html They all tend to fall left center or right center, even Bush and Obama. They all fall right of center. Obama was a conservative. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 325] Auteur : Drizzt Date : June 24th, 2020 11:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I started reading this thread but felt like going through 15 pages of a debate on categorization would give me cancer so I skipped here. To throw some thought provoking bullshit out there I think the truth on the civil war is a bit of a middle ground. In any war the winner always frames their fight with a bunch of post hoc stuff to make them out to be the morally justified champions who conquered evil regardless of the motivations or evils they committed. I pretty much believe this to be a consistent regardless of context that has a parallel to the civil war. So I am going to take an unpopular position of pointing out how the civil war was not about human rights but please take a moment to understand what I am saying before screaming I am a racist. Keep in mind that the ideas of human rights and slavery have to be separated to have an intelligent conversation on the subject. To preface- 100% the civil war was about slavery. But it was an economic weapon that is now framed as some kind of moral selfless fight. To anyone who would like to argue that it was about human rights I would point out a few questions- 1- Why did the emancipation proclamation postdate the end of the war? If it was about providing humane treatment to slaves why not give them equal rights when creating a war over it (if it was about human rights) 2- Corollary to 1- Even if slaves were not given equal human rights why were they not given freedom in areas that were taken by the north from the south? They were given a chance to fight for the north to earn their freedom but freedom was not treated as something inherent to their human condition. They had to serve for it and were often treated as cannon fodder serving in the most brutal of conditions to insulate the non-slave fighters from casualties. 3- Confiscation. We understand it now as a drug dealer who gets his car snatched up by cops because it was part of his drug business and it then gets sold by the cops or used as an undercover vehicle to support anti-drug operations. But it was also used on slaves. The north 'confiscated' slaves from the south who would not serve for their freedom and put them to work on railroads until the emancipation proclamation re-classed them as the 'freed men.' Theres journals of that time from railroad foremen detailing how they had business formulas to pay the freed men just enough to get by but avoid paying them enough that they could afford returning to the east coast to reconnect with their familys and they even worked to create an infrastructure for them to send money back with the idea that they would keep working to help their family if they specifically saw it as their only option. Sure that is post civil war but kinda pointing to the mindset. There is quite a few other points I could make but I am lazy : ) Sure those questions are something of note but consider the nature of power. Over the last what.. 20 years or something we have had those struggles with North Korea, Syria, and many others but without declaring war we have pressured them to do whatever. This is the preface to any war. War is viewed as some huge change but really its just another way to exert power. Prior to any war there is usually a long struggle that centers around economic pressure. In context to the civil war there was an evolution of the economy in the industrial revolution. The south was an agrarian society while the north became industrialized. A power struggle evolved as the country developed centered around taxation and spending of taxed funds. (Back then they didnt run up the national debt like a 16 year old with daddys credit card, they actually had to fund the things they wanted to do.) The south got pissy about being taxed with their tax money being spent to develop the Norths infrastructure and raised prices and thus an economic war was created. The north needed the souths raw goods to feed their industrial machine while the south saw the north as an overbearing government on par with England which they had fought to separate from. Yes slavery was a key factor in the war but it came with the timing of uncle toms cabin as the most viable justification. I believe that human rights is just the moral post hoc stance taken on the war and that its the pretty bow put on an ugly war. In our day now we argue about the left or the right or CNN vs FOX but its all the same. Its just another power struggle where the rich take whatever socially acceptable platitude to push for a greater share of power. I think the fact this thread is titled "Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism" is a bit telling of that nature. To push it a bit further I have a belief that this draws on human nature in more ways than one. I think we have a lot of trouble separating morality from power structures but whatever. Tell me I am wrong if you want but this was more of a power struggle than it was a fight for human rights. Lincoln said: If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it.." It may have initiated the war, but slavery was not the focal point until post hoc. I think it was more about the individual freedom for white men to choose their own fate. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 326] Auteur : Drizzt Date : June 24th, 2020 11:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4qQElJUYnM I love this video. If only Tucker Carlson was on staff; we'd have a great time. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 327] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 24th, 2020 12:16 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Tucker Carlon's a pretty cool dude, especially since he's not expected to report facts you know, just spew his diatribe that's protected by the 1st amendment. Facts don't matter. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/fox-news-tucker-carlson-facts-trump-playboy-model-a9573436.html They all fall right of center. Obama was a conservative. There are plenty of journalists on both sides that say stupid shit. Rachel Maddow had a 10 million dollar lawsuit against herself 2 months before the one you posted was filed. Not to mention, that article outlining Tucker's lawsuit took a quote from Fox's lawyer out of context. The suit, like many others will just get thrown out. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 328] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 24th, 2020 12:34 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism There are plenty of journalists on both sides that say stupid shit. Rachel Maddow had a 10 million dollar lawsuit against herself 2 months before the one you posted was filed. Not to mention, that article outlining Tucker's lawsuit took a quote from Fox's lawyer out of context. The suit, like many others will just get thrown out. You won't see me defending Rachel Maddow. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 329] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : June 24th, 2020 02:36 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism IMO only racists and smoothbrains say that the Confederacy was about state rights or whatever. The VP of the Confederacy had an entire speech about slavery: https://iowaculture.gov/history/education/educator-resources/primary-source-sets/civil-war/cornerstone-speech-alexander "[I]ts foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." Or at least people who don't care at all about racism (or rather "applied racism" and slavery), which isn't really better than racism itself, so... more or less, yes. also how can you say that black people are inferior when you permanently look like you died 5 days ago lmao https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Alexander_Stephens.jpg/800px-Alexander_Stephens.jpg This is not so relevant to the debate lol, but it's quite funny :D -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 330] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 24th, 2020 04:22 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4qQElJUYnM I love this video. If only Tucker Carlson was on staff; we'd have a great time. Why/how do you love this video? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 331] Auteur : Drizzt Date : June 25th, 2020 04:43 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why/how do you love this video? Did you watch it? The confrontation on live tv was funny. Checking your sources is the first rule of journalism. I heard a quote from a journalist once and it went something like this: "If your mother tell you she loves you, check your sources." -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 332] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 25th, 2020 07:22 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Did you watch it? The confrontation on live tv was funny. Checking your sources is the first rule of journalism. I heard a quote from a journalist once and it went something like this: "If your mother tell you she loves you, check your sources." Yes I did watch it, most of it anyway, skipped maybe the last minute because I didn't find the video all that interesting. Even if the guy being interviewed was legit (the whole thing looked staged) I don't understand why this would be news to me. So some guys are protesting Trump, and maybe some people are paid to protest Trump, it doesn't really matter to me, because I can find legitimate reasons to protest against this president. How would you get this person working for money onto an interview anyway? The guy says something like, "I wouldn't be interviewed on national television anyway, because I would definitely be vetted." So I have no reason to take the interview seriously. Additionally, Fox News and Tucker Carlson routinely spread misinformation. I can't tell why you are talking about checking your sources. Not sure what that was about. There's a Vox video on Tucker Carlson, wanna see (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ)? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 333] Auteur : Drizzt Date : June 25th, 2020 09:49 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes I did watch it, most of it anyway, skipped maybe the last minute because I didn't find the video all that interesting. Even if the guy being interviewed was legit (the whole thing looked staged) I don't understand why this would be news to me. So some guys are protesting Trump, and maybe some people are paid to protest Trump, it doesn't really matter to me, because I can find legitimate reasons to protest against this president. How would you get this person working for money onto an interview anyway? The guy says something like, "I wouldn't be interviewed on national television anyway, because I would definitely be vetted." So I have no reason to take the interview seriously. Additionally, Fox News and Tucker Carlson routinely spread misinformation. I can't tell why you are talking about checking your sources. Not sure what that was about. There's a Vox video on Tucker Carlson, wanna see (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ)? Well, the whole video was about the failure of reporter on checking their sources. And the fake activist was put on legitimate news organizations due to a failure of fact checking. I'm not sure if you're trolling or you truly don't see the dots here. I don't believe it was staged insomuchas the activist didn't know Tucker Carlson knew the whole thing was a sham. Just trying to bring a little sunshine to the conversation. Oh and god, if you're looking to fox news for actual news and not entertainment, you're gonna be dissapointed. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 334] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 25th, 2020 10:15 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I agree with almost everything you said-actually nothing you said I disagree with. Tucker Carlson is pretty cool, I listened to him back on Bubba the Love Sponge radio show. Any time you hear about stats relating politics to IQ, i.e. the right is dumber stats wise, you have to remember bias. Who exactly is administering these tests? Are the majority of them liberals due to higher education being linked to leftist views? And what is intelligence anyways? The Wright Brothers invented flight but there was no evidence they were 200 IQ geniuses. And Oppenheimer was responsible, in part, for the nuclear bomb, but was he smart enough not to make it? He gave it to the military for peace, lol? The subjectivity and hate divides, but at the end of the day we haven't had a real left or right president in a long time. They all tend to fall left center or right center, even Bush and Obama. TL;Dr: If you want to make yourself upset, argue politics or religion. Well, the whole video was about the failure of reporter on checking their sources. And the fake activist was put on legitimate news organizations due to a failure of fact checking. I'm not sure if you're trolling or you truly don't see the dots here. I don't believe it was staged insomuchas the activist didn't know Tucker Carlson knew the whole thing was a sham. Just trying to bring a little sunshine to the conversation. Oh and god, if you're looking to fox news for actual news and not entertainment, you're gonna be dissapointed. I'm getting something wrong here. And I'm still not sure what I got wrong. So you like Tucker Carlson because he's entertaining, and you know he doesn't report facts. But you've been following him for a while.. to be entertained? I really don't know your stance on him. At this point it seems like you were telling a joke and the punchline flew over my head. If so, sorry about that, I don't get jokes often. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 335] Auteur : Drizzt Date : June 25th, 2020 10:54 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Everything isn't black or white with me. Yes, Tucker Carlson is entertaining. No, I do not follow him and haven't really heard him in years. As for not reporting facts, I think you would need citations to back that statement up. I'm sure he's gotten plenty wrong, nobody is perfect. I'm not a conservative or a liberal. Someone mentioned Tucker Carlson, so I linked a humorous video. The video just so happens to highlight the importance of checking sources- my confusion was that you didn't understand that subject. Perhaps I, or you, misinterpreted one another. Does this clear things up? Cheers, Brock -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 336] Auteur : Helz Date : June 26th, 2020 12:15 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'll address your points one by one. 1) The union probably did treat slaves (and black people in general) as inherently inferior at least implicitly. However, I don't think that's relevant because gradual social progress can't be criticized because they didn't immediately solve all the problems at once. The Confederacy seceded over the issue of slavery, and while Lincoln and the Union didn't necessarily fight to abolish slavery, but rather to maintain the Union, that doesn't say anything about the Confederacy because their motives are entirely separate. 2) The Confederate rhetoric wasn't that slaves are inferior. Read the speech I posted, it was very specifically said that black people are inferior: "[I]ts foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition." 3) I don't think the Union was fighting to free slaves. I don't think I actually ever said that, though one of the end results was that the Union ended up ending slavery. But I do think the Confederacy is a slave state and was inherently found as a white supremacist nation. That's what I'm attacking. 4) The probable reason that the Union didn't immediately free slaves was because it's a complicated endeavour due to economics and public sentiment, but honestly I don't know. Perhaps the Civil War momentarily changed priorities? I'm not really sure what this conversation is trying to achieve, I'll be honest. I think bringing in the context of the Union's intentions and actions is muddying the conversation of the Confederacy being a nation founded solely because they wanted to maintain slavery. The Union wasn't a perfect model of a nation, but it wasn't founded on the pretext of owning slaves, while the Confederacy was. I don't know what alternative point you're proposing here, or what it has to do with my other arguments regarding statues and honouring traitors and whatnot. I dont feel like its fair to suggest its erroneous to talk about the unions motives while arguing the morality of the confederacy motives. Yes it will 'muddy the water' but my point is that the pretty moral justification we put on the civil war is garbage. I do not see why its such an offensive thing to hold the union accountable for the massive loss of life in the name of profit. Both sides were wrong and neither side cared for human rights in their actions. They acted out of self interest in a fight for power from what I see. I strongly believe that actions speak louder than words and those actions speak to intentions. Its as true in Mafia as it is in social interactions and even international politics. With that in mind the actions of the union do not support the narrative of "Fighting for morality and human rights" thats accepted as the driving factor of the civil war. We should be critical of the confederacy racism but why can we not also be critical of the union pointing to the confederacy's racism to avoid their own as well as the loss of life resulting from their greed? Should one evil be ignored because another existed? How can you separate racism from slavery after reading the statements from the southern states in regards to their secession? They are deeply connected. I kinda feel that this is a loaded question. Of course you can't separate them in context to what your asking. Take a step back from the context and you absolutely can. What I said earlier was to point out that there were slaves of many races. Slavery as a function is not a race issue. We just view it as such because our most pronounced recent historical incident with it predominantly was. The human rights side was totally racial post-slavery but that is a separate issue. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 337] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 26th, 2020 12:33 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Hmm still at it I see -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 338] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 26th, 2020 12:33 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Worth reading or nah? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 339] Auteur : Helz Date : June 26th, 2020 12:42 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Worth reading or nah? I would say Nah. I read the first 2 pages, skiped to participate, then felt guilty and read up... I want that portion of my life back >.< -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 340] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 26th, 2020 12:46 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Everything isn't black or white with me. Yes, Tucker Carlson is entertaining. No, I do not follow him and haven't really heard him in years. As for not reporting facts, I think you would need citations to back that statement up. I'm sure he's gotten plenty wrong, nobody is perfect. I'm not a conservative or a liberal. Someone mentioned Tucker Carlson, so I linked a humorous video. The video just so happens to highlight the importance of checking sources- my confusion was that you didn't understand that subject. Perhaps I, or you, misinterpreted one another. Does this clear things up? Cheers, Brock There was a good portion of this thread discussing Tucker Carlson. It was wrong for me to presume you had read it. Feel free to look back and read the thread or you could watch the video I linked. Here, I'll link it again:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ I'm sure Tucker reports fact fairly often, but he also reports facts that are irrelevant, that aren't facts, or misleading. It's good to check sources for accuracy, but it's also good to evaluate information for relevance, recency, and usefulness. Someone could classify me as conservative or liberal, but I like to think that I'm doing a good job staying politically neutral. I was confused as to why you thought the video was humorous in the context of the rest of the thread. Was it funny because it's so cringe, or perhaps because you liked Carlson and he nailed someone, or perhaps because Carlson was wasting his time on someone obviously doing something stupid. See, it was hard to tell if you had posted a video with the intent of it being satire. Chest-o -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 341] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 26th, 2020 12:46 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I would say Nah. I read the first 2 pages, skiped to participate, then felt guilty and read up... I want that portion of my life back >.< Wasn't entertaining .. aw. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 342] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 26th, 2020 01:12 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism There was a good portion of this thread discussing Tucker Carlson. It was wrong for me to presume you had read it. Feel free to look back and read the thread or you could watch the video I linked. Here, I'll link it again:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ I'm sure Tucker reports fact fairly often, but he also reports facts that are irrelevant, that aren't facts, or misleading. It's good to check sources for accuracy, but it's also good to evaluate information for relevance, recency, and usefulness. Someone could classify me as conservative or liberal, but I like to think that I'm doing a good job staying politically neutral. I was confused as to why you thought the video was humorous in the context of the rest of the thread. Was it funny because it's so cringe, or perhaps because you liked Carlson and he nailed someone, or perhaps because Carlson was wasting his time on someone obviously doing something stupid. See, it was hard to tell if you had posted a video with the intent of it being satire. Chest-o He nailed the obvious troll hard man -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 343] Auteur : Date : June 26th, 2020 01:14 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’ll play the devils advocate here. Most of the slaves in the South were black - along with a few native Americans slaves. Many discussions at the time about slavery directly referenced Black Americans. Don’t you think that implies it IS at least to some extent primarily about blacks? That being said, while I do think many southerners were racist, not all of them marched against the Union in support of slavery. Many joined the confederacy to protect their homes and their lands. It’s not fair to describe it as being purely about slavery, IMO. And i maintain that the cultural gap between the north and the south (which manifested itself at all levels of society - from the economic aspect to the social aspect), was a big part of the reason why the war happened. The south had once been the richest region in the country; due to the industrial revolution, it very swiftly started losing ground to the north. Slavery was also economically motivated. Southerners were afraid of losing their political influence. The second part of this post has nothing to do with slavery or with the Civil war. It’s about the confederate flag. You can see the confederate flag as being equivalent to the flag of New England - a region which doesn’t have the same national consciousness (I think) as the South, probably because they were swiftly integrated into the Union. The south doesn’t really have any other recognizable symbol for use as a flag. I can totally understand why they’d use it; I can also understand why some people may have qualms about it, although it definitely isn’t merely a symbol of white nationalism. I guess the only thing you could really do is get the South to adopt another flag. Commission an artist and make him design a new flag for the south. (That’s not gonna happen but, lol). Also, unrelated but Maryland, Texas and California have the dopest state flags in the union -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 344] Auteur : Date : June 26th, 2020 01:16 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The most terrible flags are the flag of Massachusetts (kinda sad cuz that’s my favourite state), North Carolina, and New Mexico -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 345] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 26th, 2020 01:18 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I dont feel like its fair to suggest its erroneous to talk about the unions motives while arguing the morality of the confederacy motives. Yes it will 'muddy the water' but my point is that the pretty moral justification we put on the civil war is garbage. I do not see why its such an offensive thing to hold the union accountable for the massive loss of life in the name of profit. Both sides were wrong and neither side cared for human rights in their actions. They acted out of self interest in a fight for power from what I see. I strongly believe that actions speak louder than words and those actions speak to intentions. Its as true in Mafia as it is in social interactions and even international politics. With that in mind the actions of the union do not support the narrative of "Fighting for morality and human rights" thats accepted as the driving factor of the civil war. We should be critical of the confederacy racism but why can we not also be critical of the union pointing to the confederacy's racism to avoid their own as well as the loss of life resulting from their greed? Should one evil be ignored because another existed? I kinda feel that this is a loaded question. Of course you can't separate them in context to what your asking. Take a step back from the context and you absolutely can. What I said earlier was to point out that there were slaves of many races. Slavery as a function is not a race issue. We just view it as such because our most pronounced recent historical incident with it predominantly was. The human rights side was totally racial post-slavery but that is a separate issue. I don't understand your point at all. I said the Confederacy was founded on racism and slavery as a founding principle, so to its core, it is irredeemably bad. Every traitor that fought for the Confederacy was fighting to maintain racism and slavery. The Union did bad things, yes, but the Confederacy was founded upon the idea of slavery as a cornerstone. I literally don't care what the Union did because I'm not defending them, I'm attacking the Confederacy. Your point about the Union, though it is absolutely correct, is muddying the waters because it's entirely irrelevant to any point I was making. You are trying to both-sides an argument that wasn't even pinning one side against another. You are spinning whataboutism about the Union into a pseudo-defence of the morality of the Confederacy, which is not only a fallacy but quite a disingenuous way of framing what I was saying in the first place. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 346] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 26th, 2020 01:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I would say Nah. I read the first 2 pages, skiped to participate, then felt guilty and read up... I want that portion of my life back >.< I've almost caught up bb -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 347] Auteur : Date : June 26th, 2020 01:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The best flag in the world are the following flags: The flag of Normandy The flag of Northumbria The old Prinsenvlag of the Netherlands The old flag of RSA The old flag of Prussia The flag of Occitania The flag of Lombardy The flag of my city, it’s fucking DOPE -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 348] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 26th, 2020 01:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The most terrible flags are ... New Mexico This is the most egregious opinion posted in this thread. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 349] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 26th, 2020 01:21 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism IMO I'm just going to ignore anyone continuing to post about the Confederacy in this thread until they explicitly acknowledge the Cornerstone Speech. Until you do that, you are being wilfully ignorant or arguing in bad faith. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 350] Auteur : Date : June 26th, 2020 01:36 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Are you talking about the speech where the VP said the confederacy was founded on the principles of slavery? Tbh there’s no way getting around that, it’s pretty fucked. It shows an attitude which was probably common in the south at the time. Was the confederacy bad? Yes, but slavery wasn’t the only reason why war erupted. The north would probably have had bad relations with the south regardless of slavery. The south was poorer and getting poorer than the north. I don’t know if it would’ve led to war per se, but it would definitely have led to rocky relations, even in the absence of slavery. Plantations were well entrenched in the South; they weren’t going anywhere. What the South did was in part a reaction to a growing economic gap between themselves and the north. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 351] Auteur : Date : June 26th, 2020 01:38 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is the most egregious opinion posted in this thread. No u Actually looking at the Canadian provinces’ flags, those are dope as fuck. They look like actual flags unlike most US state flags. The flag of Quebec, Nova Scotia and Ontario are cool. The flag of BC sucks though. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 352] Auteur : Date : June 26th, 2020 01:38 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Like, the flag of Arkansas is literally a fucking logo... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 353] Auteur : Drizzt Date : June 26th, 2020 01:43 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism There was a good portion of this thread discussing Tucker Carlson. It was wrong for me to presume you had read it. Feel free to look back and read the thread or you could watch the video I linked. Here, I'll link it again:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNineSEoxjQ I'm sure Tucker reports fact fairly often, but he also reports facts that are irrelevant, that aren't facts, or misleading. It's good to check sources for accuracy, but it's also good to evaluate information for relevance, recency, and usefulness. Someone could classify me as conservative or liberal, but I like to think that I'm doing a good job staying politically neutral. I was confused as to why you thought the video was humorous in the context of the rest of the thread. Was it funny because it's so cringe, or perhaps because you liked Carlson and he nailed someone, or perhaps because Carlson was wasting his time on someone obviously doing something stupid. See, it was hard to tell if you had posted a video with the intent of it being satire. Chest-o Yea, I only read the last page. I thought Tucker Carlson did a good job blasting him, and I thought he did a good job keeping his face straight, and the bit going like Andy Kaufman. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 354] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 26th, 2020 01:44 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No u Actually looking at the Canadian provinces’ flags, those are dope as fuck. They look like actual flags unlike most US state flags. The flag of Quebec, Nova Scotia and Ontario are cool. The flag of BC sucks though. The flag of Ontario is pretty garbage my man lmao. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 355] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 26th, 2020 04:20 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Intentionally or unintentionally, Helz makes an excellent argument for why we should tear down the Union statues as well. This isn't about whether these people were "evil" because of their racism. This is about the fact that figures you dedicate larger than life statues to can and should reflect the ideals of the CURRENT society, rather than the ideals of some society 100s of years ago. I don't know why "should we put up statues of racist people that were contemporary heroes?" needs to be conflated with "are they bad because they were racist in a society where everyone was racist?". You can be a moral relativist and still oppose the existence of these statues. But I think it's important to remember that we are always encouraged to spend endless amounts of time talking about the symbolism like the flags and the statues rather than the concrete things we can do to combat modern social issues like ending the drug war or ending for profit policing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 356] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 26th, 2020 05:57 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Intentionally or unintentionally, Helz makes an excellent argument for why we should tear down the Union statues as well. This isn't about whether these people were "evil" because of their racism. This is about the fact that figures you dedicate larger than life statues to can and should reflect the ideals of the CURRENT society, rather than the ideals of some society 100s of years ago. I don't know why "should we put up statues of racist people that were contemporary heroes?" needs to be conflated with "are they bad because they were racist in a society where everyone was racist?". You can be a moral relativist and still oppose the existence of these statues. But I think it's important to remember that we are always encouraged to spend endless amounts of time talking about the symbolism like the flags and the statues rather than the concrete things we can do to combat modern social issues like ending the drug war or ending for profit policing. No complaints from me. Tear them all down. Who fucking cares about statues anyway? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 357] Auteur : rumox Date : June 26th, 2020 11:26 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I kinda feel that this is a loaded question. Of course you can't separate them in context to what your asking. Take a step back from the context and you absolutely can. What I said earlier was to point out that there were slaves of many races. Slavery as a function is not a race issue. We just view it as such because our most pronounced recent historical incident with it predominantly was. The human rights side was totally racial post-slavery but that is a separate issue. Why would you step back from context? Separating yourself from the context just makes your point of view disconnected from reality. I could entertain the thought of separating racism from slavery generally speaking, but when discussing slavery in the USA in regards to the civil war, the southern states explicitly said that due to the divine virtue of being white the black man is inferior and should be in permanent indentured servitude. The very core of their slavery belief is built on racism. It would be a completely different story if slaves were not predominantly black and if the southern states didn't outright say blacks are inferior, but they didn't and to separate the racist aspect from their slavery is disingenuous. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 358] Auteur : Helz Date : June 26th, 2020 11:28 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't understand your point at all. I said the Confederacy was founded on racism and slavery as a founding principle, so to its core, it is irredeemably bad. Every traitor that fought for the Confederacy was fighting to maintain racism and slavery. The Union did bad things, yes, but the Confederacy was founded upon the idea of slavery as a cornerstone. I literally don't care what the Union did because I'm not defending them, I'm attacking the Confederacy. Your point about the Union, though it is absolutely correct, is muddying the waters because it's entirely irrelevant to any point I was making. You are trying to both-sides an argument that wasn't even pinning one side against another. You are spinning whataboutism about the Union into a pseudo-defence of the morality of the Confederacy, which is not only a fallacy but quite a disingenuous way of framing what I was saying in the first place. I think thats somewhat fair although I did not have the intention of misrepresenting your position. The confederacy as an agrarian society was built on slave labor and they were fighting to preserve their way of life. I very intentionally push to separate the ideas of human rights morality with this subject because I think its the disingenuous framework for any discussion on the civil war. You view this as a pseudo-defense while I feel like its a push to dispel the pretty moral justification that we place on the civil war. At the end of the day the North decided to use violence to maintain control over the south because it was necessary to preserve their power at the cost of over a half million American citizens; and people act like its ok because- 'slavery bad.' (America used the same framework of revisionism in WW2; look into the terror bombing campaigns.) I suppose we are making two separate points. We are somehow able to agree with etchother while simultaneously continuing a debate. I do still feel that understanding the context and motivations of both sides is necessary to correctly view the morality of the individual or the states; but it may be better for me to lay that to rest given the direction this is going. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 359] Auteur : Helz Date : June 26th, 2020 11:42 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why would you step back from context? Separating yourself from the context just makes your point of view disconnected from reality. I could entertain the thought of separating racism from slavery generally speaking, but when discussing slavery in the USA in regards to the civil war, the southern states explicitly said that due to the divine virtue of being white the black man is inferior and should be in permanent indentured servitude. The very core of their slavery belief is built on racism. It would be a completely different story if slaves were not predominantly black and if the southern states didn't outright say blacks are inferior, but they didn't and to separate the racist aspect from their slavery is disingenuous. Its pretty simple. I made a statement about slavery as a concept. You can absolutely do both. I can maintain the function of slavery as a historical function between nations in wars while also acknowledging the racially charged aspect of slavery in the pre-industrialized southern american states. It has a place in this conversation because simply put- not all slaves were black. There were debtors, Native Americans, Mexicans, and all sorts of other races who had their freedom taken from them. Racism's connection to slavery in this context was that the moral justification for the inhumane treatment of people who's freedom was not taken from them as a consequence to their action because 'the black man was less than human and therefore- less deserving of human rights.' But this does not in any way make slavery synonymous with racism and I believe separating the two concepts is important to having an intelligent conversation on the subject. As simply as I can say it this is why you need to step back from the context, separate the two concepts, and then step back in to the situation before talking about entangled morality of the subject. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 360] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 26th, 2020 11:57 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I can't engage with someone so condescending -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 361] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 26th, 2020 11:57 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Even given his status -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 362] Auteur : rumox Date : June 26th, 2020 11:58 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Nope still disagree. You can't say slavery in the south is not synonymous with racism when official statements from the south in regards to the secession is heavily racially motivated. Feel free to read over the thread more thoroughly to find those statements. It may be edgy and hip to separate morality from discussions, but when it IS the morality of the offending party we are discussing, separating morality from discussing their morality seems a bit retarded no? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 363] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 12:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Intentionally or unintentionally, Helz makes an excellent argument for why we should tear down the Union statues as well. This isn't about whether these people were "evil" because of their racism. This is about the fact that figures you dedicate larger than life statues to can and should reflect the ideals of the CURRENT society, rather than the ideals of some society 100s of years ago. I don't know why "should we put up statues of racist people that were contemporary heroes?" needs to be conflated with "are they bad because they were racist in a society where everyone was racist?". You can be a moral relativist and still oppose the existence of these statues. But I think it's important to remember that we are always encouraged to spend endless amounts of time talking about the symbolism like the flags and the statues rather than the concrete things we can do to combat modern social issues like ending the drug war or ending for profit policing. I have never even considered this. Is the objective of a landmark to preserve the opinion held at its time of creation or is it more important to preserve current ideology? Is preserving ideology only ok when it corresponds with current ideology? Im not sure which way is best but maybe its some combination that gives value to old monuments in that they were important enough at the time of their creation to be erected while also moral enough to survive the years of changing views. I think someone said it earlier but its probably worth noting neither qualifys for the preservation of most southern civil war statues as that the greater number of them were erected long after the civil war as a push against rights movements. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 364] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism But also too awake to sleep. Too tired to play something. Too broken of a phone screen to do anything longer than 5 minutes on it without switching the screen off for at least a minute to avoid the epileptic flashes Whats a now 30 year old with an asshole of a brother that projects his issues onto everyone else, threatening to ruin their lives through their therapist to do -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 365] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 12:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I can't engage with someone so condescending I am sorry that you feel that way. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 366] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism But also too awake to sleep. Too tired to play something. Too broken of a phone screen to do anything longer than 5 minutes on it without switching the screen off for at least a minute to avoid the epileptic flashes Whats a now 30 year old with an asshole of a brother that projects his issues onto everyone else, threatening to ruin their lives through their therapist to do -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 367] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I am sorry that you feel that way. I've looked up to you and wanted your approval in the past Not anymore -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 368] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Nope still disagree. You can't say slavery in the south is not synonymous with racism when official statements from the south in regards to the secession is heavily racially motivated. Feel free to read over the thread more thoroughly to find those statements. It may be edgy and hip to separate morality from discussions, but when it IS the morality of the offending party we are discussing, separating morality from discussing their morality seems a bit retarded no? Didn't you hear? This thread and the opinions within are worhless -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 369] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 12:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism “Back then it was okay so they’re fine morally” Back “sometime” you could rape anybody you pleased Murder if you were stronger Blah blah blah. Hell Hitler thought he was a good guy! What kind of stupid argument is that? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 370] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:05 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Literally cancerous -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 371] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 12:05 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Let’s keep statues of Hitler up because he thought he was good! Right? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 372] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism “Back then it was okay so they’re fine morally” Back “sometime” you could rape anybody you pleased Murder if you were stronger Blah blah blah. Hell Hitler thought he was a good guy! What kind of stupid argument is that? Its easy to do the right thing when its popular -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 373] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 12:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We NEED to preserve nazi culture it would be cruel to destroy it!!! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 374] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Maybe I'll play some Dishonored. Sneaking around gives me pleasure -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 375] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 12:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Nope still disagree. You can't say slavery in the south is not synonymous with racism when official statements from the south in regards to the secession is heavily racially motivated. Feel free to read over the thread more thoroughly to find those statements. I understand your point but I am not sure why you refuse to separate the concepts. Yes Racism was a huge issue and was a morally reprehensible position taken by southern states. I have read the thread and I 100% understand that. I believe that the intention behind the action defines the morality of the action and its a very different discussion to look at the situation as economic or racially motivated. This difference has very direct bearing on the morality. It may be edgy and hip to separate morality from discussions, but when it IS the morality of the offending party we are discussing, separating morality from discussing their morality seems a bit retarded no? This made no sense to me. I am not advocating for separating morality from the discussion. I am pushing to separate the concepts of slavery and racism so a discussion can exist on morality. Without doing so I do not see how much reasoning can be put into the conversation on morality. Maybe we should agree to disagree? I am totally open to changing my view there if you can open my mind to a different way of looking at the issue but I am not sure we are heading in that direction. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 376] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 12:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I should be allowed to proudly wave the nazi flag around because I’m a patriotic 1940s German and it has nothing at all to do with bigotry!!! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 377] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 12:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I should be allowed to proudly wave the nazi flag around because I’m a patriotic 1940s German and it has nothing at all to do with bigotry!!! Don’t take my cultural heritage away from me! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 378] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 12:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I should be allowed to proudly wave the nazi flag around because I’m a patriotic 1940s German and it has nothing at all to do with bigotry!!! Stahp it snowflake. You're making my racist conscience ache -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 379] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 27th, 2020 12:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I understand your point but I am not sure why you refuse to separate the concepts. Yes Racism was a huge issue and was a morally reprehensible position taken by southern states. I have read the thread and I 100% understand that. I believe that the intention behind the action defines the morality of the action and its a very different discussion to look at the situation as economic or racially motivated. This difference has very direct bearing on the morality. This made no sense to me. I am not advocating for separating morality from the discussion. I am pushing to separate the concepts of slavery and racism so a discussion can exist on morality. Without doing so I do not see how much reasoning can be put into the conversation on morality. Maybe we should agree to disagree? I am totally open to changing my view there if you can open my mind to a different way of looking at the issue but I am not sure we are heading in that direction. I mean yeah I can swallow this. The north wanted economic control and access to cheap labor/base products and the south wanted to keep slavery. The north and the south were racist but the south much more so. The north killed a lot of people for material reasons, the south lost and had to submit under the economic control of the then federal government. Wars kill people and through this civil war the north kept in mind its economic interests, whilst the conclusion is that now a lot of black slaves became freedmen. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 380] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 12:20 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I mean yeah I can swallow this. The north wanted economic control and access to cheap labor/base products and the south wanted to keep slavery. The north and the south were racist but the south much more so. The north killed a lot of people for material reasons, the south lost and had to submit under the economic control of the then federal government. Wars kill people and through this civil war the north kept in mind its economic interests, whilst the conclusion is that now a lot of black slaves became freedmen. Very elegantly put. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 381] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 12:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism But this does not in any way make slavery synonymous with racism and I believe separating the two concepts is important to having an intelligent conversation on the subject. As simply as I can say it this is why you need to step back from the context, separate the two concepts, and then step back in to the situation before talking about entangled morality of the subject. This came across as do not consider morality when thinking about the topic. Let me ask you this, do you think racism is a moral issue? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 382] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 12:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism 27200 27201 “It’s just economics guys” -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 383] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 12:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This came across as do not consider morality when thinking about the topic. Let me ask you this, do you think racism is a moral issue? Sorry I missed the part you said it was morally reprehensible. So I'll move on, do you also think slavery is a moral issue? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 384] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 12:44 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism “Back then it was okay so they’re fine morally” Back “sometime” you could rape anybody you pleased Murder if you were stronger Blah blah blah. Hell Hitler thought he was a good guy! What kind of stupid argument is that? I think I missed where someone made that argument but it is a tenable position. For an extreme in the philosophical model of determinism you can not assign moral blame to any actions by virtue of free will being an illusion. This is the core of the argument that there can not be an all powerful, and all knowing creator if free will exists. Kant had a great line of thought in this direction he dubbed 'tutelage.' If you scale back from the extreme of determinism its worth considering the impact of conditioning and lack of access to modes of thought that would enable a different thought process/action. Can you assign moral blame to an individual who was given the choice of door#1 or door#2 when the moral action would have been to pick door#3? The individual never had the free will or autonomy to do what you consider right so you are pushing consequences on them for a pre-existing circumstance they did not create. I believe morality (good or bad) can not exist without choice. There has to be autonomy and that can not exist without information. Theres many different ethical structures that can carry this to the extremes you described. I am in no way going to say they are 'right' but the reasoning they present fascinates me. A nihilist arguing through utilitarianism in a tribal society struggling to survive could argue that the murder of the individual for the betterment of a group as moral; and it would even be immoral for the individual of that group to not murder the person he was stronger than. These kinds of arguments are only stupid on the surface but get pretty deep if you ever want to dive down that endless rabbit hole. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 385] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 12:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This came across as do not consider morality when thinking about the topic. Let me ask you this, do you think racism is a moral issue? Absolutely. The idea of removing someones freedom is acceptable to a degree to me when its a consequence to a persons actions but the idea of removing someones freedom because of who they are is a really evil thing. I even take that to more of an extreme with issues today such as efforts to control mass perspective which removes autonomy. Racism is probably one of the most ignorant positions someone can take and the overwhelming majority of racists I have met actually discriminate based on culture rather than race. They will say "This black guy is ok because he acts white" or "That while guy is not ok because he acts black." The idea that a human being as any less deserving of ethical treatment because of their race is just evil in my opinion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 386] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 02:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Agreed. What about slavery? Your post already hints towards yes, but I just want to lay the foundation. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 387] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 02:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Agreed. What about slavery? Your post already hints towards yes, but I just want to lay the foundation. I can't really give a yes or no to that. In the context of racism absolutely yes its a moral issue but I do take the controversial position that slavery has its moral place. One such example would be how societys would make foreign invaders into slaves for a period of time. It feels acceptable to me in that if a group of people invades another country to murder them, destroy their infrastructure, and take their wealth it makes sense to have those people rebuild the damage they caused after the fact. This is in line with the idea of a loss of freedom resulting as a consequence to the individuals actions. If you avoid thinking in absolutes slavery in one form or another exists everywhere. People sacrifice portions of their freedom for various benefits and freedom is removed from people as a consequence to committing crimes. You could argue that mandated 'chain gangs' or hard labor rehabilitation used in military prisons are in pretty much every respect slavery. The individual can not choose what they get to eat or if they want to work. Scale that extreme and it becomes a question of 'how much freedom' is forcefully taken or 'what kind of tasks' are mandated. With that view you could say that slavery absolutely exists today in America and that it is to some degree morally appropriate. Some parents even pay for their children to be subjected to such conditions through boarding schools that remove the childs freedom and require hard labor to develop discipline and work ethic against their will. You can also essentially designate a military draft as a form of slavery forcing individuals into hard labor and hazardous conditions without their consent. I have herd arguments that it is more moral than basic imprisonment under the reasoning if someone has their freedom taken for harming society it is immoral to require that society to then pay for that persons welfare. That obligating contributions in return works to offset the cost. (I don't think I agree with this in practice as American for-profit prisons are a sick and terrible thing but the base reasoning does make some sense to me) Regardless I do not think anyone in their right mind could argue that the 'Uncle Toms Cabin' portrayal of 1800s American slavery was in any way moral. I am curious where you are going with this : ) Do you believe that a moral application of slavery can exist or is appropriate in context to rehabilitation or mandated social service? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 388] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 02:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism A moral application of "slavery" can definitely exist. A persons transgressions against a society can be repaid in part with forced labor however the ethics of how it is implemented and who specifically it applies to is where the true debate takes place on that matter. I think this is straying off-topic though. To point it back I'll bounce this - what transgressions did the slaves during and before the civil war era commit to justify their shackles? We can both agree that an actual transgression has to occur for mandated service to come into effect however from the mouth of southern states themselves, the slaves (majority of them) transgression against society was simply their race, for existing to put it more tragically. This is where I cannot accept separating racism from slavery on the topic of the civil war. The very core foundation of the slavery was racism. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 389] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 02:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And we could argue a hypothetical point - what if they weren't black, or what if it was an equal representation of races enslaved. But I would again refer back to what I said earlier. We would be then disconnecting ourselves from the reality of the situation thus making the discussion irrelevant, even though it might be interesting. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 390] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 04:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism To point it back I'll bounce this - what transgressions did the slaves during and before the civil war era commit to justify their shackles? We can both agree that an actual transgression has to occur for mandated service to come into effect however from the mouth of southern states themselves, the slaves (majority of them) transgression against society was simply their race, for existing to put it more tragically. This is where I cannot accept separating racism from slavery on the topic of the civil war. The very core foundation of the slavery was racism. It varied although the obvious answer is the greater majority of slaves came from the African slave trade. The majority of those slaves were sold by Africa. From my limited understanding in the beginning Africa was selling the people in their prisons but as things went on private groups basically started capturing large amounts of people in their villages and would then sell then to the slave trade companies. The majority of Native American slaves were also sold by Native Americans. They practiced slavery before and while Europeans came to America against tribes they had wars with. A significant amount of Native American slaves were basically captured by Americans. Some with justification such as wars or crimes and others just captured for profit. (I will note that it was not an insignificant number of slaves. Some 50,000 were exported to the west indies and Native Americans were strongly sought after because they knew the land and were experts at cultivating crops.) There was also a significant pipeline of slaves from Mexico / the American Southwest That was consistently pumping Native American slaves into the southern colonies. If your interested in that sort of thing New Mexico in particular has quite a bit of study's on the subject projecting that a third of the states population was Native American slaves at one point in their lives. The third largest pool was the Hispanic slaves. Some were captured soldiers from the Texas revolutionary war and others were appropriated criminals. Judges began selling criminals into slavery instead of hanging them in some areas. There were also white slaves. Some were indentured servants that volunteered for a period of time in return for something while others were prisoners serving a sentence or debtors working off a debt. Regardless of that first generations origin the second generation slaves were born into captivity and were totally innocent. That and I do believe that the greater majority of people brought into slavery did not come as debtors or prisoners and those that were very likely received too harsh of a punishment for whatever they did. I really think that the core foundation of American slavery was economic. The racism was created out of necessity to justify that evil. The south didnt succeed saying "We just want to make black people suffer;" Their motivation was "The loss of slavery would destroy our way of life and its justified because blacks are less than human and undeserving of freedom." To suggest the former is true you would essentially have to argue the entire confederacy was built upon sadism and dedicated to it to the extreme of going against self interest. That is to say- I believe that Racism was just the means to an end as opposed to the end itself. And we could argue a hypothetical point - what if they weren't black, or what if it was an equal representation of races enslaved. But I would again refer back to what I said earlier. We would be then disconnecting ourselves from the reality of the situation thus making the discussion irrelevant, even though it might be interesting. I would point out that its not a hypothetical at all. There were massive amounts of other races but its just not talked about, but thats something interesting to read up on if you choose to scratch that itch. I agree its not worth diving into more than I already have because it does not really have any real bearing on the morality of succession. Even if we came to the absurd conclusion that races were equally represented in slavery it does not change anything other than the 'racist' title tagged onto the discussion. The only reason I drew it out a good bit is I have a distaste for how history likes to cater to some injustices while it neglects others. Dig into Christopher Columbus' journal and you will find some horrific atrocities that make Uncle Toms Cabin sound like Disney World. He is credited with the genocide of up to a million Native Americans and committed such evil acts that upon his third return to Spain the Queen of Spain threw him in prison when she herd about it. This is not to say what African Americans endured in America was in any way ok but this is a big part of why I dislike that place black racism as synonymous with slavery. Yes they suffered but they were not the only ones who did, and saying so in no way detracts from the injustices they experienced. But back on subject, slaves were predominantly African American and regardless of how the first generation of slaves were brought to market the second generation and all that followed did nothing to deserve their treatment making their enslavement an objective evil in my opinion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 391] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 04:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sometimes I reread what I wrote and figure theres something wrong with me. Immediately after agreeing something was not worth discussing I just couldn't help myself and had to ramble on about it some more. That Pedantic nature to be excessively concerned with minor details causes more problems for me in these situations than it resolves.. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 392] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 27th, 2020 04:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism People still out here trying to deflect from the Cornerstone Speech lmao "Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." "The new Constitution has put at rest forever all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution—African slavery as it exists among us—the proper status of the negro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution." "Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error." "Many governments have been founded upon the principle of the subordination and serfdom of certain classes of the same race; such were and are in violation of the laws of nature. Our system commits no such violation of nature's laws." -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 393] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 04:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes I agree slavery itself it economic, but this isn't the run of the mill slavery we are discussing. You can't read the the literature posted here and say "but it wasn't just about racism". You simply cannot lol. It's incredibly disingenuous and honestly a huge insult to do so. Leaders of the Confederates clearly made the stance of 'Blacks are inferior and should be enslaved' and anyone that supports the Confederacy, regardless of their opinion on the slavery/racism, is by proxy endorsing these racist beliefs. Racism is so embedded in the foundation of the Confederacy you cannot compartmentalize it and put it outside the scope of discussion or the identity of the Confederacy. This is also what actual systematic racism looks like. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 394] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 04:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Your point of argument is more befitting say the Roman Empire. Slavery for everyone! -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 395] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 04:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think thats somewhat fair although I did not have the intention of misrepresenting your position. The confederacy as an agrarian society was built on slave labor and they were fighting to preserve their way of life. I very intentionally push to separate the ideas of human rights morality with this subject because I think its the disingenuous framework for any discussion on the civil war. You view this as a pseudo-defense while I feel like its a push to dispel the pretty moral justification that we place on the civil war. At the end of the day the North decided to use violence to maintain control over the south because it was necessary to preserve their power at the cost of over a half million American citizens; and people act like its ok because- 'slavery bad.' (America used the same framework of revisionism in WW2; look into the terror bombing campaigns.) I suppose we are making two separate points. We are somehow able to agree with etchother while simultaneously continuing a debate. I do still feel that understanding the context and motivations of both sides is necessary to correctly view the morality of the individual or the states; but it may be better for me to lay that to rest given the direction this is going. Mate I actually have been saying many of the same things you have, and yet you’ve said a lot of the discussion isn’t worth your time. Are you referring to the discussion PRIOR to that, or what? I just don’t understand where you’re coming from. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 396] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 05:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes I agree slavery itself it economic, but this isn't the run of the mill slavery we are discussing. You can't read the the literature posted here and say "but it wasn't just about racism". You simply cannot lol. It's incredibly disingenuous and honestly a huge insult to do so. Leaders of the Confederates clearly made the stance of 'Blacks are inferior and should be enslaved' and anyone that supports the Confederacy, regardless of their opinion on the slavery/racism, is by proxy endorsing these racist beliefs. Racism is so embedded in the foundation of the Confederacy you cannot compartmentalize it and put it outside the scope of discussion or the identity of the Confederacy. This is also what actual systematic racism looks like. Im really not sure how else to say that I believe Racism was just the means to an end as opposed to the end itself. It was an absolute necessity for the south. If African Americans were accepted as equal then the south had to acknowledge what they were doing was evil. The fact their economy was built on slave labor made this unacceptable. I do not believe the motive for the war was a push for the intention of sadistically oppressing African Americans and I do not see how any reasonable person could take that position when considering the motivations of the people during that time. Would you agree with me that they would have taken the exact same position if the greater majority of their slaves were Native American and those statements would read "The Native American is sub-human and their natural position in society is as a slave?" If so then you understand exactly what my point is. The racism was the justification for slavery but not the objective and in context to the power struggle between the north and south while keeping in mind the north did not free slaves or declare equality until after the war its a reasonable conclusion that slavery was the economic tool leveraged for power with the moral pretense of human rights. I feel like this is a very reasonable conclusion that is directly based on the information available but people just keep jumping back to 'racism because racist' without reasoning to motives. Would it be acceptable to establish the common ground that as racism was the justification to validate slavery and was at the heart of succession? If so both of our positions are valid and there is no contention. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 397] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 05:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Mate I actually have been saying many of the same things you have, and yet you’ve said a lot of the discussion isn’t worth your time. Are you referring to the discussion PRIOR to that, or what? I just don’t understand where you’re coming from. I was just responding to Oops there. I didnt mean to say a lot of the discussion wasn't worth my time. I was just trying to establish common ground. I think a lot of people have voiced essentially the same view but we get hung up on details and semantics. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 398] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 05:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways I kind of have the same feeling about my posts after I read them. I just don’t think it’s fair to paint the Confederacy and especially the South in general as completely morally wrong. Sure what they did wrt slavery wasn’t okay, but a lot of these people died in defense of their homes and their culture. Many southerners felt a stronger loyalty to their state rather than the Union (unlike the north). It’s not like everyone in the South was a Nazi who wanted blacks enslaved lmao. Slavery is bad, which, no shit it is, nobody’s arguing it wasn’t lmao. That’s literally not controversial. No decent person agrees with slavery. The confederacy is a symbol. It’s VERY unfair to compare it to the nazis for a variety of reasons, the first is that while the South was a racist society indeed, you can’t just discount their entire culture on the basis of this sole fact. Honestly this is just actually a part of a larger whole. This is essentially part of an attack on the moral foundations of Western civilization. The West didn’t create slavery, the West abolished it lol.... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 399] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 05:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also, where’s all the Confederate death camps for killing blacks? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 400] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 05:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Im really not sure how else to say that I believe Racism was just the means to an end as opposed to the end itself. It was an absolute necessity for the south. If African Americans were accepted as equal then the south had to acknowledge what they were doing was evil. The fact their economy was built on slave labor made this unacceptable. I do not believe the motive for the war was a push for the intention of sadistically oppressing African Americans and I do not see how any reasonable person could take that position when considering the motivations of the people during that time. Would you agree with me that they would have taken the exact same position if the greater majority of their slaves were Native American and those statements would read "The Native American is sub-human and their natural position in society is as a slave?" If so then you understand exactly what my point is. The racism was the justification for slavery but not the objective and in context to the power struggle between the north and south while keeping in mind the north did not free slaves or declare equality until after the war its a reasonable conclusion that slavery was the economic tool leveraged for power with the moral pretense of human rights. I feel like this is a very reasonable conclusion that is directly based on the information available but people just keep jumping back to 'racism because racist' without reasoning to motives. Would it be acceptable to establish the common ground that as racism was the justification to validate slavery and was at the heart of succession? If so both of our positions are valid and there is no contention. I'd ask you to read about free blacks in the antebellum period and ask yourself - is it really only a justification for slavery? I can agree that racism entwined with slavery was at the heart of the secession (sorry lol). I just do not agree with the post that Ganelon made earlier that it "wasn't just about slavery". I find it in very bad taste to frame the topic as he did. The civil war wasn’t only about slavery. Id argue the civil war was a result of the economic differences between the North and the South. The Soutn was mostly agricultural, while the North was more industrialized. I’d argue that even the Jim Crow laws passed in the South after the war were motivated primarily by resentment and were the South’s way of ‘getting back’ at the freedmen. Kinda comparable to how Hitler and the nazis became hugely popular due to German revanchism and the Great Depression. i just don’t think an entire people would be so anal about slavery when it was widely seen as immoral if it hadn’t been for the economic aspect. Remember that only 25% of Southern (white) families owned slaves. It wasn’t even a majority of the population. It was mostly the elites who were against, along with bigoted whites. Hence why I don’t think it’s fair to paint the Confederacy as a primarily racist society. The confederate flag is viewed as a symbol of pride for southerners in much the same way national flags are around the world. Yes, it has been used by white nationalists as well, but they aren’t the only ones who used it, and I’d argue that most people who don’t want the confederate flag removed aren’t nazis. If you look at the KKK, they have around 5,000 members today. In the ‘20’s they had a whooping 6 MILLION. Btw incidentally 20% of the white male (enfranchised?) population of Indiana were members of the KKK. Wtf happened to Indiana, they weren’t even in the South lol. This literally screams Lost Cause rhetoric -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 401] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 05:44 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Rumox, how is what I’m arguing in bad taste? Literally not one second have I said that Slavery is okay. I’m arguing the South didn’t fight merely for slavery. I was actually about to post the same thing that Helz did - that racism was a justification for slavery. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 402] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 27th, 2020 05:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Helz is my slave in my dungeon of naughty sexi time. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 403] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 05:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'd ask you to read about free blacks in the antebellum period and ask yourself - is it really only a justification for slavery? I can agree that racism entwined with slavery was at the heart of the secession (sorry lol). I just do not agree with the post that Ganelon made earlier that it "wasn't just about slavery". I find it in very bad taste to frame the topic as he did. Fair point. If I said that I thought racism was only a justification for slavery I misspoke. I do believe racism is real and was a big issue in the south. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 404] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 05:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Helz is my slave in my dungeon of naughty sexi time. Why do you have to tell them our secrets master? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 405] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 06:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Rumox, how is what I’m arguing in bad taste? Literally not one second have I said that Slavery is okay. I’m arguing the South didn’t fight merely for slavery. I was actually about to post the same thing that Helz did - that racism was a justification for slavery. Bruh I have said numerous times why I thought so. The way you discuss the topic comes across as downplaying the significance of the how racially charged it was. It comes across as: confederacy racist? yea sure man dunno maybe BUT STATE RIGHTS ON THE OTHER HAND. Nah men. You cannot put the blatant racism on the backburner on this topic. You went straight into whataboutisms which just feeds into arguing in bad taste. I don't see what's so hard with accepting that the Confederacy was at its very core, the pillar of its foundation, a racist state. Read any scripture on why non-slaveholding southerners fought (besides conscription duh) and you will find the general opinion was that it wasn't just the 25% of the population with slaves that wanted to keep the status quo going. I'm sorry but it's a racist state, a racist flag and majority of the citizens were racists. I'm not kidding when I said Lost Cause. It sounds like you are arguing straight from the pov of a United Daughters of the Confederacy member which you must understand is contentious in of itself. If Southerners really wanted to separate themselves from racism and being pro-slavery they shouldn't use the BATTLE FLAG of an army fighting to ensure its survival. You cannot be more smooth brained than that. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 406] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 07:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Fine but do you see how it’s possible for someone to argue in favour of the flag and of its importance to modern Southerners without being racist? Such people see the South and its culture for what it could be, not what it was. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 407] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 07:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m totally not arguing in bad faith here, I just strongly disagree with the idea that the flag and the statues shouldn’t be used. Maybe I’ve presented a faulty argument here, but I would blame that on my general airheadedness rather than any racism on my part. Im just reacting to the overwhelming negative backlash towards these symbols and my gut tells me something is seriously wrong. I don’t know if the mistake is in assuming the Confederacy is fundamentally racist or somewhere else, but I do deeply mistrust the moves to remove the statues. I just don’t think that is done in good faith. We can argue as to whether it’s a good idea to remove them or not, but I guess what really concerns me is: why the sudden interest? When did confederate statues suddenly become popular? They weren’t nearly as contentions a few years ago, and here we are, people who would otherwise have no business with each other fighting over it. I think this is indicative of a political polarization. Which nicely ties in with the original intent of the thread. ontent m -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 408] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 07:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is also why photos of the slave states and the states who voted Republican were compared against one another. I’m possibly wrong in assuming the Confederaxy wasn’t primarily about slavery and I can accept that, but IMO it’s completely disingenuous to compare Trump supporters to slavery supporters. It’s literally outlandish lol, I know plenty of people on the right and it’s generally the case that people vote along ideological lines, and many of those who are on the right don’t agree with slavery or with racism lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 409] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 07:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I can see it being possible to support the flag without being racist or pro-slavery, but I am also not an idiot and understand that flying that specific flag will get you accused of being racist. There is no and will never be any wriggle room around this opinion people have. There is too much negativity connected to the flag. If people truly cared to separate themselves from the racist implications of the flag there would be some evidence of southern priders proposing something else, maybe a flag or some sort of identifier from one of the anti-slavery societies in the south but I literally can't find any reference to this being true. They want to use a battle flag of an army that fought to ensure the survival of slavery. They have only themselves to blame. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 410] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 27th, 2020 10:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I wonder if in 100 years people will be flying the Nazi flag and arguing it's for their German heritage, and claiming that the Holocaust wasn't done for racism and rather for economic reasons while completely disregarding anything Hitler or Himmler or any Nazi actually said. I wonder how many enlightened centrists would already make that argument today. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 411] Auteur : Date : June 27th, 2020 10:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why has this issue (the statues) become so polarizing lately? Ten years ago it wasn’t in the public eye - not to this extent. What changed? I am not talking about the Confederacy because this thread shows nothing good can come from this topic. Furthermore, doesn’t anyone else feel lIke politics has become much more polarized in the last 5 years or so? I can’t recall a year that was as polarized as this. I guess in retrospect Bush’s presidency was also controversial, although that is for some understandable reasons. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 412] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 27th, 2020 11:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I have never even considered this. Is the objective of a landmark to preserve the opinion held at its time of creation or is it more important to preserve current ideology? Is preserving ideology only ok when it corresponds with current ideology? Im not sure which way is best but maybe its some combination that gives value to old monuments in that they were important enough at the time of their creation to be erected while also moral enough to survive the years of changing views. I think someone said it earlier but its probably worth noting neither qualifys for the preservation of most southern civil war statues as that the greater number of them were erected long after the civil war as a push against rights movements. You're making this much more abstract than is appropriate. I'm not saying that "preserving ideology is only ok when it corresponds with the current ideology". Statues of political figures in public spaces are maintained using taxes from the local citizens and those spaces are used and enjoyed by the local citizens. It's rather unfair if a large swathe of the citizens are paying taxes to put up with a statue of a political figure in a public space who is, by modern moral standards, an asshole. That's very different from believing "preserving ideology is only ok when it corresponds with the current ideology". I'm not suggesting we break into people's houses to destroy whatever statues society currently considers racist. I've read this several times and still may not fully understand what you're saying, but I think you're suggesting that these statues have historical and cultural value and the decision of whether they're kept up or taken down shouldn't be made solely by examining whether the message of the statue is moral by current standards. If the statue was in a museum or was on someone's private property, I'd say "fair enough". However, this is a statue of a political figure paid for by taxes in a public space. Its existence is deeply political and viewing it simply like a piece of art is naiive. Though you perhaps view my perspective as rather cold. p;edit both paragraphs are replying to your first paragraph, to be clear -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 413] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 27th, 2020 11:59 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I thought the thread was dead. And then it lit up like a Christmas tree. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 414] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 27th, 2020 12:08 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why has this issue (the statues) become so polarizing lately? Ten years ago it wasn’t in the public eye - not to this extent. What changed? I am not talking about the Confederacy because this thread shows nothing good can come from this topic. Furthermore, doesn’t anyone else feel lIke politics has become much more polarized in the last 5 years or so? I can’t recall a year that was as polarized as this. I guess in retrospect Bush’s presidency was also controversial, although that is for some understandable reasons. The economy is going to shit - in some ways we never truly recovered from the 2008 recession. A bunch of corrupt goons are in charge, and our society is changing faster than it ever has before, and the internet has profoundly changed how people acquire information and, by extension, how politicians are incentivized to behave. Then on top of all that we now have to deal with coronavirus. That said, the politics of this period of time isn't particularly polarizing in the grand scheme of things... yet... There have always been people who had a problem with these statues. People are just getting angrier about the fact our system has become so stagnant we can't even get rid of a fucking statue any more without a full on riot lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 415] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 27th, 2020 12:28 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If you think about it, the Union was the real racists for assuming that black people were offended by slavery. What, did the white Union politicians think that black people are too dumb to free themselves? Come on, man. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 416] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 27th, 2020 01:10 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I thought the thread was dead. And then it lit up like a Christmas tree. Its pretty cancerous now -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 417] Auteur : rumox Date : June 27th, 2020 01:13 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ah yes, the "you guys are cancerous, but let me drop what I think" post. Thanks Helz. :scum: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 418] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 27th, 2020 02:26 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I can see it being possible to support the flag without being racist or pro-slavery, but I am also not an idiot and understand that flying that specific flag will get you accused of being racist. There is no and will never be any wriggle room around this opinion people have. There is too much negativity connected to the flag. If people truly cared to separate themselves from the racist implications of the flag there would be some evidence of southern priders proposing something else, maybe a flag or some sort of identifier from one of the anti-slavery societies in the south but I literally can't find any reference to this being true. They want to use a battle flag of an army that fought to ensure the survival of slavery. They have only themselves to blame. This right here is a good point and why it's entirely impossible to use and support Confederate symbols (among other stuff like saying the n-word in a supposedly-non racist generic insult way) without being a racist. By flying a Confederate flag you are saying that you don't give a shit about black people getting upset over it's historical use as a racist symbol, which in and of itself is a racist act. Even if you entirely use it as a symbol of southern pride you are saying that your use as such is more important than how the vast majority of black people feel about it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 419] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 03:07 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I wonder if in 100 years people will be flying the Nazi flag and arguing it's for their German heritage, and claiming that the Holocaust wasn't done for racism and rather for economic reasons while completely disregarding anything Hitler or Himmler or any Nazi actually said. I wonder how many enlightened centrists would already make that argument today. Hey don’t steal my point -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 420] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 03:30 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also, where’s all the Confederate death camps for killing blacks? It’s interesting you don’t give the nazi regime the same benefit of the doubt as you do the confederacy. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 421] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 03:34 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Solution#CITEREFNiewykNicosia2000 Historiographic debate about the decision is an interesting read -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 422] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 04:29 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You're making this much more abstract than is appropriate. I'm not saying that "preserving ideology is only ok when it corresponds with the current ideology". Statues of political figures in public spaces are maintained using taxes from the local citizens and those spaces are used and enjoyed by the local citizens. It's rather unfair if a large swathe of the citizens are paying taxes to put up with a statue of a political figure in a public space who is, by modern moral standards, an asshole. That's very different from believing "preserving ideology is only ok when it corresponds with the current ideology". I'm not suggesting we break into people's houses to destroy whatever statues society currently considers racist. I've read this several times and still may not fully understand what you're saying, but I think you're suggesting that these statues have historical and cultural value and the decision of whether they're kept up or taken down shouldn't be made solely by examining whether the message of the statue is moral by current standards. If the statue was in a museum or was on someone's private property, I'd say "fair enough". However, this is a statue of a political figure paid for by taxes in a public space. Its existence is deeply political and viewing it simply like a piece of art is naiive. Though you perhaps view my perspective as rather cold. p;edit both paragraphs are replying to your first paragraph, to be clear I honestly did not have any 'message' there. I just liked that thought and had never taken a moment to think about the purpose of a landmark in relation to the events/culture as seen through time. I do kinda like the idea of landmarks being created but then having to survive through time to earn their place as something that gives them value. A sort of 'trial by time' that weeds out those unworthy of existing kinda thing. On your reply though I don't really care for the mix of politics and art. But at the same time I hate politics in general. Its like the practice of manipulating populations to get power and using that power for your personal interest without getting caught. I think its really disgusting that this is how we function as a species but thats just my take on politics. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 423] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 04:48 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m totally not arguing in bad faith here, I just strongly disagree with the idea that the flag and the statues shouldn’t be used. Maybe I’ve presented a faulty argument here, but I would blame that on my general airheadedness rather than any racism on my part. I understand your feeling here. I do not agree with the confederate war flag being anything but a symbol of offence and the overwhelming majority of confederate statues I feel were placed as symbols of offence if you keep in mind the context of the time they were placed (Decades after the civil war and during times of genuine human rights movements.) At the same time there are the few that were made to commemorate the sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of citizens in a time after the union purposefully targeted civilian infrastructure burning down homes and towns indiscriminately. I do not know how that would feel to loose a war, have many of your friends and family dead and have not just your home but your entire state in ruins but I can imagine there was a lot of emotion in those monuments dedicated to commemorate that loss. The issue I run into is that the overwhelming majority of southern monuments were not made in this context. The south really screwed itself in my opinion by creating symbols of hatred with the pretense of commemorating the war so the backlash on all monuments is pretty much justified to me. I take the same issue with medals in the Military. A bronze star means absolutely nothing to me right now because its often 'blanketed' to an entire units E6+Officers. Its terrible that that takes away from the few that truly earned a bronze star but because of this choice the value of that medal has lost the prestige and respect it would otherwise command. I do have to say that you should feel no need to say "I am arguing in good faith" when people keep straw-manning the fuck out of you and throwing around Nazi rhetoric. I get that this is an emotional subject but that is truly arguing in bad faith in my book given that you truly believe the things you are saying. You kinda nailed it here: I think this is indicative of a political polarization. Which nicely ties in with the original intent of the thread. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 424] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 05:00 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If people truly cared to separate themselves from the racist implications of the flag there would be some evidence of southern priders proposing something else, maybe a flag or some sort of identifier from one of the anti-slavery societies in the south but I literally can't find any reference to this being true. They want to use a battle flag of an army that fought to ensure the survival of slavery. They have only themselves to blame. There actually is. Its the actual confederate flag (not the confederate battle flag.) The majority of people dont even recognize it as a confederate flag and it does not carry the message of hatred that the battle flag does. I can't speak for everyone but I live in Texas and last year had a chat with an old guy in Georgetown who flew it in his front yard. He basically said he used that flag specifically because he stood for southern pride but not racism. After that I noticed it in quite a few places. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 425] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 05:37 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is also why photos of the slave states and the states who voted Republican were compared against one another. I’m possibly wrong in assuming the Confederaxy wasn’t primarily about slavery and I can accept that, but IMO it’s completely disingenuous to compare Trump supporters to slavery supporters. It’s literally outlandish lol, I know plenty of people on the right and it’s generally the case that people vote along ideological lines, and many of those who are on the right don’t agree with slavery or with racism lol We make some of the same points but I really dont see any way to think the confederacy was not primarily about slavery. It really really was. I think its much more complicated than just saying "racism" and totally agree with you on the significant economic and power struggle but slavery was where the system broke. I kind of look at it as the south lost 2 wars. The first was the political power struggle. When it became apparent they had lost, that they would be subjected to northern industrial control, and their voice no longer mattered they chose to separate. The north chose to make a war out of it instead of letting go at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives. This is largly why I am so critical of the north. They get the 'moral high ground' of fighting for human rights (which by their actions they were not) while preforming evil for a power grab. Someone earlier brought up the point of how its immoral that at one time one person would murder another because they are stronger but thats essentially how I see the civil war. There was a population difference of 18 million union to 8 million confederate with the union being an advanced industrialized civilization and the confederacy being a rural agrarian society. The "Bigger and stronger" Union murdered the "Smaller and weaker" Confederacy because they wanted power and we now give them moral credit for the war? Thats trash in my opinion. Its one thing for evil to be questioned as a degree of evil but another for evil to be called good. Everyone has their split hairs on this discussion but the indoctrinated historical revision irks me. The north was no more justified in fighting the south to grab power than America was in launching terror bombing campaigns targeting civilian populations in Japan in WW2. We just have that need to be seen as morally justified after we commit evil as a species. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 426] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 27th, 2020 05:41 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We make some of the same points but I really dont see any way to think the confederacy was not primarily about slavery. It really really was. I think its much more complicated than just saying "racism" and totally agree with you on the significant economic and power struggle but slavery was where the system broke. I kind of look at it as the south lost 2 wars. The first was the political power struggle. When it became apparent they had lost, that they would be subjected to northern industrial control, and their voice no longer mattered they chose to separate. The north chose to make a war out of it instead of letting go at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives. This is largly why I am so critical of the north. They get the 'moral high ground' of fighting for human rights (which by their actions they were not) while preforming evil for a power grab. Someone earlier brought up the point of how its immoral that at one time one person would murder another because they are stronger but thats essentially how I see the civil war. There was a population difference of 18 million union to 8 million confederate with the union being an advanced industrialized civilization and the confederacy being a rural agrarian society. The "Bigger and stronger" Union murdered the "Smaller and weaker" Confederacy because they wanted power and we now give them moral credit for the war? Thats trash in my opinion. Its one thing for evil to be questioned as a degree of evil but another for evil to be called good. Everyone has their split hairs on this discussion but the indoctrinated historical revision irks me. The north was no more justified in fighting the south to grab power than America was in launching terror bombing campaigns targeting civilian populations in Japan in WW2. We just have that need to be seen as morally justified after we commit evil as a species. I can't say I'm well learned in the Civil War but could you please provide concrete sources that the Union actually began as the aggressors? Because literally every single source I can find directly contradicts you. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 427] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 05:56 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I can't say I'm well learned in the Civil War but could you please provide concrete sources that the Union actually began as the aggressors? Because literally every single source I can find directly contradicts you. Im not sure where you are looking. The Confederacy declared secession- not war. The Union declared their succession illegal and called it 'rebellion' which is just a clever way of declaring war but saying the other side declared war. At the point that the Confederacy declared war the Union had a choice. They could have allowed them to leave but why would they? They were more advanced and had well over twice as many people and had just established political dominance over the areas that wanted to leave. I mean.. I could dig up sources but literally every source I look at just speaks to this narrative citing the Union as declaring the Confederate succession as "illegal/rebellion." Its not any different than the American war for Independence where England declared America in rebellion instead of letting them separate. You can place the blame for 'who was the aggressor' where you want but I dont see it as much different than an abusive boyfriend knocking around his girlfriend after she says she wants to leave and then telling people she made him do it. -edit Im actually way off. At the time war was established only 7 states succeeded putting the numbers more like 4 million confederate vs 22 million union. I doubt an article exists that argues 4 million people declared war against 22 million. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 428] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 06:40 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Im not sure where you are looking. The Confederacy declared secession- not war. The Union declared their succession illegal and called it 'rebellion' which is just a clever way of declaring war but saying the other side declared war. At the point that the Confederacy declared war the Union had a choice. They could have allowed them to leave but why would they? They were more advanced and had well over twice as many people and had just established political dominance over the areas that wanted to leave. I mean.. I could dig up sources but literally every source I look at just speaks to this narrative citing the Union as declaring the Confederate succession as "illegal/rebellion." Its not any different than the American war for Independence where England declared America in rebellion instead of letting them separate. You can place the blame for 'who was the aggressor' where you want but I dont see it as much different than an abusive boyfriend knocking around his girlfriend after she says she wants to leave and then telling people she made him do it. -edit Im actually way off. At the time war was established only 7 states succeeded putting the numbers more like 4 million confederate vs 22 million union. I doubt an article exists that argues 4 million people declared war against 22 million. I'd argue that declaring secession without getting approval first from your federal government is a declaration of war/rebellion -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 429] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 06:59 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'd argue that declaring secession without getting approval first from your federal government is a declaration of war/rebellion I am very curious why you think this. I do not see any relationship dynamic (regardless of personal, business or political) where the oppressive side would agree to give freedom to the oppressed. Scale that to slavery and it sounds a lot like an argument a slaver would make if his slaves decided to leave. Isn't the entire point about free will? I do get the concept but in Feudalism it makes sense because the crown owned everything but granted rights to use that land for the mutual benefit the vassals taxation and military service where as in America the Federal government postdated the existence of the colonies and never owned the land to grant it to the colonies. Its the difference of equals entering a compact then separating instead of a powerful side giving a measure of power to a weak side in return for services with the weak side reneging and stealing the measure of power granted to them. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 430] Auteur : DJarJar Date : June 27th, 2020 07:02 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I am very curious why you think this. I do not see any relationship dynamic (regardless of personal, business or political) where the oppressive side would agree to give freedom to the oppressed. Scale that to slavery and it sounds a lot like an argument a slaver would make if his slaves decided to leave. Isn't the entire point about free will? I do get the concept but in Feudalism it makes sense because the crown owned everything but granted rights to use that land for the mutual benefit the vassals taxation and military service where as in America the Federal government postdated the existence of the colonies and never owned the land to grant it to the colonies. Its the difference of equals entering a compact then separating instead of a powerful side giving a measure of power to a weak side in return for services with the weak side reneging and stealing the measure of power granted to them. i'm not saying it's wrong to rebel, but rebelling is still rebelling and I don't think it's right to view the union as the one who declared war. You basically just agreed with me by pointing out that no greater power is going to just let a smaller power secede. Therefore by trying to secede the smaller power knows exactly what it's getting into -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 431] Auteur : Helz Date : June 27th, 2020 07:07 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism i'm not saying it's wrong to rebel, but rebelling is still rebelling and I don't think it's right to view the union as the one who declared war. You basically just agreed with me by pointing out that no greater power is going to just let a smaller power secede. Therefore by trying to secede the smaller power knows exactly what it's getting into Sure. I agree with you on both points 100%. My entire point was that it spells out how immoral the war was for the Union. Hundreds of thousands of people were killed for greed and power and I dislike the idea of them being viewed as 'morally justified' after the fact because some good came out of it. Ie- The fact the union was acting in their own self interest as expected from any power structural invalidates the argument for their morality in the civil war and underscores human rights as a pretense for greed. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 432] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 27th, 2020 07:40 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Furthermore, doesn’t anyone else feel lIke politics has become much more polarized in the last 5 years or so? I can’t recall a year that was as polarized as this. I guess in retrospect Bush’s presidency was also controversial, although that is for some understandable reasons. Trump gaining the presidency has shifted the Overtom Window, the range of policies the public finds acceptable as a result of continued radical ideas being brought forth. "Build the wall!" vs stronger immigration control -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 433] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 27th, 2020 07:42 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The union engaging in the civil war isn't a "good" act. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 434] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 28th, 2020 02:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Im not sure where you are looking. The Confederacy declared secession- not war. The Union declared their succession illegal and called it 'rebellion' which is just a clever way of declaring war but saying the other side declared war. At the point that the Confederacy declared war the Union had a choice. They could have allowed them to leave but why would they? They were more advanced and had well over twice as many people and had just established political dominance over the areas that wanted to leave. I mean.. I could dig up sources but literally every source I look at just speaks to this narrative citing the Union as declaring the Confederate succession as "illegal/rebellion." Its not any different than the American war for Independence where England declared America in rebellion instead of letting them separate. You can place the blame for 'who was the aggressor' where you want but I dont see it as much different than an abusive boyfriend knocking around his girlfriend after she says she wants to leave and then telling people she made him do it. -edit Im actually way off. At the time war was established only 7 states succeeded putting the numbers more like 4 million confederate vs 22 million union. I doubt an article exists that argues 4 million people declared war against 22 million. Dude what. I'm sorry but this makes no sense. Of course the Union is not going to recognize a big part of it deciding to secede (because they want to keep slaves, no less), just like literally every other country that that would happen to. The actual start of aggression and battle was by the Confederacy lmao. I suppose you'll also start arguing that the US government recognize CHAZ as a foreign nation, right? (spoiler: he won't) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 435] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 02:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The union engaging in the civil war isn't a "good" act. So any self respecting nation is just expected to let a large portion of it just break off whenever it decides and effectively declare a war of ideology against it's mother-nation? The United States was the first democratic state in the modern world, letting a large portion of it rebel and keep it's very undemocratic institution would be a failure in the experiment that was democracy. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 436] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 03:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I honestly did not have any 'message' there. I just liked that thought and had never taken a moment to think about the purpose of a landmark in relation to the events/culture as seen through time. I do kinda like the idea of landmarks being created but then having to survive through time to earn their place as something that gives them value. A sort of 'trial by time' that weeds out those unworthy of existing kinda thing. On your reply though I don't really care for the mix of politics and art. But at the same time I hate politics in general. Its like the practice of manipulating populations to get power and using that power for your personal interest without getting caught. I think its really disgusting that this is how we function as a species but thats just my take on politics. Ah, fair enough. That's quite a romantic thought, actually. That makes sense, but why on earth are you posting in the thread then? :P -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 437] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 03:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It's a conflicting life as a Brofessor -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 438] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 03:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm kind of mystified that y'all seem to view declaring secession as intrinsically bad. I thought we were in agreement that the confederacy was bad because they were founded primarily to hold onto slavery, whether driven by economics and ideology or pure ideology is besides the point. Forcing groups to remain part of a state on the other hand is fundamentally oppressive. And I'm willing to bet the union didn't give a shit about slaves lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 439] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 03:59 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I actually do disagree with the secession itself; I think states shouldn’t have the right to secede unilaterally, not from a federation, at least. If they do, the whole concept of government breaks down. Federations need a moderately strong central government. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 440] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah I do find the things the Union did in the south during the war (Sherman’s march to the Sea) pretty reprehensible. Not saying I don’t think the Union should’ve won the war (I do), but they could’ve bene a lot of less brutal about it. After all, they weren’t fighting against a hostile nation. They were fighting their own countrymen lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 441] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 04:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If they do, the whole concept of government breaks down. Sorry is this supposed to be a counter argument? :P Lol but seriously, it's a shame that the strength of the central government erodes, but that doesn't entitle them to rule over people who reject them. That's fundamentally undemocratic. I don't think "the whole concept of government breaks down". The minority will just go form their own government. Would this put you on the side of England who ruthlessly crushed Ireland's and Scotland's numerous attempts to leave? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 442] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 04:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It would be chaotic if they could check in or check out whenever they like, but permitting military force to keep them in line is very authoritarian. I think the EU has the right balance. Trying to leave is bureaucratic hell, but nevertheless nominally permitted at the very least. And the UK now permits Scotland to vote for independence. But it's made sharply clear that if they leave, they won't be allowed to come back. And the vote is held rarely. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 443] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 04:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah I do find the things the Union did in the south during the war (Sherman’s march to the Sea) pretty reprehensible. Not saying I don’t think the Union should’ve won the war (I do), but they could’ve bene a lot of less brutal about it. After all, they weren’t fighting against a hostile nation. They were fighting their own countrymen lol. The Confederacy ceased to be our fellow countrymen when they denounced the United States and its federal government. They literally were a hostile nation wtf bro, and to answer yzb never did I say that the Confederacy was bad ONLY because they rebelled. They kept and tried to defend an institution that's barely a step above genocide in the "things you can do to a population moral ladder". That alone is enough to declare war in my humble opinion, at least in an pre nuclear era -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 444] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 04:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The Confederacy ceased to be our fellow countrymen when they denounced the United States and its federal government. They literally were a hostile nation wtf bro, and to answer yzb never did I say that the Confederacy was bad ONLY because they rebelled. They kept and tried to defend an institution that's barely a step above genocide in the "things you can do to a population moral ladder". That alone is enough to declare war in my humble opinion, at least in an pre nuclear era I'm not saying you said that. I believe they were bad ONLY because they were founded upon keeping slaves, and I'm saying you at least partially see them as bad for "rebelling" (attempting to secede). Am I wrong about that? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 445] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism So basically if California decided to secede now and you were conscripted, would you treat a Californian soldier the same way you’d treat a Russian invader? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 446] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism They did not suddenly become a hostile nation. The cultural, familial, religious, historical and linguistic bonds between the north and the south didn’t suddenly disappear with secession. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 447] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism At the end of the day, the Union had to reintegrate the Southern states. They rever recognized the Confederate government as a legitimate one, and so they didn’t view them as a separate nation, either. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 448] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sorry is this supposed to be a counter argument? :P Lol but seriously, it's a shame that the strength of the central government erodes, but that doesn't entitle them to rule over people who reject them. That's fundamentally undemocratic. I don't think "the whole concept of government breaks down". The minority will just go form their own government. Would this put you on the side of England who ruthlessly crushed Ireland's and Scotland's numerous attempts to leave? Of course not, but I don’t see the Confederate as being ‘oppressed’ by the north. On the contrary, they were highly autonomous (as states are wont to be), and were allowed to keep slavery as an institution; they were represented in Congress, and had the right to participate in presidential elections. The only thing they weren’t allowed to do is leave. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 449] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 04:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm not saying you said that. I believe they were bad ONLY because they were founded upon keeping slaves, and I'm saying you at least partially see them as bad for "rebelling" (attempting to secede). Am I wrong about that? Yes I do see the Confederacy as bad partly because they were a rebel state from the first democratic state, they had a good deal going on and decided to fuck it up for everyone involved. So basically if California decided to secede now and you were conscripted, would you treat a Californian soldier the same way you’d treat a Russian invader? Well A.) I'd never have to worry about that in the first place because I have enough excuses to avoid conscription, plus we'd never go to war with another state in the modern world because it's likely that every single one of them would be a literal nuclear state if it seceded. B.) I love how ya tryta make a subtle difference between californians "soldiers" and russian "invaders" as if there's any difference between the two peoples intrinsically. C.) This is clearly a strawman argument. Of course it's easier to talk about a rebel state that existed for less than a quarter of my life over a hundred years ago than a hypothetical in the modern world. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 450] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 04:33 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism At the end of the day, the Union had to reintegrate the Southern states. They rever recognized the Confederate government as a legitimate one, and so they didn’t view them as a separate nation, either. Literally no government will recognize it's failed rebel state as a legitimate one. But they'll fight them anyways. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 451] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Of course I make that distinction. A Russian invader isn’t a part of your country. There are no cultural bonds between Russians and Americans (or rather, they do exist but they are very weak). Meanwhile, California’s history more or less begins with the US. They are a part of the US, speak the language, are considered to be American culturally, and so on. All these things, when combined, generally make one a lot less willing to treat a compatriot the same way as a foreigner, even when hostile. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 452] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 04:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't get why anyone says that the fact that the united states government didn't recognize the Confederacy matters at all. If a state rebelled from it's motherland and the motherland recognized it as a legitimate government, why the hell would they fight? the motherland already said "hmm yes this piece of land has an autonomous government" by recognizing it, why would it try to impose its will if it recognized the will of the state that spawned from it? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 453] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes I do see the Confederacy as bad partly because they were a rebel state from the first democratic state, they had a good deal going on and decided to fuck it up for everyone involved. Well A.) I'd never have to worry about that in the first place because I have enough excuses to avoid conscription, plus we'd never go to war with another state in the modern world because it's likely that every single one of them would be a literal nuclear state if it seceded. B.) I love how ya tryta make a subtle difference between californians "soldiers" and russian "invaders" as if there's any difference between the two peoples intrinsically. C.) This is clearly a strawman argument. Of course it's easier to talk about a rebel state that existed for less than a quarter of my life over a hundred years ago than a hypothetical in the modern world. It isn’t a straw man. As I see it there’s no distinction between the two; they’re both American. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 454] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 04:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Of course I make that distinction. A Russian invader isn’t a part of your country. There are no cultural bonds between Russians and Americans (or rather, they do exist but they are very weak). Meanwhile, California’s history more or less begins with the US. They are a part of the US, speak the language, are considered to be American culturally, and so on. All these things, when combined, generally make one a lot less willing to treat a compatriot the same way as a foreigner, even when hostile. I try to treat people equally regardless of where they came from. I judge people based off how they treat others, if ya treat other people like shit, then ya a bad lad, otherwise, you're probably cool in my books. "Culture" has nothing to do with it unless your culture says "hmm yes, slavery is good" and you're totally cool with it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 455] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 04:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It isn’t a straw man. As I see it there’s no distinction between the two; they’re both American. Citizens in the Confederacy aren't Americans, they're confederates. They literally rebelled from the country that made them American -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 456] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 04:56 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism So to you is nationality more about citizenship than cultural background? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 457] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 04:58 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Of course not, but I don’t see the Confederate as being ‘oppressed’ by the north. On the contrary, they were highly autonomous (as states are wont to be), and were allowed to keep slavery as an institution; they were represented in Congress, and had the right to participate in presidential elections. The only thing they weren’t allowed to do is leave. B U T T H A T ' S T H E M O S T I M P O R T A N T T H I N G . -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 458] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 05:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism B U T T H A T ' S T H E M O S T I M P O R T A N T T H I N G . Pretty much every administrative division and/or state is oppressed then. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 459] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 05:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Pretty much every administrative division and/or state is oppressed then. ... YES -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 460] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 05:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism ... YES Individuals are allowed to leave, allowed to move from state to state or even to leave the supranational region entirely. The rights of the individual are more important than the rights of the states in my view, and the individual was most certainly not oppressed in the South; at least, not the ones who voted for secession. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 461] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 05:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Individuals are allowed to leave, allowed to move from state to state or even to leave the supranational region entirely. The rights of the individual are more important than the rights of the states in my view, and the individual was most certainly not oppressed in the South; at least, not the ones who voted for secession. I mean, people associate "oppressed" with much more hardcore shit. I'd rather use the phrase "overly authoritarian", or something to that effect. But that doesn't fundamentally change the point. That said, there were lots of actually-oppressive governments that were happy for you to fuck off if you didn't like how they handled their shit. That's not really fair to expect people to abandon their homeland for what they should be entitled to and is thus also besides the point. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 462] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 05:14 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don’t really see that as oppression. Some degree of authority is necessary. A country can’t survive if its constituent parts can leave whenever they want. It makes for a chaotic environment. The other issue is that it would be quite complex a matter, too. The constituent part could then blackmail the federal government into doing something they wanted threatening to leave if they didn’t get what they wanted. Also, the state could then just leave if the Union decided to go to war with a neighbor and thus be spared from the consequences resulting from that, and could even sign a separate treaty with the offending nation, only to rejoin once hostilities ended. Some degree of cohesion is important. Look at the early US. It was essentially a confederation. The national government was so weak they basically couldn’t collect taxes unless the individual states agreed to, and they didn’t really have a federal standing army either. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 463] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 05:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don’t really see that as oppression. Some degree of authority is necessary. Imagine how much less incentivized the central government is to look after the interests of their minority states when all they can do is try to swing their minority voting power. In all fairness, I believe the electoral college is deliberately designed to give disproportionate weight to the south, but the conversation seems to have become more general anyway. Furthermore, autonomy is never a guaranteed blessing if the central government maintains absolute authority. Just look at what happened in Jammu and Kashmir. Again, I'd rather get away from the word "oppression" because that conjures up rather dramatic images. I dunno, maybe it'd be more productive to start with you clarifying how you distinguish a "declaration of independence" from a "failed rebellion". Does the state have to receive a certain degree of mistreatment from the central government before it's permitted to think about independence? How do you determine how much mistreatment is enough? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 464] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 28th, 2020 05:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don’t really see that as oppression. Some degree of authority is necessary. A country can’t survive if its constituent parts can leave whenever they want. It makes for a chaotic environment. The other issue is that it would be quite complex a matter, too. The constituent part could then blackmail the federal government into doing something they wanted threatening to leave if they didn’t get what they wanted. Also, the state could then just leave if the Union decided to go to war with a neighbor and thus be spared from the consequences resulting from that, and could even sign a separate treaty with the offending nation, only to rejoin once hostilities ended. Some degree of cohesion is important. Look at the early US. It was essentially a confederation. The national government was so weak they basically couldn’t collect taxes unless the individual states agreed to, and they didn’t really have a federal standing army either. As I said, if they could check in or check out whenever they like that'd be a problem too. But you're kind of misinterpreting me. I gave my own country as an example of a system closer to "fair". -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 465] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 05:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism So to you is nationality more about citizenship than cultural background? In this context I'm referring explicitly to citizenship, obviously it's more complicated than that -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 466] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 05:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism B U T T H A T ' S T H E M O S T I M P O R T A N T T H I N G . Nah the most important thing is whether the CITIZENS can leave or not. Having a huge piece of land just fucking off is a huge deal, and totally different than what I think you're implying -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 467] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 05:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I do think that certain governments can be oppressine and that absolute authority isn’t good - it quickly leads to tyranny, which is why I think that federations are the best form of government. I guess the distinction for me is primarily threefold. a) Would the state fare better if it were independent? b) Are fundamental freedoms being infringed upon? c) Are the differences (cultural, economic, social) between the nation as a whole (or even the ‘core’ of the nation) and the state so significant that continued cooperation is either impossible or extremely difficult? I don’t really know how to separate them, like you’ve said. It is definitely important to figure out where to draw the line, I’m not saying states should never secede. I’m saying that generally they shouldn’t, and that id support a central government’s attempts to restore order (not with the full extent of their power: like I said, I find what the Union did in the South reprehensible). Since it’s kind of hard for me to figure out where the line is exactly, I’ll just give you some examples. I think that the Baltic states and Finland declaring their independence from the Russian Empire right before the Russian Revolution was totally justified. The Russian Empire had adopted a policy of Russification in many of their conquered territories (like Poland), and that independence was necessary for these cultures to survive. Likewise, I think the decolonization process at the end of the Second World War was a good thing, the various indigenous cultures were far too dissimilar from European culture for Europe to figure out what to do with them. I do think that more effort should’ve been put into helping them than Europe did, and I think colonialism wasn’t completely bad because it exposed many of these cultures to Western civilization and initiated, at least a surface-level transformation of these societies along Western lines. One example where I think secession isn’t warranted would probably be modern day Scotland. There aren’t really any grievances, and the cultures are similar enough (with Scotland speaking one of the ancient varieties of the English language, having a long history of being English speaking - in some cases, longer than some regions in England itself), and I’m not convinced they would fare well if they were independent. I guess one angle which would indeed justify secession would probably be the issue of Brexit. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 468] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 05:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think the Irish secession was justified, based on the long history of oppression by the English/British. Second of all, unlike Scotland, English influence in Ireland was a foreign influence that was forced upon Ireland, and many Irishmen regarded Irish culture and language as being more important than English culture for their identity. One secession that happened and succeeded that I do not agree with would probably be the separation of the various South American states (Colombia used to own Panama, Venezuela and Ecuador, and there used to be a federation covering all of Central America). One other case of disunity that isn’t really a case of secession would be Scandinavia. These three (four, if you include Finland) countries are sufficiently similar that it wouldn’t be unthinkable for them to be a single (perhaps federal) state. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 469] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 05:52 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think colonialism wasn’t completely bad because it exposed many of these cultures to Western civilization and initiated, at least a surface-level transformation of these societies along Western lines. Colonialism was the worst thing to happen to the african cultures, holy shit. You do realize the beginning of semi-modern western influence to africa is commonly referred to as the "rape of africa"? First western powers enslaved a good portion of the population, then they deliberately gave minority groups power over a majority population to act as defacto overlords over the population, used this system to drain resources and exploit workers for centuries, then when they finally left, they left arbitrary drawn borders that contained multiple ethnic and cultural groups, a good portion of which never liked each other in the first place, thus leading to countless civil wars and incredible instability within their governments. Judging a group of people by whether or not they adher to western values and ideas is the worst take in addition to your apparent ignorance regarding the damage that western civilization did to an entire continent. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 470] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 05:58 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The worst thing? Africans lived (and still do) in absolute poverty for ages prior to colonization. I think they would be far worse off today had it not been for colonialism. Colonialism did affect the African continent in many negative ways, but you have to compare to what was in Africa prior to colonization. African economies are actually (some of them) growing rapidly, and you can see this reflected in various statistics. Infant mortality is decreasing in Africa as is literacy. Life expectancy, too. I doubt this would be the case if they hadn’t been colonized. I actually believe the introduction of capitalism helped a great deal. They did commit terrible atrocities (see the Belgian Congo, probably the worst of them all). But it wasn’t all bad. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 471] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 06:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Did Europe exploit Africa? Of course it did. It was in their interests. I also think however that Africa wouldn’t have various states and semi-functional societies if it weren’t for the European presence there. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 472] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 06:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think Europe had a moral duty as colonizers to introduce Western values and civilization to Africa. Even unwillingly they did that (well, some more so than others. Belgium didn’t), and I believe that had a positive effect. Remember that few societies we would recognize as states existed in Africa, and now they do. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 473] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 06:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Did Europe do a sloppy job? Yes. Look at Rwanda. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 474] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 06:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism African economies are actually (some of them) growing rapidly, and you can see this reflected in various statistics. Infant mortality is decreasing in Africa as is literacy. Life expectancy, too. I doubt this would be the case if they hadn’t been colonized. I actually believe the introduction of capitalism helped a great deal. They did commit terrible atrocities (see the Belgian Congo, probably the worst of them all). But it wasn’t all bad. Yeah modern medicine does wonders, doesn't it. It's not like the west wouldn't have started interacting with an entire continent at any point. We could've done this thing called peaceful trading instead of forcing our own will upon the populations, and encouraging others within those population to do the same. The west could have ignored Africa for centuries, and they would have been so much better off than if they were "colonized" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 475] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 28th, 2020 06:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think Europe had a moral duty as colonizers to introduce Western values and civilization to Africa. Even unwillingly they did that (well, some more so than others. Belgium didn’t), and I believe that had a positive effect. Remember that few societies we would recognize as states existed in Africa, and now they do. I'm not going to dignify this with any response other than "wtf bro?" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 476] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 06:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I have no doubt that Africa could’ve been better off than they are. Maybe trading would’ve worked better, I don’t know. My suspicion is that simple diffusion of material goods isnt enough, though. Trading with the natives works but it doesn’t introduce ideas of government and civilization to the same extent that colonization did. It would’ve been a lot slower, and perhaps there (most likely) would remain parts of the continent that remain unclaimed by any significant governing authority. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 477] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 28th, 2020 06:33 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm kind of mystified that y'all seem to view declaring secession as intrinsically bad. I thought we were in agreement that the confederacy was bad because they were founded primarily to hold onto slavery, whether driven by economics and ideology or pure ideology is besides the point. Forcing groups to remain part of a state on the other hand is fundamentally oppressive. And I'm willing to bet the union didn't give a shit about slaves lol. I'm not saying that secession is intrinsically bad. I'm saying that it's usually (and in the case of the Confederacy, actually was) an aggressive motion. I don't think aggressive motions are intrinsically bad, however. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 478] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 28th, 2020 09:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lmao in related news today Mississippi voted to remove the Confederate emblem from their flag. Another loss for muh history. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 479] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 09:54 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lmao in related news today Mississippi voted to remove the Confederate emblem from their flag. Another loss for muh history. A republican controlled senate and house. >fucking liberals -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 480] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 10:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The resolution calls for the immediate removal of the current flag and for a commission to design a new flag in which all Confederate symbols will be removed and the words "In God We Trust" will be added. Mmm yes how secular. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 481] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 28th, 2020 10:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism A republican controlled senate and house. >fucking liberals Simultaneously. >see libtards? republicans aren't racists, democrats are the real racists. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 482] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 28th, 2020 10:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Mmm yes how secular. Ohhhhh god they're adding "In God We Trust" to the flag? Holy shit, can Republicans get any more cringe? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 483] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 10:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It has to pass an acceptance vote by the citizens, but from what I read that is what is going to be included in the first draft. If the majority reject it they will try again until a version is accepted so who knows what it will truly end up as. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 484] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 28th, 2020 10:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I have a sneak preview of the new flag of Mississippi: https://i.imgur.com/Mkqzkv1.png -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 485] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 10:13 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I have a sneak preview of the new flag of Mississippi: https://i.imgur.com/Mkqzkv1.png o7 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 486] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism why is adding ‘In God we Trust’ a bad thing? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 487] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 10:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism o7 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 488] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 10:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism why is adding ‘In God we Trust’ a bad thing? We should add "In Satan we trust" Do you think that's a bad idea? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 489] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 10:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism why is adding ‘In God we Trust’ a bad thing? Do you believe a state should be secular? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 490] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism From Wikipedia: ”In Lynch v. Donnelly (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynch_v._Donnelly) (1984), the Supreme Court wrote that acts of "ceremonial deism (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceremonial_deism)" are "protected from Establishment Clause scrutiny chiefly because they have lost through rote repetition any significant religious content"​ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 491] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Idk to me that seems like a non-issue. Don’t see why it concerns you guys so nuch -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 492] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Do you believe a state should be secular? Yes -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 493] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 10:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Idk to me that seems like a non-issue. Don’t see why it concerns you guys so nuch Then it should be a non issue to not put it on anything government related. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 494] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 28th, 2020 10:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Doesn't really upset me, it's just really cringe lmao -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 495] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 10:39 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yet it concerns christians so much if they're not able to force their religious beliefs on everyone else -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 496] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 10:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Well I don't see how you can rationalize that propelling a position of ethical high ground based on religion on a state flag isn't infringing on the basis of what a secular state is. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 497] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:43 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Tbh I think putting text on flags is kinda cringe in general but, I mean if it were the same motto or something, why not? It’s on coins in the US too. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 498] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 10:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And I would say the same to the coins as well, how very secular /s -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 499] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 10:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Tbh I think putting text on flags is kinda cringe in general but, I mean if it were the same motto or something, why not? It’s on coins in the US too. The phrase should not be on coins. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 500] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The phrase in god we trust actually didn’t refer to the Christian God, originally. The founding fathers were deist, and to them God wasn’t a personal god. Generally Deism holds that God created man and endowed him with intelligence; I don’t think Deism holds any other beliefs about God. I also think that a relatively benign phrase such as this isn’t going to demonize non-believers or other denominations. It doesn’t even specify who God is. I see personally nothing wrong with this phrase. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 501] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 10:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The mental gymnastics you religious nuts go through to justify this shit is amazing. Always invoking the founding fathers even though none of them pushed for/promoted religious mottos that were enacted long after they were all dead. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 502] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not a religious nut lmao -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 503] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:51 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not even religious, let alone a nut -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 504] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 10:52 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Actually I would convert to Catholicism and go DEUS VULT! And smite all heathens in Rachyl’s holy name /s -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 505] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 10:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not a religious nut lmao Whatever you say boss. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 506] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 11:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Banana I can see you feel very strongly about certain things and that’s okay, but I’m not your enemy or something. I’m really not religious, you can ask like 50 people on this website and they’d tell you the same thing. Sure I’m pro-religion but I’m only pro-good religion. I don’t like fanaticism. I don’t see anything wrong with religion when it’s not taken to the extreme -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 507] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 11:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Majority of the founding fathers were not deists but okay, majority were Christian. The person who designed the coin was a Reverend. The person who authorized the design is arguably Christian. The president that expanded the motto was Christian. Are you sure you can confidently claim that they aren't referring to the Christian god? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 508] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 28th, 2020 11:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Majority of the founding fathers were not deists but okay, majority were Christian. The person who designed the coin was a Reverend. The person who authorized the design is arguably Christian. The president that expanded the motto was Christian. Are you sure you can confidently claim that they aren't referring to the Christian god? You can if you twist the argument as much as possible to make it so -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 509] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 11:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyway, whether if it's a Christian God or an everyman God is beside the point. Not very secular to reference it in the first place. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 510] Auteur : Date : June 28th, 2020 12:14 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I guess. Mississippi is also quite a religious state, I imagine so it’s probably motivated by religion. I don’t find the phrase particularly religious in and of itself, but I understand where you’re coming from. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 511] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 12:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I guess. Mississippi is also quite a religious state, I imagine so it’s probably motivated by religion. I don’t find the phrase particularly religious in and of itself, but I understand where you’re coming from. Care to explain... I don't want to pre-emptively say mental gymnastics but I honestly have no idea how you can come to this conclusion without it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 512] Auteur : Helz Date : June 28th, 2020 07:47 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Dude what. I'm sorry but this makes no sense. Of course the Union is not going to recognize a big part of it deciding to secede (because they want to keep slaves, no less), just like literally every other country that that would happen to. The actual start of aggression and battle was by the Confederacy lmao. We are totally going to have to just agree to disagree here. Im not sure there is any chance of us finding common ground when you admit in your own statement that of course the Union would not allow the confederacy to go peacefully while simultaneously blaming the confederacy as the aggressor. Wanting to leave and wanting war are two ideas I will never consider synonymous. I suppose you'll also start arguing that the US government recognize CHAZ as a foreign nation, right? (spoiler: he won't) I believe they want to call themselves CHOP now? And why on earth would I make such an absurd argument? I do love that place. Its the total face of hypocrisy. They say they want independence but then turn around and demand donations of food, berthing, clothing, and medical supplies. They say police are too violent and AR-15s are unnecessary but then they create their own cops geared out with AR-15s and physically assault people who wear anything that resembles a police support patch. I think my favorite moment was when someone was dying and they refused to allow police and emergency services into the area but then blamed the government for that persons death when they didnt get treatment fast enough. I like what they are doing because it demonstrates how bullshit their beliefs are in actual practice. Kinda reminds me of all the Anti-Gun nuts that hit me up for a gun as soon as they were afraid that the government may fall at the start of this COVID thing. Before people could only argue hypotheticals but now we get to grab the popcorn and watch their hypocrisy unfold in real time. Its very entertaining : ) To your insinuation of the US government allowing anything to separate now its an invalid argument in my opinion for a number of reasons. The biggest is that at the time of the civil war there was nothing prohibiting states from leaving. That had simply not been addressed in any form. Now there is agreements and law prohibiting any state from leaving. Texas joined as sovereign nation and does not have the legal right to leave. These issues did not exist back then. The second issue is that now we have national debt and every American citizen owes 67,000 dollars twards that debt. So say..Wyoming (which has the smallest population in the US) wanted to leave they would need to fork over 38.7 billion dollars just to cover that National Debt. Thats not even touching on state / municipality debt, or the federal subsidization that keeps state funded public services and infrastructure working, or even the federal land holdings within the state. TLDR- Trying to compare areas separating from the US today is totally different than it was back then and makes no sense. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 513] Auteur : Helz Date : June 28th, 2020 08:06 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Simultaneously. >see libtards? republicans aren't racists, democrats are the real racists. I mean.. They did found the KKK and fight hard against black rights.. It wouldn't be hard to argue they now exploit the minority population in the US for political power Jokes aside I do not feel that its fair to call either party racist. Entire political partys are just too broad of a category. I feel like thats just part of the polarizing political kool-aid thats generously dispersed. Reminds me of back when Trump got elected and there was a push that it only happened because of uneducated people voting for Trump or because of African American Women thinking Hillary was a snake. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 514] Auteur : Helz Date : June 28th, 2020 08:14 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We should add "In Satan we trust" Do you think that's a bad idea? In a way they are kind of the same thing. Saying "In God we trust" in no way designates which God.. If anything loose the capital G on God and it makes room for polytheism then the only ones left out are of the atheist variety and why should they care? I never understood why a Nihilist feels the need to push that view against a Fatalist. If nothing matters to that person who gives a shit if someone else talks to an imaginary sky man? On a side note sometime last winter I studied the belief structure of the Satanic Temple after reading about their satanic statue thing and I found their belief structure to preform almost all of the same functions as other religions while also encouraging moral behavior in many regards. Totally worth reading into if you like learning about different beliefs. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 515] Auteur : Helz Date : June 28th, 2020 08:17 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yet it concerns christians so much if they're not able to force their religious beliefs on everyone else Isn't that all religious though? The Catholic church did it for century's by torching people for science and the Muslims do it now by blowing people up. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 516] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : June 28th, 2020 10:06 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Satanists are encouraging moral behavior? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of satanism to promote admittedly pure evil (whether that exists or not) and literally praise it? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 517] Auteur : rumox Date : June 28th, 2020 11:58 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism In a way they are kind of the same thing. Saying "In God we trust" in no way designates which God.. If anything loose the capital G on God and it makes room for polytheism then the only ones left out are of the atheist variety and why should they care? I never understood why a Nihilist feels the need to push that view against a Fatalist. If nothing matters to that person who gives a shit if someone else talks to an imaginary sky man? It is still denoting A God. Your choice of wording implies you are talking from some religious viewpoint (the only ones left out are of the atheist variety and why should they care?) and honestly this just confirms my view. Non-religious people are the minority in the world, and then in the USA it's drastically even more shifted in favor of theists. It makes sense to me that "In God we trust" has been codified in US law as NOT being a religious statement when the people that it is in reference to are overwhelmingly the majority of the populace. The religious population in the USA in 2016 was 79.1%, opposed to 20.9% non religion/no answers. If a vote was put to the public where religious beliefs or lack of were attached to an individuals vote about whether "In God we trust" is a religious statement or not, I have a feeling I already will know what the results would look like. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 518] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 12:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also to not believe in god doesn't defacto mean you are a Nihilist. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 519] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 12:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What do you mean by religious? I believe there is a higher power but I do not subscribe to any of the standard religious beliefs and my beliefs aren’t really at the center of my being. I do have some moral beliefs but those are divorced from my beliefs in a higher power. Im not religious and I don’t find this innocuous phrase important. I know they’re not going to enshrine any religion as the state/main religion in the US or in Mississippi just because of one sentence that has a long history and which is so overused that it essentially has little religious meaning. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 520] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 12:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Satanists are encouraging moral behavior? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of satanism to promote admittedly pure evil (whether that exists or not) and literally praise it? No, the point is for people to turn their firstborn child into the literal incarnation of Satan and conquer the World through their awesome power. Just make sure your firstborn gets all the inheritance or they may try to assassinate their siblings. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 521] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 12:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ganelon don't @ me until you respond to my previous post, until you do I don't feel like I can in good faith continue this topic with you. I will say I think you need to become familiar with what to be secular really means. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 522] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 12:58 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It is still denoting A God. Your choice of wording implies you are talking from some religious viewpoint (the only ones left out are of the atheist variety and why should they care?) and honestly this just confirms my view. Non-religious people are the minority in the world, and then in the USA it's drastically even more shifted in favor of theists. It makes sense to me that "In God we trust" has been codified in US law as NOT being a religious statement when the people that it is in reference to are overwhelmingly the majority of the populace. The religious population in the USA in 2016 was 79.1%, opposed to 20.9% non religion/no answers. If a vote was put to the public where religious beliefs or lack of were attached to an individuals vote about whether "In God we trust" is a religious statement or not, I have a feeling I already will know what the results would look like. Man my rep button is all worn out -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 523] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 01:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Care to explain... I don't want to pre-emptively say mental gymnastics but I honestly have no idea how you can come to this conclusion without it. The phrase is all over the place. It doesn’t mean anything. In God we Trust is just a blessing. It’s a patriotic slogan that doesn’t have any religious meaning. I frankly don’t understand why that’s such an issue. It’s not as if the Government is going to enforce religion. I would start worrying when the government tells you you need to be religious to do certain things. Which isn’t the case. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 524] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 01:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Satanists are encouraging moral behavior? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of satanism to promote admittedly pure evil (whether that exists or not) and literally praise it? I will refer you to these posts, buried in the "cancerous" portion of the thread. This is biased conjecture. Morality does not depend on religion. Religion has its own moral code. That moral code does not apply to everyone. So you can say "religion can and did give people morals to live by" but all it's doing is enforcing its own moral code. Why is divorce an immoral act? You know what's immoral? A religious leader telling an abused wife to give her husband another chance and stay in the marriage to avoid a divorce. You know what else is immoral? Someone breaking their marital vows and betraying their spouse's trust by going behind their spouses back to cheat on them for years. Wanna know another one? Staying in a loveless marriage because marriage is "moral". "Marriage" is not a moral act. It is neither moral nor immoral. Same with divorce. Unless you're religious, and your belief is that marriage is ordained of god, and that divorce is a sin. "In god we trust" is in no way a moral statement, and should not be the motto of a country that prides itself in being a diverse melting pot of ideas. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 525] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 01:14 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Uh, i don’t see what it being a moral statement has anything to do with if its not a moral statement at all, it’s not even much of a religious statement -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 526] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 01:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Uh, i don’t see what it being a moral statement has anything to do with if its not a moral statement at all, it’s not even much of a religious statement Read the post I was responding to. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 527] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 01:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also Banana it is VERY unfair of you to take those stances and paint religion as a whole with it. Not everyone who is religious believes that. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 528] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 01:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also Banana it is VERY unfair of you to take those stances and paint religion as a whole with it. Not everyone who is religious believes that. What stances are you referring to here? I responded to secondpassing that was arguing marriage = moral and divorce = immoral, and mallow who was arguing against "In Satan we trust" due to its "immorality" vs "In god we trust". So what am I painting here? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 529] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 01:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The phrase is all over the place. It doesn’t mean anything. In God we Trust is just a blessing. It’s a patriotic slogan that doesn’t have any religious meaning. I frankly don’t understand why that’s such an issue. It’s not as if the Government is going to enforce religion. I would start worrying when the government tells you you need to be religious to do certain things. Which isn’t the case. I want to impart the blessing of Satan, who is the God of this world, with his many powers and priesthoods. I propose a compromise. Since "In Satan we trust" is a patriotic slogan to me, and just a meaningless blessing to others, I propose that the new motto be: "In God we trust, and Satan too". -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 530] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 01:43 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism its not a moral statement at all, it’s not even much of a religious statement You are so close to breaking the veil of whatever dogma you hold onto. Also, "In God we trust" is a moral statement. The very core of religion is to indoctrinate followers with a specific moral compass. To endorse a blanket statement for all citizens about the TRUTH from a religious perspective is an affront to anyone not religious. It is another way of saying "our morality is the truth". It is propelling a class in front of another. Fuck the motto. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 531] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 01:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What stances are you referring to here? I responded to secondpassing that was arguing marriage = moral and divorce = immoral, and mallow who was arguing against "In Satan we trust" due to its "immorality" vs "In god we trust". So what am I painting here? I feel you’re very profoundly anti-religion and your statements show that. It’s not okay to say that ‘Christians want to impose their beliefs’ on everybody else. It’s not as if even a majority of Christians do that. Christianity is long past that now. These people are in the minority. I can see why someone would say divorce is immoral. Theres many wrong things about divorce; first the fact that you arrived at the point where divorce is the only way forward shows that something seriously wrong happened somewhere. Either they married the wrong person or something horrible happened after marriage. It’s also not okay to leave your children behind just because you cannot reconcile with the other person. Of course, divorce should be legal and I’m not claiming otherwise. But I definitely think that religious people have a point when they say divorce is wrong (it is, and there’s absolutely no question about it). You can’t just dismiss it. I dont really see what point you’re trying to make about Satan because Satan is a well defined being. God isn’t. God means different things to different people. If we look at the statement from a religious standpoint, it could mean that the Supreme Being protects America. Or even spirituality. It doesn’t matter which god. Replacing that with Satan is about as secular as replacing it with Christ, Shiva, Thor, Allah or Jehovah. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 532] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 01:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You are so close to breaking the veil of whatever dogma you hold onto. Also, "In God we trust" is a moral statement. The very core of religion is to indoctrinate followers with a specific moral compass. To endorse a blanket statement for all citizens about the TRUTH from a religious perspective is an affront to anyone not religious. It is another way of saying "our morality is the truth". It is propelling a class in front of another. Fuck the motto. Bro ‘God protects America’ doesn’t offend anyone. If I told you God protected this forum why should you feel offended? As far as I’m concerned he protects all people equally regardless of religious belief or lack thereof. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 533] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 01:56 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Divorce is immoral? Are you sure about that? According to the institute you are speaking for divorce is neither moral or immoral, it's the actions or landscape leading up to it that determine what it is. NotLikeThis -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 534] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 01:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I find it ridiculous to suggest that ‘I’m breaking the veil of whatever sigma I’m ascribing to’. I am NOT religious, at the end of the day I couldn’t care less what people believed or didn’t. I think however that it’s ridiculous to mount an all-our assault on religious belief and paint it as irrational and therefore wrong, AND evil. There are legitimate grievances to be heard on both sides, but it’s plain WRONG to paint all religious belief as non-sensical and the people who ascribe to it as children who worship sky daddies. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 535] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 01:58 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lift the veil bruh -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 536] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I feel you’re very profoundly anti-religion and your statements show that. It’s not okay to say that ‘Christians want to impose their beliefs’ on everybody else. It’s not as if even a majority of Christians do that. Christianity is long past that now. These people are in the minority. I can see why someone would say divorce is immoral. Theres many wrong things about divorce; first the fact that you arrived at the point where divorce is the only way forward shows that something seriously wrong happened somewhere. Either they married the wrong person or something horrible happened after marriage. It’s also not okay to leave your children behind just because you cannot reconcile with the other person. Of course, divorce should be legal and I’m not claiming otherwise. But I definitely think that religious people have a point when they say divorce is wrong (it is, and there’s absolutely no question about it). You can’t just dismiss it. I dont really see what point you’re trying to make about Satan because Satan is a well defined being. God isn’t. God means different things to different people. If we look at the statement from a religious standpoint, it could mean that the Supreme Being protects America. Or even spirituality. It doesn’t matter which god. Replacing that with Satan is about as secular as replacing it with Christ, Shiva, Thor, Allah or Jehovah. Yes I am very much anti religion. I grew up in a country full of people who have tried to force their religious beliefs onto everyone else. For example, gay marriage was not legal in every state in the USA until just 5 years ago. 5. Fucking. Years ago. Because "religious beliefs say gay marriage is bad". There was literally no other explanation for restricting american's freedom to marry. Other than religious beliefs. It's even worse growing up in Utah. Mormons account for almost 90% of my state's legislature (https://apnews.com/286983987f484cb182fba9334c52a617). And believe me, they consistently try to impose the will of the LDS church here in the state as much as they can. The LDS church literally pays lobbyists to push their religious agendas through my state (https://www.salon.com/2018/12/14/utah-gop-guts-voter-approved-medical-marijuana-initiative-after-lobbying-from-mormon-church/). Voters will vote one way, but the church doesn't like it? They impose their will. They enforce their moral code. You know that I used to be on the other side of the coin? I used to use mental gymnastics to defend my cult, and in a broader sense to also defend christianity when it came to the public sphere. But since my departure from mormonism in 2015 I was able to let go of trying to justify every stupid little viewpoint that religious folk try to shove down everyone else's throats. So yeah, I have a bitter relationship with religion. There's a saying among mormons for us "anti" folk - "You can leave the church but you can't leave the church alone". Well, all I want is for the church (and all religion) to leave me in peace, and let me be free of it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 537] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Bro ‘God protects America’ doesn’t offend anyone. If I told you God protected this forum why should you feel offended? As far as I’m concerned he protects all people equally regardless of religious belief or lack thereof. God doesn't exist. I don't trust in something that doesn't exist. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 538] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No, divorce isn’t immoral but it’s definirely WRONG. You only have one life. How much time are you gonna waste with divorces? That’s why you look HARD for the right person to make sure that divorce isn’t necessary, and work with them through the relationship to make sure that differences are resolved peacefully and productively. You can’t possibly have me look at someone who divorced and go, GEE WELL DONE, you did something with your life. Of course abuses happen and people have all the right to get a divorce then, but that doesn’t change the fact that they wasted years of their lives with the wrong person. Nobody can give that time back to them; how do you make up for that time? What if you have kids? How are kids going to grow up with only one parent? There’s literally a million issues with divorce. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 539] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism God doesn't exist. I don't trust in something that doesn't exist. If he doesn’t exist, why even care then? lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 540] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ngl you guys are turning me slowly into a religious fundamentalist -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 541] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Which is hilarious considering I don’t really believe in any religion. I don’t believe in the divinity of Jesus, I don’t believe in the Christian God, I think the god that makes the most sense is theGos of Judaism and even him I don’t believe in. Yet here I am defending religious principles. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 542] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:05 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism God doesn't exist. I don't trust in something that doesn't exist. Also, I thought you rejected belief in God, not BELIEVED he didn’t exist :P -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 543] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If he doesn’t exist, why even care then? lol Read my last post "In god we trust" as a motto and repeated everywhere reinforces the idea that this is a "christian nation". I hear that argument ALL THE TIME. "Gay marriage should be illegal, because this is a christian nation, founded by christian forefathers that trusted in god, and god says its bad". People say "I'll pray for you" to me all the time. You know what? I have no issue with that. In fact, I respond with "thank you". Same if they tell me "god bless you" (my Colombian relatives in particular do this a lot). I have no problem with that. But a motto is supposed to represent a nation as a whole. Yet this one doesn't represent me. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 544] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 02:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No, divorce isn’t immoral but it’s definirely WRONG. You only have one life. How much time are you gonna waste with divorces? That’s why you look HARD for the right person to make sure that divorce isn’t necessary, and work with them through the relationship to make sure that differences are resolved peacefully and productively. You can’t possibly have me look at someone who divorced and go, GEE WELL DONE, you did something with your life. Of course abuses happen and people have all the right to get a divorce then, but that doesn’t change the fact that they wasted years of their lives with the wrong person. Nobody can give that time back to them; how do you make up for that time? What if you have kids? How are kids going to grow up with only one parent? There’s literally a million issues with divorce. This is absolutely disgusting lol. I'm moving out of this discussion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 545] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You realize Mormonism is very different from other strands of Christianity right? It’s sometimes not even seen as being Christian due to some very significant theological and cultural differences. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 546] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is absolutely disgusting lol. I'm moving out of this discussion. Would you say we should all get divorces then? I know what you’ll say, that I demonized the victim. I’m not. I think it’s deplorable these things happen. That doesn’t make divorce GOOD. It makes it the lesser of two evils. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 547] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You realize Mormonism is very different from other strands of Christianity right? It’s sometimes not even seen as being Christian due to some very significant theological and cultural differences. You're avoiding the meat of my argument. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 548] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Read my last post "In god we trust" as a motto and repeated everywhere reinforces the idea that this is a "christian nation". I hear that argument ALL THE TIME. "Gay marriage should be illegal, because this is a christian nation, founded by christian forefathers that trusted in god, and god says its bad". People say "I'll pray for you" to me all the time. You know what? I have no issue with that. In fact, I respond with "thank you". Same if they tell me "god bless you" (my Colombian relatives in particular do this a lot). I have no problem with that. But a motto is supposed to represent a nation as a whole. Yet this one doesn't represent me. Religion does have it flaws. I think there is nothing wrong with gay marriage or with being gay. I didn’t argue it doesn’t have it flaws. It, like most things, does have its flaws. One cannot deny that it is fundamentally, misguided as though it may be at times, a force for good. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 549] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This is absolutely disgusting lol. I'm moving out of this discussion. Right, as much as he claims to not be religious, his viewpoints are definitely heavily influenced by it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 550] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Religion does have it flaws. I think there is nothing wrong with gay marriage or with being gay. I didn’t argue it doesn’t have it flaws. It, like most things, does have its flaws. One cannot deny that it is fundamentally, misguided as though it may be at times, a force for good. Stop ignoring my points by addressing something else. The motto is horrible because people use it to justify forcing their beliefs on others. Good and bad. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 551] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Well, I think that is the right attitude to have. I don’t believe and I don’t pray... I haven’t been to church in over a decade. If someone tried to pray for me , depending on how they phrased and the context I would probably feel a bit cringe but also somewhat touched that they did that. It depends. Far too many people use God as an excuse for failure/to appear empathetic. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 552] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:13 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Right, as much as he claims to not be religious, his viewpoints are definitely heavily influenced by it. They are, yes. I probably should’ve been clear about that. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 553] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Engaging with you literally like chasing a chicken man. I say "the motto is bad because the religious use it to justify restricting freedoms of people different from them", you respond with "yeah religion is flawed" and ignore the point. I say "look what is being done in my state by the very religious, using those exact justifications", you respond with "mormonism isn't even christianity", even though you claim you aren't defending christianity, or any one religion, and aren't very religious even. lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 554] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Stop ignoring my points by addressing something else. The motto is horrible because people use it to justify forcing their beliefs on others. Good and bad. I think you’re using a skewed dataset though. I have friends who believe in a higher power like I do and are also not religious, and they definitely wouldn’t support outlawing gay marriage. It could be that these people are interpreting the slogan as support for the idea that the US is a Christian nation. I think they’re wrong. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 555] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Engaging with you literally like chasing a chicken man. I say "the motto is bad because the religious use it to justify restricting freedoms of people different from them", you respond with "yeah religion is flawed" and ignore the point. I say "look what is being done in my state by the very religious, using those exact justifications", you respond with "mormonism isn't even christianity", even though you claim you aren't defending christianity, or any one religion, and aren't very religious even. lol I am mostly defending Christianity because I think the Christian moral value system is good. Were it any other religion, apart from a few that I don’t agree with it, I would also be defending them. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 556] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Part of the reason I’m defending Christianity is because that’s the one that is being attacked. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 557] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyway, I went out with a guy here in the Netherlands who believed that Theocracy was the best form of government. I felt somewhat strange talking to him but he was very respectful. I find it bizarre that such people still exist, but hey. They do apparently. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 558] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyway I grew up in a country that purported to be secular but uh... my dad baptized me because it’s very difficult where I’m from to do anything if you’re not baptized. You can’t even get buried. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 559] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not resentful or anything over that, but I’m just saying. I grew up in a very religious country and even there, nobody really gave a shit what your religion was. We even have a Protestant President now. Nobody actually gives a shit. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 560] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think you’re using a skewed dataset though. I have friends who believe in a higher power like I do and are also not religious, and they definitely wouldn’t support outlawing gay marriage. It could be that these people are interpreting the slogan as support for the idea that the US is a Christian nation. I think they’re wrong. Yes, my state is one of the most religious in the country. No, that does not mean that this hasn't been a problem, especially a very recent problem. In June of 2013, just 7 years ago, only 12/50 states allowed gay marriage (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-gaymarriage-states/factbox-list-of-states-that-legalized-gay-marriage-idUSBRE95P07A20130626). This is after years, and years, and years of work and fighting for the right to marry. And the religious don't want to let it go. They want the Supreme Court to overturn its decision from 5 years ago, and even now, just this month LGBTQ individuals are still fighting for their rights (https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/15/politics/supreme-court-expanding-gay-rights/index.html). Religious oppression (as in oppressing the nonreligious / people that believe differently) is still a very real problem here. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 561] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 02:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Would you say we should all get divorces then? I know what you’ll say, that I demonized the victim. I’m not. I think it’s deplorable these things happen. That doesn’t make divorce GOOD. It makes it the lesser of two evils. Divorce is neither moral or immoral.... it's the actions or landscape that determine the morality of it. You are falling back on "so you're saying" points that your idol Peterson was the subject of, not very cash money. Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. My honest opinion is I think you need to reflect more. A lot of what you say is very disconnecting. This is in part of my opinion that you argue in bad faith. Last post in this thread, exhausted my will to continue. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 562] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not resentful or anything over that, but I’m just saying. I grew up in a very religious country and even there, nobody really gave a shit what your religion was. We even have a Protestant President now. Nobody actually gives a shit. It's a different culture then. You wanted to know why I was so "anti religious", I explained why. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 563] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism At least you can maybe see now why someone like me might take issue with their country's motto being "In god we trust"? It's not just this harmless thing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 564] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Divorce is neither moral or immoral.... it's the actions or landscape that determine the morality of it. You are falling back on "so you're saying" points that your idol Peterson was the subject of, not very cash money. My honest opinion is I think you need to reflect more. A lot of what you say is very disconnecting. This is in part of my opinion that you argue in bad faith. Last post in this thread, exhausted my will to continue. My point was more a snide remark. I didn’t actually think you’d say that. But... I cannot see how a divorce is good lol. It never is. It can be better than the alternative, but that’s not good. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 565] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism At least you can maybe see now why someone like me might take issue with their country's motto being "In god we trust"? It's not just this harmless thing. Yeah I think it’s pretty deplorable that thing is happening. Now that you mention it, religious nutters in Romania (where I’m from) also used religion to justify banning gay marriage. So you do have a point there. For the record I actually completely detest organized religion in Romania (it sucks; that’s not even the sole reason why it sucks). Many people say they believe to fit in and then they act completely contrary to their beliefs. It’s disgusting. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 566] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My point was more a snide remark. I didn’t actually think you’d say that. But... I cannot see how a divorce is good lol. It never is. It can be better than the alternative, but that’s not good. You can't just put all "marriage" into a good bucket, and all of "divorce" into a bad bucket. What about religious individuals that abuse their position of authority and power to coerce underage girls to marry them? Is that type of marriage "moral", and the girl later wanting to escape "immoral"? Marriage isn't even for everyone. It shouldn't be for everyone. Some people want to marry. Others don't. The ones that choose to marry aren't in any way more moral than those that choose to never marry. Como se te occure. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 567] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You could make the argument of "if you want to start a family, you should marry" - but we're already into the "ifs" at that point. It's all circumstance. Not the act itself. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 568] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You can't just put all "marriage" into a good bucket, and all of "divorce" into a bad bucket. What about religious individuals that abuse their position of authority and power to coerce underage girls to marry them? Is that type of marriage "moral", and the girl later wanting to escape "immoral"? Marriage isn't even for everyone. It shouldn't be for everyone. Some people want to marry. Others don't. The ones that choose to marry aren't in any way more moral than those that choose to never marry. Como se te occure. No, that isn’t okay, and divorce is then justified. That’s orobably one of the few cases where it isn’t wrong in some manner. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 569] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 29th, 2020 02:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We are totally going to have to just agree to disagree here. Im not sure there is any chance of us finding common ground when you admit in your own statement that of course the Union would not allow the confederacy to go peacefully while simultaneously blaming the confederacy as the aggressor. Wanting to leave and wanting war are two ideas I will never consider synonymous. I believe they want to call themselves CHOP now? And why on earth would I make such an absurd argument? I do love that place. Its the total face of hypocrisy. They say they want independence but then turn around and demand donations of food, berthing, clothing, and medical supplies. They say police are too violent and AR-15s are unnecessary but then they create their own cops geared out with AR-15s and physically assault people who wear anything that resembles a police support patch. I think my favorite moment was when someone was dying and they refused to allow police and emergency services into the area but then blamed the government for that persons death when they didnt get treatment fast enough. I like what they are doing because it demonstrates how bullshit their beliefs are in actual practice. Kinda reminds me of all the Anti-Gun nuts that hit me up for a gun as soon as they were afraid that the government may fall at the start of this COVID thing. Before people could only argue hypotheticals but now we get to grab the popcorn and watch their hypocrisy unfold in real time. Its very entertaining : ) To your insinuation of the US government allowing anything to separate now its an invalid argument in my opinion for a number of reasons. The biggest is that at the time of the civil war there was nothing prohibiting states from leaving. That had simply not been addressed in any form. Now there is agreements and law prohibiting any state from leaving. Texas joined as sovereign nation and does not have the legal right to leave. These issues did not exist back then. The second issue is that now we have national debt and every American citizen owes 67,000 dollars twards that debt. So say..Wyoming (which has the smallest population in the US) wanted to leave they would need to fork over 38.7 billion dollars just to cover that National Debt. Thats not even touching on state / municipality debt, or the federal subsidization that keeps state funded public services and infrastructure working, or even the federal land holdings within the state. TLDR- Trying to compare areas separating from the US today is totally different than it was back then and makes no sense. Which laws and agreements prohibit secession? Unilateral secession is illegal, but secession through revolution or consent isn't. I suppose if you consider CHAZ a revolution, that makes it legal, no? Also glad to hear that the criteria for something being aggressive or not is whether it's legal. I'm curious to hear what you think should have actually happened during the Civil War, because the cognitive dissonance is dizzying. You say that slavery was bad and the Union was bad because they didn't end slavery 5 milliseconds after Lincoln was elected, yet them trying to stop the Confederacy from leaving to form a racist slave nation was aggressive and bad as well? I guess it is quite typical that "centrists" would argue that everyone should compromise and we should only enslave half the black people. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 570] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 02:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Personally I don’t think they’re either moral or immoral, they’re good or wrong. I think marriage compels people to adopt more responsibility which is a good thing (generally speaking), although as with most things there are exceptions, I don’t think people are immoral by not getting married though. My point is that religious people do have point when they argue that divorce is wrong. I can’t see it as right (again, generally speaking). This isn’t to say that we should shame people who get divorced though, just that people should have a very long think before they do it and figure out how it came to that and what they might do in the future to avoid something similar occurring. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 571] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No, that isn’t okay, and divorce is then justified. That’s orobably one of the few cases where it isn’t wrong in some manner. Yet you just said: My point was more a snide remark. I didn’t actually think you’d say that. But... I cannot see how a divorce is good lol. It never is. It can be better than the alternative, but that’s not good. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ this is the whole point we're trying to make. The act of marriage is not moral. The act of divorce is not immoral. It's all circumstance. Divorce is neither moral or immoral.... it's the actions or landscape that determine the morality of it. You are falling back on "so you're saying" points that your idol Peterson was the subject of, not very cash money. My honest opinion is I think you need to reflect more. A lot of what you say is very disconnecting. This is in part of my opinion that you argue in bad faith. Last post in this thread, exhausted my will to continue. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 572] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 29th, 2020 02:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Divorce is neither moral or immoral.... it's the actions or landscape that determine the morality of it. You are falling back on "so you're saying" points that your idol Peterson was the subject of, not very cash money. My honest opinion is I think you need to reflect more. A lot of what you say is very disconnecting. This is in part of my opinion that you argue in bad faith. Last post in this thread, exhausted my will to continue. No man please we need rational voices here. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 573] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:43 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Personally I don’t think they’re either moral or immoral Then we are in agreement and at this point are arguing for the sake of arguing lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 574] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 02:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism See we can find some common ground lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 575] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 03:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sorry I feel I should present the entire situation as it is. Divorce, generally speaking, is wrong. It’s indicative of something going horribly wrong at some point in time. Maybe you married the wrong person. Maybe you just couldn’t settle your differences properly. Maybe... there’s a lot of maybes. It’s the correct pathway when you’re in an abusive relationship, or when you literally cannot continue to coexist peacefully. Its justified (but wrong) if the person you married doesn’t cut it (even if they’re not abusive). You have a duty to yourself to live the life you want to live. That doesn’t make divorce good - you still need to consider the consequences it will have on the other person and your children. But it can be justified in that scenario. There’s a very fine line between ‘my current partner isn’t very exciting and I don’t want to spend the rest of my life with them’ and ‘marriage is just about the thrill and divorce is juce’. There’s some situations where uts... not really right but not wholly the wrong thing to do, either. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 576] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 03:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Marriage can be the right thing to do. It depends on a lot of things. Not everyone should be a parent, and people who don’t want to raise children SHOULDN’T marry someone. Or they can marry, they just shouldn’t have kids. Marrying someone because you were forced to do so (rape) is wrong. There’s nothing good about it. But the thing is, marriage forces people to become more responsible (generally speaking). It is definitely the right thing to do for mature adults who want children. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 577] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 03:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism In keeping with what I’m saying, I think there’s a lot of things that are wrong but that are sometimes justified. For example, if someone holds a gun to your children’s head, killing them is wrong but you’re justified in doing that. I don’t think something being wrong means you (necessarily) shouldn’t do it. It means yiu should consider your actions very carefully before you do something that’s wrong. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 578] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 03:32 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Okay the comparison either murder is a bit dramatic. Let’s say instead that lying is wrong but it’s justified sometimes. Doesn’t make any less wrong though. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 579] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 29th, 2020 03:59 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The whole point of marriage is that a serious effort is made to maintain the relationship following the marriage. Various laws / benefits can only be feasibly applied to married couples on this basis. If the institution of marriage becomes sufficiently redundant, many of these laws would become redundant too. People who get married and divorce a week later are undermining the institution of marriage and are showing a lack of respect. Of course, the person you marry may spontaneously reveal themselves as a psychopathic abuser after 3 days and then you're fully justified in leaving them =P. However, you're kind of dodging the discussion by insisting that "the actions or landscape determine the morality of it" - that applies to literally every decision anyone ever makes. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 580] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 29th, 2020 04:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism To be clear, it's not like I look down my nose at individuals who get divorces. It's their life to live and it's not my place to judge them. Even if I wanted to, I couldn't possibly fully know their circumstances. But acting like marriage and divorce are moral choices that can be made in a solely individualistic context strikes me as a little off. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 581] Auteur : secondpassing Date : June 29th, 2020 04:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The unintended consequence of typing out that religion made people view divorce as immoral... I wasn't even arguing whether or not people should get divorced or not, just that religious organizations' influence on the black community kept more families together. I feel a little bad that Ganelon is just getting hit. That being said, I think "In God we Trust" does indeed bring to mind a sort of identifying, "Hey my higher power backs me" which is religious. I'm pretty sure a lot of other countries have similar wording on their coins, so when those coffers are put to use in the war machine, which one is God backing? Pretty obvious to me that someone doesn't have a god, and likely both. Religiousness has done much wrong in the world. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 582] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 04:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Kind of dodging the discussion? What discussion? That people can be moral or immoral with marriage and divorce? No shit, there is no discussion to be had there. People can do fucked up shit we all get that. Ganelon said divorce is immoral. Not only is that an explosive hill to stand on, it's factually wrong even considering the institutes stance on it that he was advocating for. I'm not here to argue how people can be moral or immoral with marriage, I was here to point out saying divorce is immoral is retarded. Yzb25, is divorce immoral? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 583] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 29th, 2020 04:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Kind of dodging the discussion? What discussion? That people can be moral or immoral with marriage and divorce? No shit, there is no discussion to be had there. People can do fucked up shit we all get that. Ganelon said divorce is immoral. Not only is that an explosive hill to stand on, it's factually wrong even considering the institutes stance on it that he was advocating for. I'm not here to argue how people can be moral or immoral with marriage, I was here to point out saying divorce is immoral is retarded. Yzb25, is divorce immoral? No, but it's like not recycling. When it happens a lot it makes the world worse. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 584] Auteur : yzb25 Date : June 29th, 2020 04:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism "dodging the discussion" is the wrong phrasing. I didn't mean to imply you were being dishonest or something. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 585] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 04:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Satanists are encouraging moral behavior? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the whole point of satanism to promote admittedly pure evil (whether that exists or not) and literally praise it? The only two I have studied was the Church of Satan and the Satanic Temple. The Church of Satan basically argued Nihilism with some code of behavior. A lot of Anton Lavey's teachings were centered around enlightenment and it was more of an Anti-religion whos position was against other religions suppressing what man was meant to be. They basically do not believe in God or Satan or anything of the sort. The Satanic Temple is looked pretty similar to me but honestly looked more like a political movement than a church. Their mission is stated as "to encourage benevolence and empathy among all people" and they have a code of morals I think just about everyone would agree with in line with that. I- One should strive to act with compassion and empathy toward all creatures in accordance with reason. II- The struggle for justice is an ongoing and necessary pursuit that should prevail over laws and institutions. III- One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone. IV- The freedoms of others should be respected, including the freedom to offend. To willfully and unjustly encroach upon the freedoms of another is to forgo one's own. V- Beliefs should conform to one's best scientific understanding of the world. One should take care never to distort scientific facts to fit one's beliefs. VI- People are fallible. If one makes a mistake, one should do one's best to rectify it and resolve any harm that might have been caused. VII- They similarly do not believe in God or Satan and their largest pushes are to increase the separation of church and state. I think a real cornerstone of their belief is Autonomy in every way; that your body is yours and you should be able to do whatever you want with it to extremes (but also to include things like Abortion.) I got the feeling that this 'religion' is only a religion for tax purposes and is specifically designed to tear down christian influence on government policy. The stuff is kinda fascinating if you ever choose to take the time to dig into it. The closest thing to what people typically consider satanic behavior I have read into was either the "Left Hand Path" but that is not so much of a group as an entire field of practice with truckloads of groups under it.. -edit Or maybe read into the "books of terror and longing." Theres some stuff in there thats pretty out there -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 586] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 04:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Kind of dodging the discussion? What discussion? That people can be moral or immoral with marriage and divorce? No shit, there is no discussion to be had there. People can do fucked up shit we all get that. Ganelon said divorce is immoral. Not only is that an explosive hill to stand on, it's factually wrong even considering the institutes stance on it that he was advocating for. I'm not here to argue how people can be moral or immoral with marriage, I was here to point out saying divorce is immoral is retarded. Yzb25, is divorce immoral? I said divorce is wrong, not immoral. Huge difference. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 587] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 29th, 2020 04:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We talking about marriage now? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 588] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 04:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Divorce is generally wrong, and there’s no escaping that. I didn’t say victims should be blamed for their own misfortune, I said people should think HARD before going for a divorce, and consider why divorce became necessary. Sure you can place blame on the other person all you want for their evil all you want, but the fact of the matter is, you married them. Why? Simply regarding yourself as a victim won’t help you. You need to figure out what (if any) beliefs, principles, flaws you may have precipitated either the breakup or you marrying someone abusive/who isn’t the right fit for you. People should grow a backbone and figure out where they went wrong. Sure the other person is evil but that doesn’t change the fact that they managed to deceive you. Figure out why that is, try to salvage your life and make sure that it doesn’t affect you AS MUCH as you can, and fix whatever it was that led to the initial situation. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 589] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 04:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Of course divorce isn’t immoral. But it’s also almost always wrong. And you really can’t argue otherwise. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 590] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 04:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It is still denoting A God. Your choice of wording implies you are talking from some religious viewpoint (the only ones left out are of the atheist variety and why should they care?) and honestly this just confirms my view. Non-religious people are the minority in the world, and then in the USA it's drastically even more shifted in favor of theists. It makes sense to me that "In God we trust" has been codified in US law as NOT being a religious statement when the people that it is in reference to are overwhelmingly the majority of the populace. The religious population in the USA in 2016 was 79.1%, opposed to 20.9% non religion/no answers. If a vote was put to the public where religious beliefs or lack of were attached to an individuals vote about whether "In God we trust" is a religious statement or not, I have a feeling I already will know what the results would look like. Alcoholics Anonymous has practicing atheists who use the word "God" as their 'higher power' that keeps them sober. It can be simple things like their Kids or their Life/Sanity. From what you are saying it sounds like you are just getting hung up on semantics because you want to push the Atheist faith. How is that any different than pushing a religion? In that regard spirituality goes out the window and its just about 'us vs them' on both sides. My point was that I never understood that drive to say "I do not believe in any God and I want to push this belief on those who do." I get that religions are all too often really disgusting things but they provide some basic functions I believe every human should practice. The simple process of challenging your belief structure and reconciling your behavior to your belief structure is just a healthy human practice. If someone does it and ties it into what you see as an imaginary sky man why do you feel the drive to push against that? One of the angles I push is that religion is a healthy and beautiful thing but the power structures that manipulate it are really evil. For example I believe the Vatican is easily the most evil organizations that has ever existed in documented history but I think Catholicism brings many people morality, peace, and comfort. I would rather you just ask me about my beliefs than take one word I say and assume my belief structure and therefor agenda in the future. "In god we trust" is in no way a moral statement, and should not be the motto of a country that prides itself in being a diverse melting pot of ideas.What do you think the nations motto should be then? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 591] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 04:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The other person who was abusive should undoubtedly be punished. It’s just that, marriage is incredibly complicated. People who have been through a divorce need to examine the circumstances that led to it and figure out their own beliefs with respect to the other person, love, the importance of marriage, in personal tterms. Maybe they shouldn’t have been married at all. Maybe they just drifted apart because the two parties were unable to settle their differences. Maybe the other person took advantage of their love and goodwill for monetary/emotional benefits or simply out of pure evil. But it’s an extremely important and traumatic scenario and people really need to start asking themselves some very important questions prior to, during and after a divorce. You should definitely divorce someone who is being abusive, but you should ask yourself, why did you even marry them in first place? What compelled you to marry someone who was flawed in that particular manner? Did you simply not see it coming? If so you should probably be a lot more careful around people, because bad people do exist and you should be very wary of allowing someone into such a long term relationship with you if they’re not a good person. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 592] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 04:54 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It's even worse growing up in Utah. Mormons account for almost 90% of my state's legislature (https://apnews.com/286983987f484cb182fba9334c52a617). And believe me, they consistently try to impose the will of the LDS church here in the state as much as they can. The LDS church literally pays lobbyists to push their religious agendas through my state (https://www.salon.com/2018/12/14/utah-gop-guts-voter-approved-medical-marijuana-initiative-after-lobbying-from-mormon-church/). Voters will vote one way, but the church doesn't like it? They impose their will. They enforce their moral code.I can see where your coming from. The LDS Church does some pretty sick stuff. Thats probably one of the only religions I have ever seen shamelessly embrace pedophilia and its always bothered me that stuff goes on with impunity in America. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 593] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 04:54 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Alcoholics Anonymous has practicing atheists who use the word "God" as their 'higher power' that keeps them sober. It can be simple things like their Kids or their Life/Sanity. From what you are saying it sounds like you are just getting hung up on semantics because you want to push the Atheist faith. How is that any different than pushing a religion? In that regard spirituality goes out the window and its just about 'us vs them' on both sides. My point was that I never understood that drive to say "I do not believe in any God and I want to push this belief on those who do." I get that religions are all too often really disgusting things but they provide some basic functions I believe every human should practice. The simple process of challenging your belief structure and reconciling your behavior to your belief structure is just a healthy human practice. If someone does it and ties it into what you see as an imaginary sky man why do you feel the drive to push against that? One of the angles I push is that religion is a healthy and beautiful thing but the power structures that manipulate it are really evil. For example I believe the Vatican is easily the most evil organizations that has ever existed in documented history but I think Catholicism brings many people morality, peace, and comfort. I would rather you just ask me about my beliefs than take one word I say and assume my belief structure and therefor agenda in the future. What do you think the nations motto should be then? Couldnt have said it better myself, although do you think the Vatican is still evil nowadays? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 594] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 04:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah and Mormonism is also for polygamy. I never understood why that religion exists. I really don’t like it either, and I’m glad I’m not the only one. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 595] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 04:56 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Speaking of pedophilia, you guys don’t know this but we had a pedophilia party here in the Netherlands. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 596] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 29th, 2020 05:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah and Mormonism is also for polygamy. I never understood why that religion exists. I really don’t like it either, and I’m glad I’m not the only one. What's wrong with polygamy? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 597] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 05:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What's wrong with polygamy? It’s pretty misogynistic in my view. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 598] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 29th, 2020 05:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It’s pretty misogynistic in my view. It's pretty misogynistic to think that polygamy is strictly one man and multiple women -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 599] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 05:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Which laws and agreements prohibit secession? Unilateral secession is illegal, but secession through revolution or consent isn't. I suppose if you consider CHAZ a revolution, that makes it legal, no? My understanding is that it was part of the treaty signed after the civil war to bind the states back into America and it was also written into every state that was formed by virtue of the states being formed on land that was essentially owned by America. The difference between that and war at the time of sucession was that the sates entered into the nation bringing their land and they therefor had no obligation in any way to America. Also glad to hear that the criteria for something being aggressive or not is whether it's legal.No clue where you got that from so.. Shrug? I'm curious to hear what you think should have actually happened during the Civil War, because the cognitive dissonance is dizzying. You say that slavery was bad and the Union was bad because they didn't end slavery 5 milliseconds after Lincoln was elected, yet them trying to stop the Confederacy from leaving to form a racist slave nation was aggressive and bad as well? I guess it is quite typical that "centrists" would argue that everyone should compromise and we should only enslave half the black people.There were wrongs on all sides but I think the best thing would have been if the Union actually had the intentions they pretend to have had today. As I have said many times I believe that the morality of an action is defined by the intention behind the action. So yes declaring war on the south is unjustified but I would view it as totally acceptable if the objective actually was to enforce human rights. The problem was that it wasn't. It was just a play for greed that costed hundreds of thousands of lives. Think of it this way- Its wrong to kill someone because you want their wallet but its justified to kill someone to prevent them from doing an extreme evil. The difference is the intention and thats why I get all pissy about people acting like the Union was good and the Confederacy was evil. They were both committing some very evil actions for greed and power. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 600] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 05:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I mean. Most people who marry women are men. So it’s nit really misogynistic -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 601] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 05:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Its weird that you’d be for polygamous marriages, even from a utilitarian perspective it’s PLAIN wrong, it leads to social unrest because some men don’t get any women. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 602] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 29th, 2020 05:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Its weird that you’d be for polygamous marriages, even from a utilitarian perspective it’s PLAIN wrong, it leads to social unrest because some men don’t get any women. "leads to social unrest" LMAO that's some neckbeard tier shit right there. anyways, I'm for people doing whatever they like with other consenting people of age, life is meant to be enjoyed, forcing arbitrary rules and labels upon oneself is restrictive more often than it is helpful or enjoyable. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 603] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 05:20 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Divorce is generally wrong, and there’s no escaping that. Is it worse for two people to separate who are unhappy so they can find happiness; or for them to suffer and have a less fulfilling life on principal? And what if its worse for the child who has to live in a hostile environment vs them separating and having 2 peaceful environments? How about if you get roofied in Vegas and wake up married? Should you spend the rest of your life with that person on principal although you were drugged and basically never consented to be married? Regardless why do you believe divorce is wrong at all? Like.. Where does your perceived 'wrongness' come from if two people both want their relationship to end? What makes it wrong at all to you? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 604] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 29th, 2020 05:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Marriage is wrong. Yet have to do it because of a fucked up system that still has places tied down due to past religious reasons. If there was 0 benefits for getting married in taxes and legal paperwork we would never of done it -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 605] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 05:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Do y’all react just to it being banned/or not by religion cuz if that’s the reason then I get it but I can’t really argue with that stance. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 606] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 29th, 2020 05:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Do y’all react just to it being banned/or not by religion cuz if that’s the reason then I get it but I can’t really argue with that stance. I provided my own reasoning arsehole -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 607] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 05:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Couldnt have said it better myself, although do you think the Vatican is still evil nowadays? Kinda. I believe actions speak louder than words and the Vatican has an extremely long history of manipulating religion for power and wealth. They are currently the wealthiest organization in the world by a massive margin. I think it would be more fair to look at them as a for-profit company. Drop any religious pretense and they function like many governments- doing what they feel they can get away with for profit and spinning history to put a good face on their actions. Its not that they are dedicated to doing evil, they just do it as a product of their greed to hold onto power. I have often wondered if there are branches of the Catholic church who reject the control of the Vatican and do their own thing -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 608] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 05:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What's wrong with polygamy? It’s pretty misogynistic in my view. It's pretty misogynistic to think that polygamy is strictly one man and multiple women This is a fair point. I have 3 good friends that are in a 3 way relationship. All of them are girls and they make it work just fine. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 609] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 05:33 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Is it worse for two people to separate who are unhappy so they can find happiness; or for them to suffer and have a less fulfilling life on principal? And what if its worse for the child who has to live in a hostile environment vs them separating and having 2 peaceful environments? How about if you get roofied in Vegas and wake up married? Should you spend the rest of your life with that person on principal although you were drugged and basically never consented to be married? Regardless why do you believe divorce is wrong at all? Like.. Where does your perceived 'wrongness' come from if two people both want their relationship to end? What makes it wrong at all to you? I just think it’s very harmful, and I can totally see why people say divorce is wrong. There are definitely some situations where divorce is preferable, but I’m saying, maybe people screwed up somewhere. I think that if it’s possible to salvage your relationship and you are afraid of getting a divorce, you should definitely fight for it and see if it’s possible and desirable for the relationship to continue. Its a complicated issue. It’s not wholly wrong, but it has an ugly tinge to it. You shouldn’t spend the rest of your life with someone you don’t like. My point is, you should try to minimize the number of divorces you have to go through. They’re not pretty. And they can be pretty damaging. They shouldn’t be viewed as a get-out-if-jail-free card if things go south. With regards to your last post: of course if both parties agree that a marriage should end, then divorce ain’t bad, although, again, there’s the situation where maybe divorce wasn’t the right thing to do. Many people experience regret after getting a divorce (over 22%). It’s really not an easy decision to make. More power to you if you decide to leave a relationship that’s not good for you. But there’s a fine line between doing that and just going through many failed marriages. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 610] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 05:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I provided my own reasoning arsehole Lol its just that, I was expecting people to agree with me about it and I’m confused that that is controversial. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 611] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 05:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I just think it’s very harmful, and I can totally see why people say divorce is wrong. There are definitely some situations where divorce is preferable, but I’m saying, maybe people screwed up somewhere. I think that if it’s possible to salvage your relationship and you are afraid of getting a divorce, you should definitely fight for it and see if it’s possible and desirable for the relationship to continue. Its a complicated issue. It’s not wholly wrong, but it has an ugly tinge to it. You shouldn’t spend the rest of your life with someone you don’t like. My point is, you should try to minimize the number of divorces you have to go through. They’re not pretty. And they can be pretty damaging. They shouldn’t be viewed as a get-out-if-jail-free card if things go south. With regards to your last post: of course if both parties agree that a marriage should end, then divorce ain’t bad, although, again, there’s the situation where maybe divorce wasn’t the right thing to do. Many people experience regret after getting a divorce (over 22%). It’s really not an easy decision to make. More power to you if you decide to leave a relationship that’s not good for you. But there’s a fine line between doing that and just going through many failed marriages. The only objective wrong I have seen with Divorce was in the antiquated practice of hereditary transfer of wealth. Back then it was extremely important to know exactly who's kid someone was and Divorces were a huge problem because wealth was transferred through family lines. I just dont think some people are cut out for long term relationships. If you consider that every 7 years pretty much every atom in your body did not exist there 7 years ago and 100% of the biological cells that were alive 7 years ago you are a totally different person. So along those lines isnt it fair to say that the person who entered the marriage no longer exists unless you believe in the soul? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 612] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 05:42 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I can see why someone would say divorce is immoral. Theres many wrong things about divorce; first the fact that you arrived at the point where divorce is the only way forward shows that something seriously wrong happened somewhere. Either they married the wrong person or something horrible happened after marriage. It’s also not okay to leave your children behind just because you cannot reconcile with the other person. Of course, divorce should be legal and I’m not claiming otherwise. But I definitely think that religious people have a point when they say divorce is wrong (it is, and there’s absolutely no question about it). You can’t just dismiss it. You conflated immorality with wrong. When you say something could be immoral you followed it up by saying how it's wrong therefore affirming the immorality of it, then agreed personally that it's wrong. Yes you did say after this divorce is not immoral, but do you see why I'm pretty skeptical of your response? I still stand by that your post where you said it isn't immoral is disgusting and exactly why I question if you truly do think divorce isn't immoral. Alcoholics Anonymous has practicing atheists who use the word "God" as their 'higher power' that keeps them sober. It can be simple things like their Kids or their Life/Sanity. From what you are saying it sounds like you are just getting hung up on semantics because you want to push the Atheist faith. How is that any different than pushing a religion? In that regard spirituality goes out the window and its just about 'us vs them' on both sides. My point was that I never understood that drive to say "I do not believe in any God and I want to push this belief on those who do." I get that religions are all too often really disgusting things but they provide some basic functions I believe every human should practice. The simple process of challenging your belief structure and reconciling your behavior to your belief structure is just a healthy human practice. If someone does it and ties it into what you see as an imaginary sky man why do you feel the drive to push against that? One of the angles I push is that religion is a healthy and beautiful thing but the power structures that manipulate it are really evil. For example I believe the Vatican is easily the most evil organizations that has ever existed in documented history but I think Catholicism brings many people morality, peace, and comfort. I would rather you just ask me about my beliefs than take one word I say and assume my belief structure and therefor agenda in the future. I'm not an atheist. Pretty easy to make the mistake of assuming eh. A religious motto within a secular state. I don't see how anyone can come to the conclusion that this isn't going against what a secular state actually means. Blows my mind. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 613] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 05:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If so that’s my mistake. It’s not immoral; I think religious people are wrong to ascribe that trait to it. But I think they have some legitimate grievances to be heard. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 614] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 05:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also Helz don't mistake my dislike of the motto for an all out attack on religion. I find it very interesting and do find it useful, but also recognize many of its flaws. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 615] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 29th, 2020 06:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My understanding is that it was part of the treaty signed after the civil war to bind the states back into America and it was also written into every state that was formed by virtue of the states being formed on land that was essentially owned by America. The difference between that and war at the time of sucession was that the sates entered into the nation bringing their land and they therefor had no obligation in any way to America.No clue where you got that from so.. Shrug?There were wrongs on all sides but I think the best thing would have been if the Union actually had the intentions they pretend to have had today. As I have said many times I believe that the morality of an action is defined by the intention behind the action. So yes declaring war on the south is unjustified but I would view it as totally acceptable if the objective actually was to enforce human rights. The problem was that it wasn't. It was just a play for greed that costed hundreds of thousands of lives. Think of it this way- Its wrong to kill someone because you want their wallet but its justified to kill someone to prevent them from doing an extreme evil. The difference is the intention and thats why I get all pissy about people acting like the Union was good and the Confederacy was evil. They were both committing some very evil actions for greed and power. I was asking what you think actually should have happened, my man. No dancing around with weird morality arguments, because nothing gets done that way. What, concretely, do you think the Union should have done when the Confederacy seceded? What should they have done differently? EDIT: Forgot to address the first part of your post. From my understanding, only unilateral secession was found to be illegal by the Supreme Court. I'll argue with that in mind. Your two arguments against any other territory (like CHAZ) seceding were the legality issue, as well as the issue of debt. The debt issue applied to the Confederacy because it wasn't like debt was invented after the Civil War, the Confederacy still had debt that they, by your logic, should have repaid to the Union. That leaves legality as your only stated reason for why secession of a territory like CHAZ is different from the Confederacy in terms of the federal government being an aggressor when it comes to recognizing them. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 616] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 07:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeah and Mormonism is also for polygamy. I never understood why that religion exists. I really don’t like it either, and I’m glad I’m not the only one. What's wrong with polygamy? The mormon eternal doctrine of celestial marriage is that a man can be "sealed to" multiple wives (mormon temple weddings, aka "sealings" say you are "sealed" to that person for all eternity), but a woman can only be "sealed to" one man. If she wants to marry another, even after he dies, she can marry him for this life only. Unless she decides to break the sealing with the husband that died. Then she can seal with the 2nd husband. But in the afterlife she can only be with 1 of them, whoever she is sealed to. So yeah, mormon polygamy is strictly 1 man, multiple wives. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 617] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 07:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If so that’s my mistake. It’s not immoral; I think religious people are wrong to ascribe that trait to it. But I think they have some legitimate grievances to be heard. The only reason we are discussing divorce again is because it was in one of my quotes that I was responding to mallow with lol, in which I also argued with secondpassing that divorce is neither a moral nor immoral act. This seems to happen a lot my dude, you'll see something that I say like: Religion has its own moral code. That moral code does not apply to everyone. So you can say "religion can and did give people morals to live by" but all it's doing is enforcing its own moral code. Why is divorce an immoral act? You know what's immoral? A religious leader telling an abused wife to give her husband another chance and stay in the marriage to avoid a divorce. You know what else is immoral? Someone breaking their marital vows and betraying their spouse's trust by going behind their spouses back to cheat on them for years. Wanna know another one? Staying in a loveless marriage because marriage is "moral". "Marriage" is not a moral act. It is neither moral nor immoral. Same with divorce. Unless you're religious, and your belief is that marriage is ordained of god, and that divorce is a sin. And your response is to argue against that. By not arguing that divorce is immoral. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 618] Auteur : deathworlds Date : June 29th, 2020 08:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh I was referring to the application of polygamy within any singular culture or religion. I was simply referring to polygamy as a consensual romantic/sexual relationship involving more than 2 people. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 619] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 08:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh I was referring to the application of polygamy within any singular culture or religion. I was simply referring to polygamy as a consensual romantic/sexual relationship involving more than 2 people. Yeh, I get you. I was just providing additional context to the specific religion in question, which is what Galeon was bringing up. I have no problem with polygamy between consensual adults. I do have a problem with religious leaders using a position of power to coerce multiple women into marrying them though. So it's a tricky subject because polygamy in the past has been abused in that way quite a lot. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 620] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 08:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I was asking what you think actually should have happened, my man. No dancing around with weird morality arguments, because nothing gets done that way. What, concretely, do you think the Union should have done when the Confederacy seceded? What should they have done differently? EDIT: Forgot to address the first part of your post. From my understanding, only unilateral secession was found to be illegal by the Supreme Court. I'll argue with that in mind. Your two arguments against any other territory (like CHAZ) seceding were the legality issue, as well as the issue of debt. The debt issue applied to the Confederacy because it wasn't like debt was invented after the Civil War, the Confederacy still had debt that they, by your logic, should have repaid to the Union. That leaves legality as your only stated reason for why secession of a territory like CHAZ is different from the Confederacy in terms of the federal government being an aggressor when it comes to recognizing them. That is a very valid point. I was under the impression that the national debt was created after the civil war but it appears the nation owed roughly 65 million dollars. Granted that breaks down to roughly 2 dollars and some change per citizen but in today's numbers thats around 6k per person. If slaves are included the confederacy essentially skipped on a tab of 48 billion dollars in today's money. I get what you are asking but the entire issue is the morality. So concrete- Issue the Emancipation Proclamation while declaring war and have a war over human rights instead of greed. I think the civil war should have been prevented by the north but they would have had to make very different actions long before the south seceded. At that point it was just too late. They forced the south into a corner leveraging taxes favorably for the industrial sector. Combine that with some republicans pushing to end slavery and of course the south wanted to leave. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 621] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 08:32 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yeh, I get you. I was just providing additional context to the specific religion in question, which is what Galeon was bringing up. I have no problem with polygamy between consensual adults. I do have a problem with religious leaders using a position of power to coerce multiple women into marrying them though. So it's a tricky subject because polygamy in the past has been abused in that way quite a lot. I think thats a common line of pretty much all cults though. If you think about it its a pretty nice job.. People call you God or at least gods voice on earth or something You get to bang everyone you want because you say thats somehow gods will And the people that join give you all their money Yeah.. Who wants to join my cult? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 622] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 29th, 2020 08:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism That is a very valid point. I was under the impression that the national debt was created after the civil war but it appears the nation owed roughly 65 million dollars. Granted that breaks down to roughly 2 dollars and some change per citizen but in today's numbers thats around 6k per person. If slaves are included the confederacy essentially skipped on a tab of 48 billion dollars in today's money. I get what you are asking but the entire issue is the morality. So concrete- Issue the Emancipation Proclamation while declaring war and have a war over human rights instead of greed. I think the civil war should have been prevented by the north but they would have had to make very different actions long before the south seceded. At that point it was just too late. They forced the south into a corner leveraging taxes favorably for the industrial sector. Combine that with some republicans pushing to end slavery and of course the south wanted to leave. Yet you argued that the Union not recognizing the Confederacy was an aggressive act and that the Union not "letting go" cost hundreds of thousands of lives, right here: I kind of look at it as the south lost 2 wars. The first was the political power struggle. When it became apparent they had lost, that they would be subjected to northern industrial control, and their voice no longer mattered they chose to separate. The north chose to make a war out of it instead of letting go at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives. Had they issued the Emancipation Proclamation right when the war had started, how would that have changed your initial insinuation that the Union should have let the Confederacy go? Would they not be the aggressors regardless, for not letting the Confederacy leave legally and peacefully? Would it have shifted the blame of the hundreds of thousands of deaths back to the Confederacy? I looked more into your claim of economic reasons for the Confederacy leaving (which, as I found, most historians actually discount as being a significant factor), and I was curious about the compromises and failed negotiations that the Union and the soon-to-be Confederacy did. Specifically, the Crittenden Compromise, the Corwin Amendment, and the Peace Conference of 1861, which were the most major conferences and proposed policies for maintaining the Union. In all three of these negotiations and propositions, economic negotiations were at no point discussed. All three dealt specifically with maintaining slavery. Surely, if your idea of the Confederacy breaking off because of the economic impact of slaves is correct, and that the South only kept slaves as an economic necessity, they would have negotiated economics prior to secession, rather than slavery? Could it not be that the direction of causality led instead from the Confederacy considering slavery as a moral right, and the economic benefits being a result, rather than the other way around as you're trying to imply? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 623] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 08:56 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Was waiting for when the appeasement from the north to keep the union together was going to be mentioned lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 624] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 09:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sorry. I’m going through some rough shit right now and I lose the ability to discriminate between attacks and arguments. I (mis)interpreted your posts as an attack on religion itself, something which greatly concerns me not because I am religious but because it is so ubiquitous nowadays and I just can’t help and push against it. I am more on the religious side of things than not so that’s where I stand; I think religion is very interesting and nice so I’m quite sympathetic to it (partly because it is, in my view, a bit too vilified, especially amongst younger people) I think I have contributed a lot to polarization through threads like these and consequently as a gesture of goodwill this will be my last post about religion on this thread. About divorce: divorce isn’t wrong. It’s fine. I do think it’s something that should generally be carefully considered, but it’s not wrong (or immoral). I maintain that the symbol of the US doesn’t concern me at all. Some actions from the religious conservatives in the US do, however; like gay marriage/abortion for instance. But this motto has been around for so long that I don’t think it’s really got any significant religious meaning behind it. I think it can be and is being pushed in some cases by more religious members of the government and I can see why; Mississippi is the most religious state in America. Anyways good luck y’all and if you’d like to continue the discussion we can talk in PMs or on Discord. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 625] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 09:09 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism With regards to the civil war: what I find most distressing on the part of the Union are the tactics union generals employed in subduing the south. You don’t generally wage total war against regions in your country. I believe they should’ve done something else. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 626] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 09:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also what does everyone think about the plan to resettle blacks in Africa I think it was dumb and actually quite racist. Imagine deporting thousands of your citizens to a land they had literally never seen before. Liberia would’ve been nice if it had worked out because then the US would today have a major American ally in Africa, but this wasn’t the case. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 627] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 09:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yet you argued that the Union not recognizing the Confederacy was an aggressive act and that the Union not "letting go" cost hundreds of thousands of lives, right here: I did and I dont think that has changed any. I did screw up the math earlier. Its actually 3,000% increase which is.. 30$ and not 3,000 so 480 million dollars instead of 48 billion. It does not change my opinion that the Union decided to make it a war and that their motivation was greed. Im still glad you brought it up though, I totally overlooked that as a factor. Had they issued the Emancipation Proclamation right when the war had started, how would that have changed your initial insinuation that the Union should have let the Confederacy go? Would they not be the aggressors regardless, for not letting the Confederacy leave legally and peacefully? Would it have shifted the blame of the hundreds of thousands of deaths back to the Confederacy? It would not have changed that they were the aggressors but it would have changed the reason those lives were lost. Saying hundreds of thousands of people died for greed is very different from saying hundreds of thousands of people died for human rights. I looked more into your claim of economic reasons for the Confederacy leaving (which, as I found, most historians actually discount as being a significant factor), and I was curious about the compromises and failed negotiations that the Union and the soon-to-be Confederacy did. Specifically, the Crittenden Compromise, the Corwin Amendment, and the Peace Conference of 1861, which were the most major conferences and proposed policies for maintaining the Union. In all three of these negotiations and propositions, economic negotiations were at no point discussed. All three dealt specifically with maintaining slavery. Surely, if your idea of the Confederacy breaking off because of the economic impact of slaves is correct, and that the South only kept slaves as an economic necessity, they would have negotiated economics prior to secession, rather than slavery? I don't see your initial point. If slaves were necessary for their economy to function discussing slavery is itself an economic negotiation. That would be like telling a farmer today we will take his tractors but buy his corn at a higher price. If there wont be any corn without the tractor why would they discuss the selling price of the corn which won't exist? Could it not be that the direction of causality led instead from the Confederacy considering slavery as a moral right, and the economic benefits being a result, rather than the other way around as you're trying to imply? It does make sense that the Confederacy saw owning slaves as a moral right. In their minds they thought they owned them and they were discussing property. I have a bit of trouble picturing taking that position on a human being but if the government came up and talked to me about taking my work truck I would probably tell them to eat shit on principal. Regardless what your saying has sound reasoning and could totally be possible. It would make more sense given the lack of economic discussion. It would make the souths motivations even less moral / more bigoted but it does not change anything for the norths. At the end of the day there is the massive glaring question of why the north did not free slaves if their war was about ending slavery. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 628] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 09:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism With regards to the civil war: what I find most distressing on the part of the Union are the tactics union generals employed in subduing the south. You don’t generally wage total war against regions in your country. I believe they should’ve done something else. That is a valid point. I remember there was one specific union officer who went on a rampage burning as many homes and farms as he could. Some of the unions objectives seemed to be not just to win the war but decimate the souths ability to recover after the war. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 629] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 09:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ugh more civil war talk -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 630] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 09:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism One other thing that in my view constitutes a very glaring issue is the fact that the north allowed Jim Crow laws to be passed in the south. If all men are created equal, why allow people to disenfranchise a substantial minority of them based on skin colour? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 631] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 09:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It's okay Ganelon, we are strangers on the internet after all. Literally messages going through a SeRiEs Of TuBeS. Discussing stuff like this can be mentally straining because it's a challenge of a very personal part of yourself that isn't often challenged. The Union was by no means morally superior. If you read the actual appeasements they tried to make you will see how cooked everyone in the USA was. Some of it can be argued as time wasting but the Corwin Amendment... lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 632] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 09:30 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I actually do have another question that I think rarely gets brought up. The Northern states had abolished slavery quite a while before the South did. Why? And speaking of which, how many blacks were there in the north to begin with? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 633] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 09:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism That is a valid point. I remember there was one specific union officer who went on a rampage burning as many homes and farms as he could. Some of the unions objectives seemed to be not just to win the war but decimate the souths ability to recover after the war. The doctrine was in effect - take from the land enough supplies to sustain the army but do not assault the citizens or enter their homes, unless partisans (like the french resistance in ww2) present themselves then basically torch the whole place. I don't think the intention was to decimate the Souths economy as hard as they did, rather to try and bring an end to the war asap. Sounds fairly standard as far as war time doctrines go but the actual implementation of it leaves a lot to be desired. The south did not recover for a very long time. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 634] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 09:32 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Ugh more civil war talk I wonder if this is a reflection of the shit that’s going on in the US atm -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 635] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 29th, 2020 09:41 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I don't see your initial point. If slaves were necessary for their economy to function discussing slavery is itself an economic negotiation. That would be like telling a farmer today we will take his tractors but buy his corn at a higher price. If there wont be any corn without the tractor why would they discuss the selling price of the corn which won't exist? If your concerns are economic, would you not bring other propositions to the table than what the south did? It's obvious that a non-slave based economy can function, in fact, the north did it as per your own admission. If the root problem was taxation, economic oppression, and technological advancement, and not actually slavery, wouldn't you think that they would actually negotiate in economic terms? Once again, all the south argued for in every single major negotiation and conference they had was maintaining slavery; nothing else. You'd think if an entire country is struggling financially and they're trying to negotiate with a supposed economic oppressor who is taxing the shit out of them and advancing technologically while they're left in the dirt, they'd discuss changing that rather than discussing constitutional amendments guaranteeing that they can keep their tractors, no? It does make sense that the Confederacy saw owning slaves as a moral right. In their minds they thought they owned them and they were discussing property. I have a bit of trouble picturing taking that position on a human being but if the government came up and talked to me about taking my work truck I would probably tell them to eat shit on principal. You're getting at my point at last, if maybe only by accident! Regardless what your saying has sound reasoning and could totally be possible. It would make more sense given the lack of economic discussion. It would make the souths motivations even less moral / more bigoted but it does not change anything for the norths. At the end of the day there is the massive glaring question of why the north did not free slaves if their war was about ending slavery. If the north's motivations were to oppress the south and not to free slaves, why did they not accept the south's demands to make slavery a constitutional right if it would have maintained the union? By your own admission, the north was already outstripping the south in every economic aspect. You already mentioned that they were advancing at a rapid rate, their population and economy outpacing the south due to industrialization and supposed economic pillaging and taxation. Surely, if all the south was demanding was to maintain slavery, and the north were just greedy fucks that wanted to keep exploiting the south and they truly didn't give a fuck about slaves, they would have taken the south's proposal to amend the constitution to guarantee holding slaves as a right, maintained the union, and continued their exploitation? Why didn't they do that? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 636] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 10:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I read an extremely interesting and long comment on a YT video about the South during the civil war. It was a very convincing comment; however, I think it’s extremely strange that the Jim Crow laws are literally never mentioned in any debate over what the south fought for. While there’s a lot to be said about what the South fought for and a lot of things can essentially be said in favour of them not fighting (just) for slavery, the fact remains that the Jim Crow laws are extremely difficult to explain away. You can’t ignore them. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 637] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 10:38 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Even here, none of you guys brought up the Jim Crow laws as an argument. Why? Why is this crucial piece of evidence often overlooked by both sides? I can understand why pro-Confederacy people would ignore it, but certainly not those against it lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 638] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 10:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I wouldn't say its overlooked, more beside the point. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 639] Auteur : Date : June 29th, 2020 10:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why? Isn’t it a very strong argument in favour of the confederates being essentially fundamentally founded on racist principles? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 640] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 29th, 2020 10:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Even here, none of you guys brought up the Jim Crow laws as an argument. Why? Why is this crucial piece of evidence often overlooked by both sides? I can understand why pro-Confederacy people would ignore it, but certainly not those against it lol I don't understand what the Jim Crow laws have to do with anything. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 641] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 10:48 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I wouldn't say its overlooked, more beside the point. It would be like adding jet fuel to a bonfire. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 642] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 29th, 2020 10:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why? Isn’t it a very strong argument in favour of the confederates being essentially fundamentally founded on racist principles? Oh I see now. I suppose it does, but at the same time I think the Confederacy's actions outside of Jim Crow provide enough evidence. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 643] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : June 29th, 2020 05:48 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No, the point is for people to turn their firstborn child into the literal incarnation of Satan and conquer the World through their awesome power. Just make sure your firstborn gets all the inheritance or they may try to assassinate their siblings. Rofl claim Alexander the Great's legacy too I will refer you to these posts, buried in the "cancerous" portion of the thread. "In god we trust" is in no way a moral statement, and should not be the motto of a country that prides itself in being a diverse melting pot of ideas. Isn't that unrelated to my post, though? Satanists are serving a power they believe to be evil (Satan is evil incarnate by definition), while other religions serve a power they believe to be good. In other words, they don't even try to be moral lol: that is the whole point. Hence why I have a hard time understanding their "code of conduct" Helz quoted, which just seems to be common sense and pro-science without references to religion. I follow that code of conduct, does that make me a satanist xD? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 644] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : June 29th, 2020 05:51 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Its weird that you’d be for polygamous marriages, even from a utilitarian perspective it’s PLAIN wrong, it leads to social unrest because some men don’t get any women. Objection, Your Honor. I don't think the defendant meant "polygamy" under the meaning of "a system under which a man can have multiple wives, but a women cannot have multiple husbands"; the point of Mr. Ganelon is therefore irrelevant. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 645] Auteur : Helz Date : June 29th, 2020 08:16 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The doctrine was in effect - take from the land enough supplies to sustain the army but do not assault the citizens or enter their homes, unless partisans (like the french resistance in ww2) present themselves then basically torch the whole place. I don't think the intention was to decimate the Souths economy as hard as they did, rather to try and bring an end to the war asap. Sounds fairly standard as far as war time doctrines go but the actual implementation of it leaves a lot to be desired. The south did not recover for a very long time. You may be interested in reading into William Tecumseh Sherman. He held the strong position that "the negro was inferior" while also running one hell of a terror campaign burning through the south.. literally.. Like.. The homes of civilians and entire citys kinda burning through the south.. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 646] Auteur : rumox Date : June 29th, 2020 09:07 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism That's literally who I'm talking about -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 647] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 29th, 2020 09:40 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Isn't that unrelated to my post, though? Satanists are serving a power they believe to be evil (Satan is evil incarnate by definition), while other religions serve a power they believe to be good. In other words, they don't even try to be moral lol: that is the whole point. Hence why I have a hard time understanding their "code of conduct" Helz quoted, which just seems to be common sense and pro-science without references to religion. I follow that code of conduct, does that make me a satanist xD? Yes it does make you a satanist, and therefore you should have no problem changing the motto to "In God we trust, and Satan too" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 648] Auteur : Frinckles Date : June 29th, 2020 09:53 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The left hand path. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 649] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 12:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The doctrine was in effect - take from the land enough supplies to sustain the army but do not assault the citizens or enter their homes, unless partisans (like the french resistance in ww2) present themselves then basically torch the whole place. I don't think the intention was to decimate the Souths economy as hard as they did, rather to try and bring an end to the war asap. Sounds fairly standard as far as war time doctrines go but the actual implementation of it leaves a lot to be desired. The south did not recover for a very long time. ... IV. The army will forage liberally on the country during the march. To this end, each brigade commander will organize a good and sufficient foraging party, under the command of one or more discreet officers, who will gather, near the route traveled, corn or forage of any kind, meat of any kind, vegetables, corn-meal, or whatever is needed by the command, aiming at all times to keep in the wagons at least ten day's provisions for the command and three days' forage. Soldiers must not enter the dwellings of the inhabitants, or commit any trespass, but during a halt or a camp they may be permitted to gather turnips, apples, and other vegetables, and to drive in stock of their camp. To regular foraging parties must be instructed the gathering of provisions and forage at any distance from the road traveled. V. To army corps commanders alone is entrusted the power to destroy mills, houses, cotton-gins, &c., and for them this general principle is laid down: In districts and neighborhoods where the army is unmolested no destruction of such property should be permitted; but should guerrillas or bushwhackers molest our march, or should the inhabitants burn bridges, obstruct roads, or otherwise manifest local hostility, then army commanders should order and enforce a devastation more or less relentless according to the measure of such hostility. VI. As for horses, mules, wagons, &c., belonging to the inhabitants, the cavalry and artillery may appropriate freely and without limit, discriminating, however, between the rich, who are usually hostile, and the poor or industrious, usually neutral or friendly. Foraging parties may also take mules or horses to replace the jaded animals of their trains, or to serve as pack-mules for the regiments or brigades. In all foraging, of whatever kind, the parties engaged will refrain from abusive or threatening language, and may, where the officer in command thinks proper, give written certificates of the facts, but no receipts, and they will endeavor to leave with each family a reasonable portion for their maintenance. VII. Negroes who are able-bodied and can be of service to the several columns may be taken along, but each army commander will bear in mind that the question of supplies is a very important one and that his first duty is to see to them who bear arms.... — William T. Sherman, Military Division of the Mississippi Special Field Order 120, November 9, 1864. Like I said the actual implementation of this doctrine leaves a lot to be desired. The burning of an entire city (I'm assuming it's Atlanta) cannot fairly be attributed solely to Sherman imo. Sure he is the superior, but there is so much more to what happened to Atlanta then simply Sherman burned it. Examples: confederates took up defensive positions in the city, confederates destroyed buildings before fleeing, subordinates under Sherman taking their own initiative, conflicting stories on the destruction regardless of allegiance. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 650] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 12:24 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sherman by no means is innocent, he pretty clearly sets himself up to be absolved of any possible perceived immorality while at the same time reaping the rewards if such immorality isn't perceived. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 651] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : June 30th, 2020 05:19 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes it does make you a satanist, and therefore you should have no problem changing the motto to "In God we trust, and Satan too" :huh: I think I'll pass xD There are probably too many Christians in the US to make that change. It's not a truly religion-neutral country, like you said yourself. And Utah would launch a civil war if that happened lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 652] Auteur : Helz Date : June 30th, 2020 05:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If your concerns are economic, would you not bring other propositions to the table than what the south did? It's obvious that a non-slave based economy can function, in fact, the north did it as per your own admission. The ifrst bit is 100% a fair point but I do not feel that its fair to compare the norths economy with the souths. The north was industrialized with factory's that took raw goods and used the to fabricate. Pelts and cotton would become coats. The south produced raw goods. They farmed the cotton and gathered the pelts. This is why I constantly refer to the 'industrialized north vs the agrarian south.' They are two fundamentally different economy's. I do agree with you that a 'slave free agrarian economy' could exist but your argument here is contrived. The pointed difference would be change. If you live one way your whole life and I walk up and tell you that you have to change and you are morally wrong on a fundamental level how receptive to that message would you be? I could argue how a problem-solution format would have been more effective for the north to use but I simply do not believe their objective was moral. They just wanted control over the raw goods they depended on. If the root problem was taxation, economic oppression, and technological advancement, and not actually slavery, wouldn't you think that they would actually negotiate in economic terms? Once again, all the south argued for in every single major negotiation and conference they had was maintaining slavery; nothing else. You'd think if an entire country is struggling financially and they're trying to negotiate with a supposed economic oppressor who is taxing the shit out of them and advancing technologically while they're left in the dirt, they'd discuss changing that rather than discussing constitutional amendments guaranteeing that they can keep their tractors, no? I absolutely would. I do feel that it would be silly to haggle on the price of cotton if the topic of discussion removed the production of cotton but you have a solid point here. I will have to read into the negotiations as it is something I have never really dug into. You're getting at my point at last, if maybe only by accident! I feel like you are more dedicated to your position than I am to mine. I am totally open to changing my opinion based on the information in front of me. Would it help if I flat out said the south was a racist society that defined African Americans as less than human and undeserving of human rights? My discussion of the context and details of the situation does nothing to refute this in any way. If the north's motivations were to oppress the south and not to free slaves, why did they not accept the south's demands to make slavery a constitutional right if it would have maintained the union? By your own admission, the north was already outstripping the south in every economic aspect. You already mentioned that they were advancing at a rapid rate, their population and economy outpacing the south due to industrialization and supposed economic pillaging and taxation. Surely, if all the south was demanding was to maintain slavery, and the north were just greedy fucks that wanted to keep exploiting the south and they truly didn't give a fuck about slaves, they would have taken the south's proposal to amend the constitution to guarantee holding slaves as a right, maintained the union, and continued their exploitation? Why didn't they do that? I can't answer that the same as you can't answer why the North did not free slaves if their fight was about human rights. I can make the assumption that it was a power struggle that ended up being fought over slavery on the basis that decisions on both sides do not make sense as a fight over human rights. But it is an assumption. I was not there. I could be wrong about the south and the norths motives but at the end of the day I just can not let go of the fact the north used African Americans as cannon fodder in a war they paint as being about human rights instead of just granting them freedom. From what I know I really do feel that calling the war as a fight over slavery is an extreme oversimplification that is not supported by the most basic macro actions. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 653] Auteur : Helz Date : June 30th, 2020 06:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism :huh: I think I'll pass xD There are probably too many Christians in the US to make that change. It's not a truly religion-neutral country, like you said yourself. And Utah would launch a civil war if that happened lol. Lol! I kinda think its funny how caught up people get on categories. Add 20 qualifications that are exactly the same but with two different names and you will be put in the box that the other side wants you to be in so they can tell you that you are wrong. Even if they hold the same 20 qualifications themselves. The oppositional defiant nature of people never ceases to amuse me. I feel like bigotry is one of the defining characteristics of our generation. All too often any effort to open someones mind is seen as an attack on their belief structure and invalidated into an argument instead of a discussion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 654] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 06:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lincoln used the emancipation proclamation as a tool for sure to win the war, what better way to disrupt the economy of the south than to say lol you're free. He was willing to keep slavery if it meant that the Union stayed together as did other Northerners. I think people are getting hung up on the wrong figureheads tho. Abolitionism was a key driving part of Northern policy. Why do you think the South took a moral stance on the issue? When everything else is exhausted your morals is really all you have left. They saw the writing on the wall, the North (for the most part) did not want slavery. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 655] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 06:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Uhh if you want to challenge or understand someone's opinion you literally have to argue. Do you want to hold hands and dance around a fire singing kumbaya until we eventually understand each other? I get that you want to be "open minded" but that is a pretty naïve view on how people with opposing ideas talk to each other. In logic and philosophy an argument is a series of statements intended to determine the degree of truth of another statement, the conclusion. This thread has been for the most pretty fucking tame. If you don't believe me just log onto Facebook for a reminder lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 656] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 06:44 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lincoln used the emancipation proclamation as a tool for sure to win the war, what better way to disrupt the economy of the south than to say lol you're free. He was willing to keep slavery if it meant that the Union stayed together as did other Northerners. I think people are getting hung up on the wrong figureheads tho. Abolitionism was a key driving part of Northern policy. Why do you think the South took a moral stance on the issue? When everything else is exhausted your morals is really all you have left. They saw the writing on the wall, the North (for the most part) did not want slavery. Touching in this for clarity, I believe Lincoln was motivated by abolishment sentiments but also heavily valued the Union being held together even if it meant forgoing abolishment aspirations. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 657] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 30th, 2020 06:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The ifrst bit is 100% a fair point but I do not feel that its fair to compare the norths economy with the souths. The north was industrialized with factory's that took raw goods and used the to fabricate. Pelts and cotton would become coats. The south produced raw goods. They farmed the cotton and gathered the pelts. This is why I constantly refer to the 'industrialized north vs the agrarian south.' They are two fundamentally different economy's. I do agree with you that a 'slave free agrarian economy' could exist but your argument here is contrived. The pointed difference would be change. If you live one way your whole life and I walk up and tell you that you have to change and you are morally wrong on a fundamental level how receptive to that message would you be? I could argue how a problem-solution format would have been more effective for the north to use but I simply do not believe their objective was moral. They just wanted control over the raw goods they depended on. Your point about the different types of industries is valid but you prove my point a bit by saying that the north just wanted control over the raw goods. Surely, if the north solely wanted control over the raw goods for economic purposes, and slavery was the best way, or even a good way, to exploit those goods, the north wouldn't have wanted to abolish slavery, no? They would have just wanted to keep the status quo? You keep actually stating/proving my point exactly with your arguments, including here, whether it's inadvertent or whether we agree without realizing it. You say that it's the principle of change and resistance to so-called change that kept the South stuck to the way they kept doing things. Except, the topic at hand is solely slavery. That's my point. The south stuck to slavery because it was one of their core principles, and they didn't want the north to change it because they saw keeping slaves as one of their rights. I absolutely would. I do feel that it would be silly to haggle on the price of cotton if the topic of discussion removed the production of cotton but you have a solid point here. I will have to read into the negotiations as it is something I have never really dug into. Slave-free production of cotton was possible, the South did it after the war. A large part of why the South had economic issues after the war was because the Confederacy had a strategy of embargoing cotton trade with Europe to force France and England's hand to recognize the Confederacy as a legitimate government. Instead, they just started up cotton production in Egypt and India instead, thus reducing their reliance on American cotton even after the war ended. I feel like you are more dedicated to your position than I am to mine. I am totally open to changing my opinion based on the information in front of me. Would it help if I flat out said the south was a racist society that defined African Americans as less than human and undeserving of human rights? My discussion of the context and details of the situation does nothing to refute this in any way. My whole point is that the Confederacy was a nation founded upon the immoral and racist principle that slavery is a right and the natural order of things. I don't particularly care what the Union did, nor do I claim that they weren't racist. I also take major issue with the idea that intent matters more than actions and results but that's a separate topic. I can't answer that the same as you can't answer why the North did not free slaves if their fight was about human rights. I can make the assumption that it was a power struggle that ended up being fought over slavery on the basis that decisions on both sides do not make sense as a fight over human rights. But it is an assumption. I was not there. I could be wrong about the south and the norths motives but at the end of the day I just can not let go of the fact the north used African Americans as cannon fodder in a war they paint as being about human rights instead of just granting them freedom. From what I know I really do feel that calling the war as a fight over slavery is an extreme oversimplification that is not supported by the most basic macro actions. I don't think the Union not immediately freeing slaves is much of a point against them. Clearly, they had the intention of freeing slaves as history proves they eventually did. I suspect that they may have not freed all slaves immediately as a strategic move, realizing that that being too hasty in freeing slaves would 1) divert attention and resources from the war and 2) cause enough destabilization to harm the war effort, both of which could have resulted in a Confederate victory leading to a worse overall result for slaves. I don't think the Union was perfectly virtuous and that every single citizen or even politician was entirely anti-racist, as their own rhetoric proves, but I do think their actions more than show that they held freeing all slaves in the US as a goal to be pursued strictly out of moral virtue. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 658] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 30th, 2020 07:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism :huh: I think I'll pass xD There are probably too many Christians in the US to make that change. It's not a truly religion-neutral country, like you said yourself. And Utah would launch a civil war if that happened lol. If you aren't okay with that motto, why is "In god we trust" acceptable? It's hypocritical to support one and not the other. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 659] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 30th, 2020 08:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We on religion now? Neat. Ping me when the debate on taxes show up. That or pollution. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 660] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 08:32 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Nerd topics -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 661] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : June 30th, 2020 08:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We on religion now? Neat. Ping me when the debate on taxes show up. That or pollution. Oh taxation is easy! Low corporate taxes, scrap welfare and replace with negative tax brackets, scrap most sales tax, tax property and capital gains rather than wealth. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 662] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 30th, 2020 08:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh taxation is easy! Low corporate taxes, scrap welfare and replace with negative tax brackets, scrap most sales tax, tax property and capital gains rather than wealth. We on taxes now? Neat. Ping me when the debate on pollution show up. That or religion. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 663] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 08:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Climate change is often the loudest voice heard on the destruction of the great barrier reef, but do you know what is just as damaging? Starfish juiced up on agriculture sector run offs. In 2000, an outbreak contributed to a loss of 66% of live coral cover on sampled reefs in a study by the CRC Reefs Research Centre. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 664] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 30th, 2020 08:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Climate change is often the loudest voice heard on the destruction of the great barrier reef, but do you know what is just as damaging? Starfish juiced up on agriculture sector run offs. We on pollution now? Neat. Ping me when the debate on religion show up. That or taxes. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 665] Auteur : rumox Date : June 30th, 2020 08:59 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism reported -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 666] Auteur : SuperJack Date : June 30th, 2020 09:12 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism reported =) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 667] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : June 30th, 2020 10:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism (= -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 668] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 05:54 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Lol! I kinda think its funny how caught up people get on categories. Add 20 qualifications that are exactly the same but with two different names and you will be put in the box that the other side wants you to be in so they can tell you that you are wrong. Even if they hold the same 20 qualifications themselves. The oppositional defiant nature of people never ceases to amuse me. I feel like bigotry is one of the defining characteristics of our generation. All too often any effort to open someones mind is seen as an attack on their belief structure and invalidated into an argument instead of a discussion. The issue is that belief systems are more or less necessary. And that most people look to politics for a concrete belief system that they can use in their lives. It’s not STRICTLY a categorisation issue because e.g. someone who is staunchly against, say, capitalism, will probably try to refuse capitalism in all of its forms. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 669] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 05:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Intent and action are interlinked. When action deviates strongly from intent, perhaps the person was lying about their real intent. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 670] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 05:58 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyway, one change I’d like to see is a more interactive taxation system where you get to choose where a certain percentage of the taxes you pay go. I would put as much as I could into space exploration because it’s, in my view, the single most important problem we are facing right now, and it heavily contributes to scientific advancement. Hell, it would be nice if we really went to Mars before 2030 like NASA is currently planning on doing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 671] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 06:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Who else thinks fusion power is fucking dope? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 672] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 06:01 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The strongest argument in favour of the Union not really giving much of a shit about slavery are the Jim Crow laws. It took nearly a century to repeal them. Why? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 673] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 06:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Oh taxation is easy! Low corporate taxes, scrap welfare and replace with negative tax brackets, scrap most sales tax, tax property and capital gains rather than wealth. Negative tax brackets? I have never heard of such a thing, is that essentially a way of giving people money if they don’t make enough? I don’t know if I agree with that though. I think wellfare is a better idea. People who don’t have a lot of money probably shouldn’t be trusted with it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 674] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 06:07 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think the war was more about secession than slavery. The only reason the north attacked the south was because they tried to secede. The South seceded because they were afraid slavery would be abolished in the South as well - I think the Union didn’t really give much of a shit about freedom and whatnot. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 675] Auteur : rumox Date : July 2nd, 2020 11:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Congratulations you have just gone full circle. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 676] Auteur : Renegade Date : July 2nd, 2020 11:23 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think the war was more about secession than slavery. The only reason the north attacked the south was because they tried to secede. The South seceded because they were afraid slavery would be abolished in the South as well - I think the Union didn’t really give much of a shit about freedom and whatnot. Lol. What happened to all of the discussion pages ago about how the war was LITERALLY about slavery.? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 677] Auteur : rumox Date : July 2nd, 2020 11:37 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism North wanted to end slavery, South didn't. South was clearly on the verge of seceding so the North compromised to allow slavery in existing Southern slave states. The South saw the writing on the wall that even if this happened, slavery wasn't destined to stay so they seceded anyway to ensure it's survival on their terms. The Union declared war because they seceded. This is as layman as I think I can make it while not subscribing to a biased narrative. I really do not know why you keep trying to push this other narrative. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 678] Auteur : Date : July 2nd, 2020 12:08 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Let me rephrase this: For the north, the war was about secession and keeping the union intact. For the south, the war was about slavery. I’m saying the Union didn’t give a shit about slavery (or about freedom), at least not to extent where they attacked the south to free the slaves. I also don’t think it was Northern greed that led to the war - I think the North simply wanted to keep the Union intact. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 679] Auteur : rumox Date : July 2nd, 2020 12:19 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And I'd fall back on my original point, the causation cannot be put aside for the justification. Full circle yay. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 680] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 2nd, 2020 04:46 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Let me rephrase this: For the north, the war was about secession and keeping the union intact. For the south, the war was about slavery. I’m saying the Union didn’t give a shit about slavery (or about freedom), at least not to extent where they attacked the south to free the slaves. I also don’t think it was Northern greed that led to the war - I think the North simply wanted to keep the Union intact. I can't understand how you logic yourself into such a position. You admit that the war was about slavery, and for the north the war was about keeping the union intact. Yet the whole reason the south started the war by seceding was because they wanted to keep slaves. If the north didn't care about slaves then why the fuck didn't they just keep slavery legal and end the whole thing immediately lmao. Or just not start it in the first place. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 681] Auteur : Ash Date : July 3rd, 2020 01:58 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Let me rephrase this: For the north, the war was about secession and keeping the union intact. For the south, the war was about slavery. I’m saying the Union didn’t give a shit about slavery (or about freedom), at least not to extent where they attacked the south to free the slaves. I also don’t think it was Northern greed that led to the war - I think the North simply wanted to keep the Union intact. The southern states wanted state rights so that they can keep slaves. They feared that with the election of Abraham Lincoln, their state rights (slavery was a state right at that time) would be diminished. While this was happening, the Northern states were expanding westward, gaining more states that favored federal laws over state laws. This is why the Southern states seceded. Because state rights favored slavery and discrimination, and the North wanted to take away state rights. State rights in the United States are shit because even after the Civil War, Jim Crow laws (more state rights) became a thing regardless. So yes, at its very core principle, the North wanted to take away or restrict slavery as hypocritical as it may seem from someone like Abe Lincoln. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 682] Auteur : rumox Date : July 3rd, 2020 02:29 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We going round again? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 683] Auteur : Helz Date : July 4th, 2020 01:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Your point about the different types of industries is valid but you prove my point a bit by saying that the north just wanted control over the raw goods. Surely, if the north solely wanted control over the raw goods for economic purposes, and slavery was the best way, or even a good way, to exploit those goods, the north wouldn't have wanted to abolish slavery, no? They would have just wanted to keep the status quo? Im not sure when the word "Just" got added into my argument about the Norths motivations. I have never made that point and have pushed pretty emphatically that it was a power struggle. In the same way the USA struggle with Iran is not just about oil but it is one point of contention that almost lead to war. The USA could give a shit about their contribution to oil but it is a power struggle. When you strangle a nations ability to self sustain they have to answer to you and do what you want- even if it has nothing to do with (in this example) oil. You keep actually stating/proving my point exactly with your arguments, including here, whether it's inadvertent or whether we agree without realizing it. You say that it's the principle of change and resistance to so-called change that kept the South stuck to the way they kept doing things. Except, the topic at hand is solely slavery. That's my point. The south stuck to slavery because it was one of their core principles, and they didn't want the north to change it because they saw keeping slaves as one of their rights. I really think thats an oversimplification. You say the 'sole topic at hand is slavery' which may be why we disagree. I am not sure what new and creative way I can find to say to you that the things I am arguing in no way make the souths actions moral. If we are simply talking about 2 different things maybe we just need to disentangle them? Slave-free production of cotton was possible, the South did it after the war. A large part of why the South had economic issues after the war was because the Confederacy had a strategy of embargoing cotton trade with Europe to force France and England's hand to recognize the Confederacy as a legitimate government. Instead, they just started up cotton production in Egypt and India instead, thus reducing their reliance on American cotton even after the war ended. I honestly think this is absurd. Do you really think the fact the Union targeted civilian housing and infrastructure was not a major impact? How about the loss of a third of their population through slaves? Or maybe the loss of another 400k of whatever was left as casualties (which was of their most physically capable?) Nevermind the fact that the unions core battle plan was to cut off the souths trade via the Mississippi river to choke out the confederacy. You would have to present quite a bit of sources for me to even consider this as a potential. Maybe you came across something I never have but this sounds like some political nonsense to me. My whole point is that the Confederacy was a nation founded upon the immoral and racist principle that slavery is a right and the natural order of things. I don't particularly care what the Union did, nor do I claim that they weren't racist. I also take major issue with the idea that intent matters more than actions and results but that's a separate topic. We can agree to disagree no problem. On that separate topic though (if we can 100% separate this from any civil war talk) why do you identify morality with actions and results if its unintentional? I have never herd this position taken before and genuinely would like to hear more about why you feel this way. I don't think the Union not immediately freeing slaves is much of a point against them. Clearly, they had the intention of freeing slaves as history proves they eventually did. I suspect that they may have not freed all slaves immediately as a strategic move, realizing that that being too hasty in freeing slaves would 1) divert attention and resources from the war and 2) cause enough destabilization to harm the war effort, both of which could have resulted in a Confederate victory leading to a worse overall result for slaves. I don't think the Union was perfectly virtuous and that every single citizen or even politician was entirely anti-racist, as their own rhetoric proves, but I do think their actions more than show that they held freeing all slaves in the US as a goal to be pursued strictly out of moral virtue. I agree that it was a strategit move by the union to not free slaves. I just think their 2 points were: 1) To make the black man die in place of the white man in their fight to gain power 2) Because freeing slaves would eliminate practices such as confiscating slaves from the south and reappropriating them to the railroads. I really dont understand why its so important to you to paint the union as moral. Like... The union is dead and gone by over a hundred years. Why do you push against the idea that they were greedy? You are not even an American and these are people so far past dead finding even a 3rd level account of them as a human being is near impossible. I totally agree with you that the confederacy was immoral and reprehensible. Would it help if I pointed out that the Union was majority republican? From my understanding a big part of your belief structure is anti financial interest/republican... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 684] Auteur : Helz Date : July 4th, 2020 02:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The issue is that belief systems are more or less necessary. And that most people look to politics for a concrete belief system that they can use in their lives. It’s not STRICTLY a categorisation issue because e.g. someone who is staunchly against, say, capitalism, will probably try to refuse capitalism in all of its forms. Fair point. But I believe people have beliefs as they are convenient to them. My favorite recent day story comes from Oxford where the students launched a climate change protest and demanded the college stopped its use and investments in fossil fuels. The dean responded by offering to shut off the gas powered heat as a step in that direction which some people asked the dean if that was provocative. He responded "You are right that I am being provocative but I am provoking some clear thinking, I hope; It is all too easy to request others to do things that carry no personal cost to yourself. The question is whether you and others are prepared to make personal sacrifices to achieve the goals of environmental improvement" Saying "I want healthcare" once you are sick is easy but being told to pay into it while you are healthy is not taken well Saying "Give tax money to this cause" is easy until that money is coming out of your pocket People want the benefit or to benefit the cause they care about but if you ask them to pay for what they want they will usually jump to ATE or a red herring. Sure they want homeless people to have a home but ask them to take one into the room next to their teenage daughter? Then its no longer convenient to have such a belief and they will fight it harder than they ever would have supported homeless housing. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 685] Auteur : Helz Date : July 4th, 2020 02:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism North wanted to end slavery, South didn't. South was clearly on the verge of seceding so the North compromised to allow slavery in existing Southern slave states. The South saw the writing on the wall that even if this happened, slavery wasn't destined to stay so they seceded anyway to ensure it's survival on their terms. The Union declared war because they seceded. This is as layman as I think I can make it while not subscribing to a biased narrative. I really do not know why you keep trying to push this other narrative. Would it be a shock for me to say that I feel like this is a biased narrative? The story of the moral and good North wanting what was right but accepting less to try to make everyone happy while the evil south was greedy and seceded forcing the north to declare war? This is as biased as it gets. The south is evil while the north is good in spite of the presented facts. Why is it such a terrible thing to accept the north was also evil in this situation? I don't think a single piece of information has come up to suggest anything against it other than arguing the south was evil. Why is it such a stretch to believe both sides were wrong when we have access to years of historical accounts of almost every side in every war ever acting out of self interest? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 686] Auteur : rumox Date : July 4th, 2020 02:46 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Never said the North wasn't evil in fact I have made several posts indicating the opposite. If you choose to interpret that I have the stance that the North is morally superior and can't be evil after I have said numerous times they weren't then that's on you, not me. I'm not here to argue every half degree, intricate variable of the civil war. I have said my purpose time and time again, you cannot separate the abolishment sentiment that predominantly came from Northern states from why the South seceded. I think I have said this at least 5 times now. Literally go read the thread again if you think I am propping the North up on some false moral platform. You and Ganelon can run off on tangents all you want but I will keep bringing up the point that Ganelon tries to stray from. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 687] Auteur : rumox Date : July 4th, 2020 02:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism This entire discussion is 50x longer than it needs to be because it literally ran off into dozens of whataboutisms. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 688] Auteur : rumox Date : July 4th, 2020 03:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Also saying Abraham Lincoln was racist has no weight. It was mid 1800's. Every man and his dog was probably racist. Was waiting for when the appeasement from the north to keep the union together was going to be mentioned lol. The Union was by no means morally superior. If you read the actual appeasements they tried to make you will see how cooked everyone in the USA was. Some of it can be argued as time wasting but the Corwin Amendment... lol Sounds fairly standard as far as war time doctrines go but the actual implementation of it leaves a lot to be desired. The south did not recover for a very long time. Sherman by no means is innocent, he pretty clearly sets himself up to be absolved of any possible perceived immorality while at the same time reaping the rewards if such immorality isn't perceived. Quick look over shows I am well aware of the immoralities of the North. But again, I am not here to argue the immoralities of the North when there are people in this thread trying to prop up the "state rights" argument over slavery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_Cause_of_the_Confederacy). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 689] Auteur : rumox Date : July 4th, 2020 03:56 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism From the link in previous posts Contemporary historians overwhelmingly agree that secession was motivated by slavery. There were numerous causes for secession, but preservation and expansion of slavery was easily the most important of them. The confusion may come from blending the causes of secession with the causes of the war, which were separate but related issues. (Lincoln entered a military conflict not to free the slaves but to put down a rebellion or, as he put it, to preserve the Union.) Even historians of that era overwhelmingly disagree with the rhetoric put out here. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 690] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 4th, 2020 04:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism On that separate topic though (if we can 100% separate this from any civil war talk) why do you identify morality with actions and results if its unintentional? I have never herd this position taken before and genuinely would like to hear more about why you feel this way. I think that intent, in a large portion of situations, is relatively constant. If you reduce it, most actions people take are done to benefit themselves or their lineage, at least to their own knowledge. Also in general I'm definitely a pragmatist, and I think sitting around philosophizing about intent and even morality of actions depending on one's ulterior motives is absolutely useless. I think someone's ulterior motives in taking an action, insofar as those ulterior motives don't manifest themselves as malicious actions down the line, don't matter at all. That's why I don't particularly care if Lincoln actually wanted to free the slaves or if he just wanted to use the slaves as a political tool against the south, because the end result was the same. The only reason I would care is if I had reason to believe that his motives one way or another resulted in a less favourable situation for black people in the US than would have otherwise happened. Keep in mind I'm not denying that motives are entirely irrelevant, to the extent that these motives might result in future underhanded actions. For example, someone giving a donation might want something out of it and attach strings to the donation, versus someone just donating out of the good of their heart. But again, this comes down to difference in actions, and to me it's useless to consider motives if the end result is exactly the same. This is also why murder and manslaughter deserve to be different crimes; someone who killed someone with intent has a different predisposition to commit more crimes than someone who killed someone unintentionally, and they should be treated differently based on that, whether in terms of future support or protecting society from them. I really dont understand why its so important to you to paint the union as moral. Like... The union is dead and gone by over a hundred years. Why do you push against the idea that they were greedy? You are not even an American and these are people so far past dead finding even a 3rd level account of them as a human being is near impossible. I totally agree with you that the confederacy was immoral and reprehensible. Would it help if I pointed out that the Union was majority republican? From my understanding a big part of your belief structure is anti financial interest/republican... I'm not really trying to paint the Union as moral, I just don't think that the Union's actions are in any way a reflection of what the Confederacy was. The Confederacy wanted to keep slaves and was founded on a cornerstone of racism, which is in stark contrast with the Union, which while also racist for many years also didn't have racism codified as a central belief. I don't think honouring Confederate symbols and figures is something that people should protect because of what the Confederacy represented. It's impossible to disentangle those ideas and symbols from slavery and racism. The Union did a lot of bad stuff during the war and they absolutely perpetrated racism, including systematic racism, for many years. But I really don't give a shit because that barely has anything to do with my original point. I understand the Union was majority Republican. I also understand that political parties change over many years. To my understanding, the Republican party was respectable and generally more aligned with my beliefs until Nixon's presidency. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 691] Auteur : Date : July 4th, 2020 01:16 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Fair point. But I believe people have beliefs as they are convenient to them. My favorite recent day story comes from Oxford where the students launched a climate change protest and demanded the college stopped its use and investments in fossil fuels. The dean responded by offering to shut off the gas powered heat as a step in that direction which some people asked the dean if that was provocative. He responded "You are right that I am being provocative but I am provoking some clear thinking, I hope; It is all too easy to request others to do things that carry no personal cost to yourself. The question is whether you and others are prepared to make personal sacrifices to achieve the goals of environmental improvement" Saying "I want healthcare" once you are sick is easy but being told to pay into it while you are healthy is not taken well Saying "Give tax money to this cause" is easy until that money is coming out of your pocket People want the benefit or to benefit the cause they care about but if you ask them to pay for what they want they will usually jump to ATE or a red herring. Sure they want homeless people to have a home but ask them to take one into the room next to their teenage daughter? Then its no longer convenient to have such a belief and they will fight it harder than they ever would have supported homeless housing. Oh, absolutely. Such people do exist. I’m thinking that people are opportunistic with their belief system (a fact they are probably aware of on some preter-conscious level). I believe that there are also genuine ideologues who flock to a belief system simply because they don’t have anything else in their lives. This group naturally overlaps with the opportunists you described, so I’m not sure how you separate them. Or maybe I’m wrong and there is no difference between the two groups and rabid ideologues are just holding on to ideologies that they believe won’t kill them, and their belief system then is simply a tool - not something they truly believe in, deep town. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 692] Auteur : Date : July 4th, 2020 01:21 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I can't understand how you logic yourself into such a position. You admit that the war was about slavery, and for the north the war was about keeping the union intact. Yet the whole reason the south started the war by seceding was because they wanted to keep slaves. If the north didn't care about slaves then why the fuck didn't they just keep slavery legal and end the whole thing immediately lmao. Or just not start it in the first place. Good question. The political climate at the start of the war was such that it is possible the South wouldn’t just have surrendered and asked to be welcomed back into the Union. It was not inconceivable to them that the North would’ve abolished slavery in their territories anyhow. I had something else to say but I forgot what it was soooooo -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 693] Auteur : Date : July 4th, 2020 01:23 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Never said the North wasn't evil in fact I have made several posts indicating the opposite. If you choose to interpret that I have the stance that the North is morally superior and can't be evil after I have said numerous times they weren't then that's on you, not me. I'm not here to argue every half degree, intricate variable of the civil war. I have said my purpose time and time again, you cannot separate the abolishment sentiment that predominantly came from Northern states from why the South seceded. I think I have said this at least 5 times now. Literally go read the thread again if you think I am propping the North up on some false moral platform. You and Ganelon can run off on tangents all you want but I will keep bringing up the point that Ganelon tries to stray from. I’m not sure who you’re arguing with here. Both of us agreed that the South was evil; we simply stated that the North as, as well. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 694] Auteur : Date : July 4th, 2020 01:27 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think it’s simple really: the South was racist, AND they used racism as an excuse for slavery. The North was racist but they were industrialized and didn’t need slaves. Why do you think the north abolished slavery very early on (with New York abolishing it in 1792, if I’m not mistaken). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 695] Auteur : Date : July 4th, 2020 01:28 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways if the Union had really cared about blacks they wouldn’t have founded the American Colonizatjon Society. Even ignoring the way Liberia turned out, you can’t kick your citizens from your country just because they’re of a different skin colour. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 696] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 4th, 2020 04:26 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Good question. The political climate at the start of the war was such that it is possible the South wouldn’t just have surrendered and asked to be welcomed back into the Union. It was not inconceivable to them that the North would’ve abolished slavery in their territories anyhow. I had something else to say but I forgot what it was soooooo But the whole reason they seceded was because Lincoln won the election and he was the anti-slavery candidate. It's not like secession happened randomly one day and they had to figure out why later. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 697] Auteur : rumox Date : July 4th, 2020 10:00 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No Ganelon my point of discussion with you and Helz are different, you aren't the same person. My point with you and always has been is how you keep pushing away the slavery aspect of the civil war. You have done it since the beginning of the thread and you are still doing it. >Abolishment was an undeniable Northern policy >War is started over this policy "Northerners didn't give a shit about slavery they just wanted to protect the union." If you think the Northerners didn't give a shit about slavery what was the point of even taking the stance? You keep on trying to separate the slavery when you fucking can't, then you go off on a tangent. You can't chop away the driving factor of something and just look at the result. This is what I have been saying on the topic since I started commenting on it. I give up chasing you down all these rabbit holes you go down to dodge this. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 698] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 4th, 2020 11:11 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 699] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 12:43 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If they did give a shit answer me this. Why the Jim Crow laws? And why was the military segregated for a long time? I’m just saying, the North probably did away with slavery because it didn’t affect their economy much. They didn’t have many slaves to begin with; they only had indentured servants. It’s easy to be an abolitionist when it personally doesn’t affect you, isn’t it -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 700] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 03:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If they did give a shit answer me this. Why the Jim Crow laws? And why was the military segregated for a long time? I’m just saying, the North probably did away with slavery because it didn’t affect their economy much. They didn’t have many slaves to begin with; they only had indentured servants. It’s easy to be an abolitionist when it personally doesn’t affect you, isn’t it Jim Crow laws and military segregation are not slavery. Nobody is claiming the north wasn't racist. I love the statement "It’s easy to be an abolitionist when it personally doesn’t affect you, isn’t it". Probably the funniest sentence I've read in this thread. I like how we've gotten to the point where feeling empathy for enslaved people is an argument against someone's character. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 701] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 03:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No Ganelon my point of discussion with you and Helz are different, you aren't the same person. My point with you and always has been is how you keep pushing away the slavery aspect of the civil war. You have done it since the beginning of the thread and you are still doing it. >Abolishment was an undeniable Northern policy >War is started over this policy "Northerners didn't give a shit about slavery they just wanted to protect the union." If you think the Northerners didn't give a shit about slavery what was the point of even taking the stance? You keep on trying to separate the slavery when you fucking can't, then you go off on a tangent. You can't chop away the driving factor of something and just look at the result. This is what I have been saying on the topic since I started commenting on it. I give up chasing you down all these rabbit holes you go down to dodge this. This is a typical conservative/right wing method of arguing that I see all the time, especially with demagogues like Tucker Carlson and especially Ben Shapiro. They rapid fire a bunch of irrelevant, dubious, or even completely made-up points in an argument about anything such that they still come out the victor in an argument with someone who cares about integrity of facts and addressing points. It's impossible to address a plethora of irrelevant and often factually incorrect points when they're presented without evidence and you feel compelled to address each one with actual facts. It makes it such that, even if you conclusively argue against some of the points, you'll leave many unanswered and thus presumed true by others. Often, the person themselves isn't even lying, they've just fallen victim to the same tactic and they're parroting points that their favourite talking head has spoon fed them. Many will also take a so-called "centrist" position where they spout whataboutisms and do both-sides arguments, but conveniently only in a way that benefits the side they argue for. You'll find these people arguing that, for example, Democrats are just as bad as Republicans for any given reason. But when a topic such as Hillary Clinton's emails or Obama's civilian drone strikes come up, you'll oddly find that these so-called centrists are completely missing. They won't hop in with their enlightened statements that, really if you think about it, both sides are bad because Trump and his family did exactly the same thing with their own private email servers, or that the drone war actually escalated under Trump. If anything, they'll shout from the rooftops about how these points further prove that liberals are just as bad as conservatives. These people are extremely dangerous because you can't spot them without knowing more about the person. They implicitly argue for one side by butting in with centrist arguments in defence of their own side, while letting anything that makes their side look good or the other side look bad slide. In principle, their arguments hold water a lot of the time, but they misrepresent themselves as being centrists when really they are very much for a specific side, which manifests in them muddying specific conversations and sowing discord among a specific group. Once you're aware of these argument styles, you'll see them everywhere. It's quite worrying how often people fall victim to them. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 702] Auteur : rumox Date : July 5th, 2020 06:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism :sick: I read something describing that not too long ago lol Mmm yes being pro abolishment cause it doesn't affect you... until your factories come to a screaming halt because the plantations stop producing the goods they require. Tariffs the federal government put in place to ensure domestic markets rather than reliance on the international market. Just because they didn't have slavery like the South doesn't mean they wouldn't have been affected by abolishing slavery, they had skin in the game too. For visual sake the British textile industry was ~60% reliant on the Souths cotton alone. Imagine how reliant the North was on it and other slave produced goods because of tariffs encouraging domestic trade. But yeah, another rabbit hole - just peaking down this one. Pls don't @ me anymore I want off this wild ride :> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 703] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 07:47 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sure but that doesn’t capture the entire economic situation. The south was primarily agricultural and heavily dependent on slave labour. The northern economy was not agricultural; it was most industrial and mechanized, and just because the textile industry depended on the southern slave economy, it doesn’t mean that their economy depended on it. The northern economy continued to grow after the war - showing that slavery wasn’t an integral part of it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 704] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 07:49 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If you don’t think slavery wasn’t a contentious issue in the north (it was, I just don’t think it was anywhere near as contentious as it’s usually made out to be), then why do you think the North abolished slavery whilst the south didn’t? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 705] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 07:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism It’s a very simple economic explanation and I don’t see how you can deny it. Many major countries had abolished slavery - France, Britain having banned it earlier than even the northern states. And the people who owned slaves in the south were primarily of British origin. I can’t see how you could say that it was anything other than economic reasons that persuaded the south (or the north, for that matter) to take the stance that they did on Slavery. You’re saying slavery cannot be disentangled from the secession war, I’m saying the economics of slavery cannot be ignored when looking at the institution of slavery in the south. Like, the only other reason I can think of is a demographic one - there were far more blacks in the southern states than in the northern states (if I’m not mistaken, they were ~30% of the population in some states). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 706] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 08:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Jim Crow laws and military segregation are not slavery. Nobody is claiming the north wasn't racist. I love the statement "It’s easy to be an abolitionist when it personally doesn’t affect you, isn’t it". Probably the funniest sentence I've read in this thread. I like how we've gotten to the point where feeling empathy for enslaved people is an argument against someone's character. I just think it’s hypocritical. All men are equal but some men are more equal than others. That kinda thing -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 707] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 08:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think that's enough responding from me. Anyone who hasn't seen the point already probably isn't capable of doing so anyway. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 708] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 09:45 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly, it also looks like you have no idea what your own points are. Look at how like 5 pages back you pointed out that the Jim Crow laws were actually evidence that the Confederacy was racist, now suddenly you're using it against the north? Why? Isn’t it a very strong argument in favour of the confederates being essentially fundamentally founded on racist principles? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 709] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 09:50 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The north could’ve repealed it or prevented their passing, they didn’t. I’m not saying the south wasn’t racist; in saying the north was too, and that if they had really given a shit about blacks they wouldn’t have allowed the south to pass those laws. They were probably less racist than the south, but that doesn’t mean that they weren’t racist. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 710] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 09:53 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Idk I don’t really have the energy but my point about abolitionism has nothing to do with empathy. I’m saying it’s easy to be in favour of personal freedom (who the fuck is in favour of slavery?) in some abstract sense, but a lot tougher to implement said belief in practice. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 711] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 10:02 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Its just, it is clearly an exaggeration to state that the North was all good and nice. Sure they cared about slavery to some extent, but obviously not enough to prevent the passing of Jim Crow laws, or to cease funding the American Colonization society. The North considered preservation of the Union the primary goal of the war - not slavery. Slavery wasn’t immediately abolished, and the Union had made many compromises (like the Missouri compromise) with the southern states and even gave the south extra representation due to the fact that they had slaves (slaves needed representation or something. idk the reason) Its biased as hell. The North was racist, just less so than the south. Did the support abolition? Yes, but it wasn’t anywhere near as important to them as it’s usually made out to be. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 712] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 10:03 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Again, if it had been, Jim Crow laws would never have been passed in the South, and blacks would’ve had representation (they didn’t even have the right to vote in most states in the South) -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 713] Auteur : Ash Date : July 5th, 2020 10:06 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If they did give a shit answer me this. Why the Jim Crow laws? And why was the military segregated for a long time? I’m just saying, the North probably did away with slavery because it didn’t affect their economy much. They didn’t have many slaves to begin with; they only had indentured servants. It’s easy to be an abolitionist when it personally doesn’t affect you, isn’t it First of all, the North did not invent Jim Crow laws. Secondly, Abraham Lincoln wasn't even president when Jim Crow laws expanded and started affecting a majority of black people. Thirdly, the South still had black people farming their plantations even after slavery ended, through a method called sharecropping. The reason Jim Crow laws lasted so long was most likely because upcoming presidents and political parties favored state laws, it's really that simple. It turns out that making social change in an era of extreme racism is really difficult. The north could’ve repealed it or prevented their passing, they didn’t. I’m not saying the south wasn’t racist; in saying the north was too, and that if they had really given a shit about blacks they wouldn’t have allowed the south to pass those laws. They were probably less racist than the south, but that doesn’t mean that they weren’t racist. Again, Jim Crow laws were state laws. There is very little the Union could have done about it at the time. They just had a massive war over the ratification of the 13th Amendment. You really think they wanted another war with the amount of idiots at the time that were in favor of state rights? Would it help if I pointed out that the Union was majority republican?. Sir, did you know that the swastika was a symbol of peace until Hitler used it on his political platform? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 714] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 10:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism First of all, the North did not invent Jim Crow laws. Secondly, Abraham Lincoln wasn't even president when Jim Crow laws expanded and started affecting a majority of black people. Thirdly, the South still had black people farming their plantations even after slavery ended, through a method called sharecropping. They didn’t, the south did, but the north didn’t do anything to stop them. The reason Jim Crow laws lasted so long was most likely because upcoming presidents and political parties favored state laws, it's really that simple. It turns out that making social change in an era of extreme racism is really difficult. Fair enough. You’re right that ingrained societal attitudes such as these don’t change overnight just because you want them to. However, segregation still occurred in national areas (e.g. the military). Again, Jim Crow laws were state laws. There is very little the Union could have done about it at the time. They just had a massive war over the ratification of the 13th Amendment. You really think they wanted another war with the amount of idiots at the time that were in favor of state rights? That’s possible. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 715] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 10:15 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism From the link in previous posts Even historians of that era overwhelmingly disagree with the rhetoric put out here. So, the quote there says that the Union fought to put down a rebellion. I do agree slavery was a contentious issue in the north but it was definitely nowhere near as important to them as it’s made out to be. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 716] Auteur : rumox Date : July 5th, 2020 11:40 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism What did I say about removing the build up and looking at only the result man. Seriously you @ me after I asked not to just to spit in what I have said time and time again. Maybe you should read the text that came before that passage. Oh wait you can't because you don't believe in context. Seriously don't @ me I don't want to take part anymore. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 717] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 12:16 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I didn’t @ you lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 718] Auteur : rumox Date : July 5th, 2020 12:39 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I mean @ and quote function the same, both give the user a notification. I thought that would be obvious with what I mean by don't @ me. If I know how to turn them off for a thread I would but I don't. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 719] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 12:49 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Fine. I don’t mind talking about this honestly I’m kinda miffed when people tell me that I’m pushing a dogma. No shit I’m gonna ‘keep pushing’ my dogma if you say that kind of thing to me lmao. Sure, slavery was important in the North, I just think its importance is exaggerated. We can argue to what extent that is the case but it’s unfair to just ignore the economic aspect of slavery from the equation. Slavery had a great economic benefit. Did the North benefit from slavery? Probably, but they didn’t benefit from it anywhere near as much as the South did. It’s not like the northern economy shut down because of abolition, lol. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 720] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 12:50 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My last post was kinda dumb (the one ‘I didn’t @ you’). I knew what you meant so there was no need for it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 721] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 01:05 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I mean, you’re right that the North cared about slavery but obviously when push came to shove, preserving the Union was more important to them than the issue of slavery. That’s why all the compromises with the south were forged, and that’s the light in which I’m seeing the war. A war to preserve the union. And partly to feel the slaves. Slavery was obviously not going to last forever in the south as most other countries had already done away with it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 722] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 5th, 2020 01:07 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You guys are going in circles and no one is budging -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 723] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 01:17 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism We’re not actually going in circles. We’re arguing for similar but slightly different things and fighting over it. I am saying the United States fought the war to preserve the Union, while the confederates fought the war primarily so that they could continue to practice slavery. And that the North didn’t care THAT much about slavery, and that you can’t divorce the economic aspects of slavery from the discussion. The first states to secede were the ones that most heavily depended on slave labour. That’s no coincidence. And I’m saying the North could afford to make abolition noises because their economy wasn’t based on slavery. I just think the North was at least partly hypocritical. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 724] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 01:22 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Wikipedia says that the North was in favour of gradual rather than immediate abolition. This I can actually agree with it and it seems as unbiased as you can get with respect to the north’s motives, and its something I can actually get behind, myself. You can’t nust free people who’ve never known freedom their entire lives and expect them to do something. I don’t know enough about this to discuss it in any depth, but my suspicion is that freeing children first and declaring those born of slaves to be free men would be a good start. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 725] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 01:38 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If anything, I think the Union was too easy on the Confederacy. They basically let all the traitors live out the rest of their lives on their old estates and plantations, when really they should have executed Lee and Davis and stamped out the entire pathological culture that led to the rebellion and glorification of slavery and racism. Instead they let the cancer of racism fester in the south. That's what I truly fault the Union for. I also find it absolutely pathetic that southerners have had 160 years to find a culture and symbols that aren't the Confederacy and they still haven't been able to. I have no sympathy for them now that people are burning their traitor rags and demolishing their illegitimate landmarks and memorials when they've had so much time to find and create something else to unite around. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 726] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 02:41 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think the war could’ve been avoided if the Union, instead of compromising with the South by essentially ignoring slavery, had tried to reach an equitable settlement with the south by offering to shoulder at least part of the costs of the abolition and founding trade schools for slaves so that they could have economic utility as free men (and by offering slave holders money for each slave they freed). I believe gradual abolition would’ve been a very smart decision had it actually been attempted. Not only could they have avoided the war but perhaps the Jim Crow laws in the south as well, and the South would’ve had time to catch up to the rest of the country, seeing as they had untapped mineral reserves (in the appalachians, say). I don’t know. It sounds awfully simplistic but I want to believe that war wasn’t inevitable, and I believe gradual, incremental change is fundamentally a better idea than radical change in such scenarios. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 727] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 02:42 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Secondly and most importantly, the traitor state known as West Virginia would not exist /s -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 728] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 02:47 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism If anything, I think the Union was too easy on the Confederacy. They basically let all the traitors live out the rest of their lives on their old estates and plantations, when really they should have executed Lee and Davis and stamped out the entire pathological culture that led to the rebellion and glorification of slavery and racism. Instead they let the cancer of racism fester in the south. That's what I truly fault the Union for. I also find it absolutely pathetic that southerners have had 160 years to find a culture and symbols that aren't the Confederacy and they still haven't been able to. I have no sympathy for them now that people are burning their traitor rags and demolishing their illegitimate landmarks and memorials when they've had so much time to find and create something else to unite around. Why is the secession such a great deal to you? I believe in the right of the individual to protest, even by force of arms, against a government they consider illegitimate. It’s not as if they attempted to defect to an enemy country (Mexico or some shit). They only wanted to secede. By executing them you essentially shit on the constitution. Misguided as they were, they weren’t traitors. I have no doubt that many of them would’ve given their lives for the United States before and after the war if, say, Britain invaded via Canada, or if Mexico became revanchist and conducted a Reconquista of California. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 729] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 02:51 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Even disregarding that aspect, it’s seldom a good idea to execute the leaders of a rebellion. Especially one like the Confederacy. Like, in case of a communist or nazi uprising I would definitely consider execution or life imprisonment for the leaders but, the Confederacy was in no way comprabile to either of these. Thirdly - you hate the Confederate flag but do you hate the South African flag? The one they had prior to apartheid? Nobody really ever talks about that flag but to me the flag of South Africa has literally nothing to do with Apartheid, anymore than Afrikaans (an extremely ugly language btw) does. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 730] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 02:54 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Why is the secession such a great deal to you? I believe in the right of the individual to protest, even by force of arms, against a government they consider illegitimate. It’s not as if they attempted to defect to an enemy country (Mexico or some shit). They only wanted to secede. By executing them you essentially shit on the constitution. Misguided as they were, they weren’t traitors. I have no doubt that many of them would’ve given their lives for the United States before and after the war if, say, Britain invaded via Canada, or if Mexico became revanchist and conducted a Reconquista of California. No they were traitors that seceded to defend a racist legacy of slavery. Had they wanted to secede for another reason they'd still be traitors, but at least for a different, perhaps more honourable reason. As it stands they're traitors for the cause of upholding institutional racism and it's a shame that they were afforded so much mercy by the Union, given the impact racism had and continues to have. As I said, that's what I fault the Union for more than anything else, and the strongest argument against the Union being virtuous anti-racists. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 731] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 02:56 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Even disregarding that aspect, it’s seldom a good idea to execute the leaders of a rebellion. Especially one like the Confederacy. Like, in case of a communist or nazi uprising I would definitely consider execution or life imprisonment for the leaders but, the Confederacy was in no way comprabile to either of these. Yes it was, the Confederacy was founded to enslave a third of their population. 3.5 million people. They were as bad, morally, as the Nazis, and should have been treated with just as much mercy. Thirdly - you hate the Confederate flag but do you hate the South African flag? The one they had prior to apartheid? Nobody really ever talks about that flag but to me the flag of South Africa has literally nothing to do with Apartheid, anymore than Afrikaans (an extremely ugly language btw) does. Yes, I hate the South African flag. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 732] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 03:01 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Uhhh the nazis are really without parallel in human history, unless you look at Italy (and even *they* weren’t as bad as the Nazis). I certainly don’t see confederates summarily executing blacks just for being black. That’s what he nazis did. The confederates didn’t, and apart from the issue of slavery, they were otherwise not repressive, had a democratic government closely modeled after the government of the US, and gave (free white) men the right to vote. Even South Africa, bad as it was, wasn’t comparable to Nazi Germany. I don’t know why, and I don’t know what the difference is, but it’s definitely there IMO. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 733] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 5th, 2020 03:09 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I certainly don’t see confederates summarily executing blacks just for being black. Have you ever heard of lynching? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 734] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 03:13 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Have you ever heard of lynching? Those weren’t institutionalized. I can point you to pogroms in Russia against the Jews; doesn’t mean that the Russian Empire was fascist. Fascism did not even exist back then. Lynching is an indicator of cultural attitudes, though even the the term ‘lynching’ brings to mind images of vigilanteism. Those were by no means advocated by the state. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 735] Auteur : Date : July 5th, 2020 03:30 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism They were also nowhere near as widespread as the Nazi gas chambers. Honestly the first state, in my view, that bordered on being totalitarian, in human history would probably be revolutionary France. But even if they had wanted to be totalitarian, they couldn’t have been. Neither could the confederates. The technology simply didn’t exist, and IMO cultural attitudes in the south weren’t tilted so far in the racial supremacy direction for them to be described as nazis. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 736] Auteur : Voss Date : July 5th, 2020 07:29 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Have you ever heard of lynching? Honestly, it also looks like you have no idea what your own points are. Look at how like 5 pages back you pointed out that the Jim Crow laws were actually evidence that the Confederacy was racist, now suddenly you're using it against the north? Those weren’t institutionalized. I can point you to pogroms in Russia against the Jews; doesn’t mean that the Russian Empire was fascist. Fascism did not even exist back then. Lynching is an indicator of cultural attitudes, though even the the term ‘lynching’ brings to mind images of vigilanteism. Those were by no means advocated by the state. This looks like a contradiction to me. I haven't read the majority of posts in this thread, but I don't need to to point that out. Looks like oops also already did. Also, who cares if they're institutional or not, the point still stands. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 737] Auteur : Voss Date : July 5th, 2020 07:32 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is: What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism? A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis? Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 738] Auteur : Voss Date : July 5th, 2020 07:34 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it. Err, going to be a bit more clear here. Because American conservatives don't do nearly enough to distance themselves from Nazis that go to and support right-wing rallies. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 739] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 5th, 2020 07:35 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it. inb4 "stahp callin me a nazi I hate nazis" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 740] Auteur : Renegade Date : July 5th, 2020 07:49 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Have you ever heard of lynching? L O L. Well I mean lynching is not funny, but this response is. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 741] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 6th, 2020 01:57 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism IMO cultural attitudes in the south weren’t tilted so far in the racial supremacy direction for them to be described as nazis. "Its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." I wonder what more you need. Keep in mind I'm not saying that they were literally the same as Nazis. The Nazis did far worse in history, in part because they weren't as fucking stupid and didn't shoot themselves in the foot at every moment like the Confederacy did. But the Confederacy's ideas were as dangerous as Nazi ideas and they came from the same type of hatred. In terms of death toll, it's hard to put a specific number on the slave trade, but the death toll from the Atlantic slave trade and from the Holocaust were roughly equal. Not all of these can be attributed to the Confederacy, but they are all attributed to the ideas that the Confederacy was founded on. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 742] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 6th, 2020 02:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly my favourite part about cringy redneck southerners sticking so hard to Confederate symbols as their heritage and unifying cause is the implication that southern culture and the south are so shit that their proudest accomplishment in the past 200 years is that time that they formed an unrecognized slave state for 4 years until they got completely trashed. I've taken shits that lasted longer than the Confederacy but you don't see me making statues of them and putting them in my lawn. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 743] Auteur : Date : July 6th, 2020 12:32 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it. And left wingers do? There is a worrying lack of reaction on the left nowadays when it comes to major social issues such as the riots in America; and these riots are all parts of a greater whole. A couple in the US got painted by the media as racists for defending their home against looters who broke into their yard. It was actually quite astonishing to see the differences in the portrayal of that event between CNN and Tucker (I’m not counting Fox News as a whole because I only watch Tucker, and sometimes Ingraham). There are many other examples, and I doubt I am in the wrong here. The left really is more radical than the right nowadays. I believe that the elements of the radical right that exist today arose as a response to ideological excesses on the left. This is not to excuse them of course, but they’ve played a major role in polarization. Take climate change for instance. There is a really high chance that climate change will not be a significant disaster this century. If you take a look at various statistics the environmentalists like to peddle as a) evidence of human influence on the climate and b) evidence of a major humanistic catastrophe occurring later, you’ll find that many of them have no actual basis in reality. There is evidence to suggest that humans are influencing the climate to a significant extent, but the evidence also says that carbon emissions are actually decreasing (and its not because of green energy): developed countries are now switching to cleaner power sources like uranium and natural gas, which do not pollute. There’s a plethora of other reasons, all arising from increase industrialization, technological development and economic growth: forests have actually started growing back in Europe and America, precisely because agriculture has become more efficient and needs less space. I see apocalyptic environmentalism as coming precisely from the left, and more exactly, it’s coning from people who I do not trust: a poll revealed that a significant proportion of British children were convinced that they wouldn’t live past the age of 30 (because of climate change). This is just an example of many. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 744] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 6th, 2020 12:41 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism And left wingers do? There is a worrying lack of reaction on the left nowadays when it comes to major social issues such as the riots in America; and these riots are all parts of a greater whole. Left winger views don't align with nazis, who are far right wingers. So the answer is yes, left wingers distance themselves literally on the other end of the political spectrum. Not all right wingers are nazis. But nazis ARE right wingers. What viewpoints do nazis espouse that align with the left? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 745] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 6th, 2020 12:47 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You can go on a tangent all you want about "radicals" and climate change Doesn't change the fact that nazis are right wing, which is why right wingers that don't distance themselves appropriately from them often get conflated with them -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 746] Auteur : Date : July 6th, 2020 12:48 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism "Its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth." I wonder what more you need. Keep in mind I'm not saying that they were literally the same as Nazis. The Nazis did far worse in history, in part because they weren't as fucking stupid and didn't shoot themselves in the foot at every moment like the Confederacy did. But the Confederacy's ideas were as dangerous as Nazi ideas and they came from the same type of hatred. In terms of death toll, it's hard to put a specific number on the slave trade, but the death toll from the Atlantic slave trade and from the Holocaust were roughly equal. Not all of these can be attributed to the Confederacy, but they are all attributed to the ideas that the Confederacy was founded on. I’m not ignoring that point. I know full well what the VP of the CSA said. However, racist attitudes weren’t uncommon at the time, and honestly I think you can’t divorce the economic aspect of slavery from the institution at all. Its no wonder that racialist policies and slavery survived the longest in the territories where it had economic utility. Brazil and the South were (I believe) the two places in the Americas where slavery survived the longest. If were talking about the death toll, a fairer comparison would be the number of Jewish deaths resulting from pogroms and general antisemitism, versus the number of blacks who died in segregation. You can take both the segregation/slavery occurring in the CSA/the South and in RSA. The number of total Jews killed in pogroms or mass extermination’s most likely far exceeds the number of slaves or blacks who perished under conditions of slavery and apartheid/segregation. The two things that really stand out to me when comparing the Confederates and the Nazis are a) the historical context, and b) the general cultural atmosphere directly caused by/related to the evil committed by both. Remember that slavery was a very old institution in 1860 and it wasn’t as if the South wanted to enslave northern blacks, which is a crucial point that must not be forgotten. I’ve already mentioned the economic aspect, and in my view it cannot be done away with in discussions of slavery. Further, the South did not engage in mass slaughter of slaves; had they been that racist, they could’ve done it; yet they chose not to. Anyways, I don’t think I can convince you that the Confederacy... isn’t as evil as the Nazis. You certainly can tell convince me of the reverse. For me, and I’ll finish by saying this, there is something distinctly awful and heart-wrenching about the Nazis, something the Confederates didn’t have and probably couldn’t have had. The inherent statism of the Nazis plays a huge role in this, but it’s not all. In my view, the war could’ve been avoided if the Union had attempted to compromise with the south in a different way (rather than essentially sticking their fingers in their ears and pretending nothing was wrong). I believe the South could’ve been reasoned with if the proper steps had been taken. This couldn’t have happened with the he nazis, who were hell-bent on annihilating everyone who wasn’t of the master race. In fact the Nazis were so evil, that they put their murderous goals above the need to win the war. Hitler accelerated the mass killings when he started losing the war. That’s no coincidence. And the fact that Hitler killed the Jews instead of enslaving them is quite telling. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 747] Auteur : Date : July 6th, 2020 12:49 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Left winger views don't align with nazis, who are far right wingers. So the answer is yes, left wingers distance themselves literally on the other end of the political spectrum. Not all right wingers are nazis. But nazis ARE right wingers. What viewpoints do nazis espouse that align with the left? My point is that the left does even less than the right to distance themselves from their rabid, dangerous, radical cousins. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 748] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 6th, 2020 12:52 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My point is that the left does even less than the right to distance themselves from their rabid, dangerous, radical cousins. You asked this: why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis? The response you got to your question is this: Because they don't do NEARLY enough to distance themselves from it. This has nothing to do with radicals on the left. You were given an answer, you can address the point or you can try to distract by pointing out flaws on the left. But pointing out flaws on the left doesn't change the fact that nazis and right wingers are conflated because they are "cousins", as you put it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 749] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 6th, 2020 12:55 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'm going to counter that by saying that I literally know everything I know about the US from watching Rachel Maddow and listening to Anita Sarkeesian podcasts, and let me tell you, the US is definitely far-right nowadays. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 750] Auteur : Voss Date : July 6th, 2020 01:14 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Have you ever heard of lynching? Honestly, it also looks like you have no idea what your own points are. Look at how like 5 pages back you pointed out that the Jim Crow laws were actually evidence that the Confederacy was racist, now suddenly you're using it against the north? You asked this: The response you got to your question is this: This has nothing to do with radicals on the left. You were given an answer, you can address the point or you can try to distract by pointing out flaws on the left. But pointing out flaws on the left doesn't change the fact that nazis and right wingers are conflated because they are "cousins", as you put it. Just to reiterate, (though it's unneeded, since Banana already did a good job here) : Mag, you "countered?" my post about my take on why nazi-ism is being associated to conservatism by talking about climate change. what?? I would not expect these types of logic jumps on mafia site. If these logic jumps have been prevalent throughout this thread, props to the people diligently responding to theses posts. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 751] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 6th, 2020 01:15 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Riddle me this: If the Confederacy wasn't fascist, how come when you take the fascist national focus in Hearts of Iron IV you play as the Confederate States of America? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 752] Auteur : Date : July 6th, 2020 02:23 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Just to reiterate, (though it's unneeded, since Banana already did a good job here) : Mag, you "countered?" my post about my take on why nazi-ism is being associated to conservatism by talking about climate change. what?? I would not expect these types of logic jumps on mafia site. If these logic jumps have been prevalent throughout this thread, props to the people diligently responding to theses posts. My point is that radicalization, while it exists on both sides, is worse on the left. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 753] Auteur : Date : July 6th, 2020 02:23 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 754] Auteur : Date : July 6th, 2020 02:24 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Riddle me this: If the Confederacy wasn't fascist, how come when you take the fascist national focus in Hearts of Iron IV you play as the Confederate States of America? Idk, when you play as Fascist Australia you become the Platypus Empire -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 755] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 6th, 2020 02:24 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized. "Nothing to do with nazism" Yet nazis are right wingers, and their views very closely align with those of other right wingers. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 756] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 6th, 2020 02:29 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I mean you yourself confused the "Unite the Right" nazi rally with regular run-of-the-mill right wingers that wanted to defend statues lol That doesn't happen by accident -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 757] Auteur : Voss Date : July 6th, 2020 02:33 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism My point is that radicalization, while it exists on both sides, is worse on the left. Anyways this is a bit of a rant but my question is: What do you feel about the idea that right-wing liberalism has nothing to do with conservatism? A second question is, why is the media trying to paint right wingers as immoral nazis? so the answer to "why is the media painting right wingers as nazis" is "radicalizations are on both sides and the left is worse"? That's not an answer, thats fallacious distracting. It seems like your responses are more suited to a separate thread where you post the statement: "Left wing radicalizations are worse than right radicalizations for reasons x, y, z". One of those reasons being climate change or something. Another reason could be that rioting is better than nazi-ism. That is not what you asked, and you did nothing to disprove my answer, nor agreed with it. I think my reasoning is spot on. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 758] Auteur : Voss Date : July 6th, 2020 02:37 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You can’t criticize people who have nothing to do with Nazism if the mainstream left is very radicalized. Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to? So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary. That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 759] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 6th, 2020 02:46 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to? So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary. That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here. I envy you in that you haven't read the entire thread, of which about half was devoted to countering the argument that the Confederacy was bad because it was a racist state founded on slavery with the argument of "well the Union did bad things too", in absolute earnest. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 760] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 6th, 2020 02:48 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to? So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary. That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here. He is quite good at deflecting like this. There's a reason why this thread has over 700 responses -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 761] Auteur : Voss Date : July 6th, 2020 02:49 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Silly example, but illustrates the point: Imagine me Voss, as a right wing politician. I go and do some cool speech that gets televised and that gets people to vote for me. Next this self proclaimed nazi, called Noss, does this crazy evil stunt, and gets in front of a camera and says "Woo nazi-ism! Woo Voss! Voss 2020". If I don't denounce this person, I'm implicitly allowing support of this group to be part of the non nazis that support me. Ergo, Nazis are now part of my right wing coalition. A moral Voss politician should denounce this, to put some distance. Then, when some reporter asks why Voss is or isn't a nazi due to his supporter's affiliation, Voss can say "nono, I don't stand for that and I denounced it back on March 3, 2016". or something. A more concrete example would be that Unite the Right Rally. If you're going to a rally, and there are people waving nazi flags, you should leave, and denounce that rally. What the left does or doesn't do badly has nothing to do with this percept that the right has. I'll say it again. It's fallacious reasoning. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 762] Auteur : Voss Date : July 6th, 2020 02:53 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I envy you in that you haven't read the entire thread, of which about half was devoted to countering the argument that the Confederacy was bad because it was a racist state founded on slavery with the argument of "well the Union did bad things too", in absolute earnest. I can just fall back to "climate change is not a reason against right wing nazi-ism. I also might bow out of this thread. I don't want to have to keep typing nazi. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 763] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 6th, 2020 03:17 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Silly example, but illustrates the point: Imagine me Voss, as a right wing politician. I go and do some cool speech that gets televised and that gets people to vote for me. Next this self proclaimed nazi, called Noss, does this crazy evil stunt, and gets in front of a camera and says "Woo nazi-ism! Woo Voss! Voss 2020". If I don't denounce this person, I'm implicitly allowing support of this group to be part of the non nazis that support me. Ergo, Nazis are now part of my right wing coalition. A moral Voss politician should denounce this, to put some distance. Then, when some reporter asks why Voss is or isn't a nazi due to his supporter's affiliation, Voss can say "nono, I don't stand for that and I denounced it back on March 3, 2016". or something. A more concrete example would be that Unite the Right Rally. If you're going to a rally, and there are people waving nazi flags, you should leave, and denounce that rally. What the left does or doesn't do badly has nothing to do with this percept that the right has. I'll say it again. It's fallacious reasoning. I like this example but I think there's the caveat that denouncing or clarifying certain things does not absolve you of responsibility for them in every case. For example, if you say "I think we should solve our problem with insert target group here once and for all" and then later "clarify" that you meant solving crime or poverty within their communities or something, it's a clear-cut case of dogwhistling and doesn't mean you're free from the consequences of the alternate interpretation. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 764] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:04 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You’re acting like one situation like that is in any way comparable to the influence the media holds, and which they use to push radical left ideology. I see this reflected in the pervasive PC culture that is inescapable nowadays. Affirmative action (which is actually quite racist and doesn’t help people, by the way) is a good example. Bright students are being discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity. It doesn’t help black students either, lowering entry standards doesn’t help anyone. The movements to dismantle statues, many of which have very little to do with racism or even slavery, is another aspect. What does Churchill have to do with racism or slavery? Sure he had some racist views, but the man literally thought against one of the most oppressive regimes in history and was a great philosemite. There are many other examples. What does Christopher Columbus have to do with anything? He discovered (or, rather, REdiscovered) the American continent. Nobody celebrates him for his role in the expansion of the Spanish Empire, which resulted in the near destruction of relatively advanced civilizations like the Aztecs, the Mayans (the Mayan League had already stopped existing by the time Europeans got there, but I still count it because the Mayan civilization itself was still extant at the time of his first landing), or the Incans. The constant, down-your-throat force feeding of PC-agenda - in movies, video games, books - is another good example. Do you know what effect gender ideology has on children? Because it ain’t a good one. Finally, the fundamentally racist, racial rhetoric the media likes to peddle around nowadays that pits (primarily) white vs black is another example of the radical left-wing ideology that is being peddled around. I think the left needs to deal with their crazy cousins before they can worry about the right. Hell, they’re the reason the radical right has seen a surge in popularity nowadays. The left really can’t adopt a moralistic tone now because they’re the reason for the mess we find ourselves in. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 765] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You’re acting like one situation like that is in any way comparable to the influence the media holds, and which they use to push radical left ideology. I see this reflected in the pervasive PC culture that is inescapable nowadays. Affirmative action (which is actually quite racist and doesn’t help people, by the way) is a good example. Bright students are being discriminated against on the basis of their ethnicity. It doesn’t help black students either, lowering entry standards doesn’t help anyone. The movements to dismantle statues, many of which have very little to do with racism or even slavery, is another aspect. What does Churchill have to do with racism or slavery? Sure he had some racist views, but the man literally thought against one of the most oppressive regimes in history and was a great philosemite. There are many other examples. What does Christopher Columbus have to do with anything? He discovered (or, rather, REdiscovered) the American continent. Nobody celebrates him for his role in the expansion of the Spanish Empire, which resulted in the near destruction of relatively advanced civilizations like the Aztecs, the Mayans (the Mayan League had already stopped existing by the time Europeans got there, but I still count it because the Mayan civilization itself was still extant at the time of his first landing), or the Incans. The constant, down-your-throat force feeding of PC-agenda - in movies, video games, books - is another good example. Do you know what effect gender ideology has on children? Because it ain’t a good one. Finally, the fundamentally racist, racial rhetoric the media likes to peddle around nowadays that pits (primarily) white vs black is another example of the radical left-wing ideology that is being peddled around. I think the left needs to deal with their crazy cousins before they can worry about the right. Hell, they’re the reason the radical right has seen a surge in popularity nowadays. The left really can’t adopt a moralistic tone now because they’re the reason for the mess we find ourselves in. You're still deflecting and distracting lmao -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 766] Auteur : Voss Date : July 7th, 2020 07:08 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You did it again Ganelon. I'm out. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 767] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:10 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes I can. Why wouldn't I be able to? So, I haven't seen reasonings support of the fact that right wingers have nothing to do with Nazi-ism. In this thread, I have seen evidence of the contrary. That aside, this thread is about right wing conservatism, not why right wing tactics are ok given that we "allow" left wing folks to get away with bad things. It's hard to talk about one without talking about the other, sure. But you can't justify bad things because the other side is doing bad things. Which you are clearly doing here. I’m not doing that, and it definitely isn’t at all clear that that is what I’m doing, because I’m not doing that st all. There is nothing moral about painting right wingers as nazis when there is a far more pressing concern on the left with regards to radicalism. One could almost call it deflecting - it is definitely a form of willful blindness and one has to ask themselves - why? Well, there’s a few possible reasons. The first and simplest reason is that the media (and the politicians they support) are lying about their actual intent, and their baseless (and in some cases, scientifically wrong) ideologies are actually just a smokescreen that they don’t expect anyone to seriously believe in (although college students seem to be quite vulnerable to this). The overwhelming majority of right wingers aren’t nazis, and there is absolutely no evidence that they are. Nobody is defending racist policies here or saying we should enact any. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 768] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:11 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You did it again Ganelon. I'm out. Yeah I see no reason to address any of Galeon's points when he ignores what is posted in response time and time again to go on ranty tangents in another direction -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 769] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:13 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m not doing that, and it definitely isn’t at all clear that that is what I’m doing, because I’m not doing that st all. There is nothing moral about painting right wingers as nazis when there is a far more pressing concern on the left with regards to radicalism. One could almost call it deflecting - it is definitely a form of willful blindness and one has to ask themselves - why? Well, there’s a few possible reasons. The first and simplest reason is that the media (and the politicians they support) are lying about their actual intent, and their baseless (and in some cases, scientifically wrong) ideologies are actually just a smokescreen that they don’t expect anyone to seriously believe in (although college students seem to be quite vulnerable to this). The overwhelming majority of right wingers aren’t nazis, and there is absolutely no evidence that they are. Nobody is defending racist policies here or saying we should enact any. Yet 100% of nazis are right wingers. Which is where the association is made. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 770] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:14 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly, if you guys can’t have a mature discussion and address my points instead of calling what I’m saying and doing ‘deflecting, distracting’ or saying that I’m defending nazis (which is a very reprehensible thing to say to someone you purport to like), then you need to grow the hell up. Stop attacking my character and address the points I’m trying to make. I literally feel like I’m talking to a wall and every time I find something to reach to you, it’s like you stick it together imperfectly with duct tape, leaving me with a smaller hole which I can use to try to get to you. But then, that process continues indefinitely until there’s no holes left. I am done. Unless someone is willing to address the points I’m trying to make in a mature, adult, and constructive way, I am done posting in this thread. Good nye -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 771] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism For example, the media reports that the "Unite the Right" rally is a nazi rally attended by nazi supporters People on the right call foul, claim the rally had lots of good people who were just defending a statue and say the media should stop "painting them as nazis" Yet the rally was literally a nazi rally attended by nazis There's no painting being done here. If you dont want to.be associated with nazis, its up to you to distance yourself from them. First step is to make sure you arent caught accidentally defending them like you have in this post. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 772] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:16 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism You’re literally the only people I know who are ignoring the fact that the media and society at large is very left - leaning, and radical. Even leftists in real life agree with me in that something us seriously wrong. There’s nothing wrong with being a leftist, but radicalism is where I draw the line. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 773] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:17 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism For example, the media reports that the "Unite the Right" rally is a nazi rally attended by nazi supporters People on the right call foul, claim the rally had lots of good people who were just defending a statue and say the media should stop "painting them as nazis" Yet the rally was literally a nazi rally attended by nazis There's no painting being done here. If you dont want to.be associated with nazis, its up to you to distance yourself from them. First step is to make sure you arent caught accidentally defending them like you have in this post. Yes. That is one scenario where the right was wrong. I didn’t say the right didn’t do stupid shit. I said the left did more of it, and you can’t deny that if you look at the state of the world today. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 774] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:18 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly, if you guys can’t have a mature discussion and address my points instead of calling what I’m saying and doing ‘deflecting, distracting’ or saying that I’m defending nazis (which is a very reprehensible thing to say to someone you purport to like), then you need to grow the hell up. Stop attacking my character and address the points I’m trying to make. I literally feel like I’m talking to a wall and every time I find something to reach to you, it’s like you stick it together imperfectly with duct tape, leaving me with a smaller hole which I can use to try to get to you. But then, that process continues indefinitely until there’s no holes left. I am done. Unless someone is willing to address the points I’m trying to make in a mature, adult, and constructive way, I am done posting in this thread. Good nye Galeon, we are attacking your argument, not your character. We are asking you to stay focused on the argument instead of changing the argument into something else time and time again. Your response every time about anything is "yeah well the left is worse because of these reasons" when that has nothing to do with the original argument. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 775] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:20 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No, saying I’m deflecting and distracting is a complicated ad hominem and it’s one I refuse to engage in, because honestly every time I look at this thread I hope that MAYBE someone will finally agree with something that I have to say. But I know it’s never happening, because the points are make are cordial reasoning, deflections, defenses of Nazism or god knows what else. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 776] Auteur : Voss Date : July 7th, 2020 07:20 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Galeon, we are attacking your argument, not your character. We are asking you to stay focused on the argument instead of changing the argument into something else time and time again. Your response every time about anything is "yeah well the left is worse because of these reasons" when that has nothing to do with the original argument. ^^ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 777] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Yes. That is one scenario where the right was wrong. I didn’t say the right didn’t do stupid shit. I said the left did more of it, and you can’t deny that if you look at the state of the world today. Yet this thread isnt even about the left. Its about right wing liberalism vs right wing conservatism. And apparently wanting to understand why right wingers are often conflated nazis. And when provided with reasons ehy, you immediately go on the defensive. Was your intention the whole time just hoping to bait certain responses so that you could rant about the left? Or to actually have your original questions answered? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 778] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:21 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m literally arguing the left is more radical and that they have no business painting right wingers as nazis when there is absolutely no evidence of this being the case, and then you launch into whatsboutisms about something Trump said. Sure, I agree that he fucked up there but one wrong move doesn’t make one a nazi. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 779] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:22 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Honestly I don’t even remember the original purpose of this thread, except that I understood my own beliefs a lot better after reading some paper. We all went on tangents that had nothing to do with the thread. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 780] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism No, saying I’m deflecting and distracting is a complicated ad hominem and it’s one I refuse to engage in, because honestly every time I look at this thread I hope that MAYBE someone will finally agree with something that I have to say. But I know it’s never happening, because the points are make are cordial reasoning, deflections, defenses of Nazism or god knows what else. You claim ad hominem. I say that your arguments are red herrings. Thats not an ad hominem attack, its an attack directly at your argument. I’m literally arguing the left is more radical and that they have no business painting right wingers as nazis when there is absolutely no evidence of this being the case, and then you launch into whatsboutisms about something Trump said. Sure, I agree that he fucked up there but one wrong move doesn’t make one a nazi. Trumps words supporting a nazi rally are absolutely relevant to a topic about why right wingers are associated with nazis -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 781] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Dude saying that someone’s argument is a red herring OVERAND OVER is not logical. I know I’m not the most straightforward person and oftentimes I am wrong, but nobody can be THAT wrong. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 782] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:28 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The only time someone has agreed with me in this thread or not attacked me is when I took the leftist side. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 783] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I’m literally arguing the left is more radical and that they have no business painting right wingers as nazis when there is absolutely no evidence of this being the case, and then you launch into whatsboutisms about something Trump said. Sure, I agree that he fucked up there but one wrong move doesn’t make one a nazi. You have been provided many pages of evidence Every time, you turn it into "yeah but the left is worse because..." You say everyone else is using whataboutisms yet every comeback is tu quoque - you answer criticisms about the right with criticisms about the left -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 784] Auteur : Voss Date : July 7th, 2020 07:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Here's an example of how I'd respond in your fashion: The media and the left aren't that bad. Pedophiles are bad and they're the real evil here. They're people like Epstein and they're the scum of the earth bc they ruin children. Now, this has nothing to do with the left, or the right arguments, but I can peddle that in response to each one of your posts. Let me tell you, it doesn't feel great. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 785] Auteur : Date : July 7th, 2020 07:29 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism When you’re ready to discuss this without emotions getting in the way, let me know. Until then, I am done. This really is my last post on this thread. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 786] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:34 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism When you’re ready to discuss this without emotions getting in the way, let me know. Until then, I am done. This really is my last post on this thread. I mean you're the one getting emotional here mate ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 787] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:35 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The only time someone has agreed with me in this thread or not attacked me is when I took the leftist side. Appeal to emotion ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 788] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 07:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Dude saying that someone’s argument is a red herring OVERAND OVER is not logical. I know I’m not the most straightforward person and oftentimes I am wrong, but nobody can be THAT wrong. Yet you've done nothing to disprove that except provide more/different red herrings ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Every bit of evidence is discarded in favor of tu quoque arguments about the left How we get from "right wingers arent nazis" to arguments about climate change is confusing -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 789] Auteur : Frinckles Date : July 7th, 2020 08:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'd hop back in but I don't actually know what content is being debated. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 790] Auteur : BananaCucho Date : July 7th, 2020 08:00 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I'd hop back in but I don't actually know what content is being debated. Yeah. Thats exactly right. lol -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 791] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : July 7th, 2020 08:31 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism The only time someone has agreed with me in this thread or not attacked me is when I took the leftist side. That's because... Left is Right Freedom is Slavery War is Peace :calix: :calix: :calix: :calix: :calix: :calix: :calix: Also, this thread has derailed so many times that nobody can reply to anything logically anymore xD -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 792] Auteur : rumox Date : July 7th, 2020 08:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Like I said we go off on these side roads that the original point gets lost because we aren't talking about X anymore, we are now talking about Y, which goes to Z. It's why I yeeted myself out because it's not a discussion it's just chasing the dragon. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 793] Auteur : Voss Date : July 7th, 2020 08:55 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism it's partly why i didn't read the entire thread. I just read the second post and responded to it. Then we started talking about climate change? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 794] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 7th, 2020 10:26 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I maintain that the left is good because Donald Trump is a literal child rapist and I won't listen to any of your arguments until someone posts a 500 page essay refuting that claim. I once saw a segment on TYT that told me that right-wing governments around the world are forcing people to use racial slurs when referring to any non-white minority, which I now accept as fact. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 795] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 7th, 2020 10:27 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think it's telling of something that I had to Google for left-wing demagogues and figureheads because I couldn't think of any off the top of my head. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 796] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 7th, 2020 10:32 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism https://shop.donaldjtrump.com/products/america-first-tee https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1427/9954/products/0174-5040-WH-M-2_900x900.png?v=1574113233 -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 797] Auteur : rumox Date : July 7th, 2020 10:36 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I fucking love eagles being used in banners but Trump using it is troll as fuck. Every flag I have used in Bannerlord has had eagles. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 798] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 8th, 2020 02:25 AM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I miss this thread. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 799] Auteur : Helz Date : July 9th, 2020 11:48 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Never said the North wasn't evil in fact I have made several posts indicating the opposite. If you choose to interpret that I have the stance that the North is morally superior and can't be evil after I have said numerous times they weren't then that's on you, not me. I'm not here to argue every half degree, intricate variable of the civil war. I have said my purpose time and time again, you cannot separate the abolishment sentiment that predominantly came from Northern states from why the South seceded. I think I have said this at least 5 times now. Literally go read the thread again if you think I am propping the North up on some false moral platform. You and Ganelon can run off on tangents all you want but I will keep bringing up the point that Ganelon tries to stray from. This has good points. I really think there is very few points you have made that I felt were unfair. I should probably step back and consider your position more as I post. Call it a character flaw of mine. This entire discussion is 50x longer than it needs to be because it literally ran off into dozens of whataboutisms. I do get what your saying here but I very honestly dislike the idea that "whataboutism" is treated like a logical fallacy. It basically allows for an argument to ignore context/circumstance when convenient and frame the other persons comments as a red herring. If what I said is erroneous its a red herring. If its not then "whataboutism" is just a crappy way to exclude conversation that detracts from your desired position. It creates the vague direction that someone is talking about 'other stuff' to deflate or support some other unspoken position which is one really ugly logic jump allowing misrepresentation on an extreme level. Maybe its just our mafia roots considering the counter train strategy but that line allows for an insane amount of bias while attempting to command the consideration of a logical fallacy and I just don't care for it. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 800] Auteur : Helz Date : July 9th, 2020 11:48 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I think that intent, in a large portion of situations, is relatively constant. If you reduce it, most actions people take are done to benefit themselves or their lineage, at least to their own knowledge. Also in general I'm definitely a pragmatist, and I think sitting around philosophizing about intent and even morality of actions depending on one's ulterior motives is absolutely useless. I think someone's ulterior motives in taking an action, insofar as those ulterior motives don't manifest themselves as malicious actions down the line, don't matter at all. That's why I don't particularly care if Lincoln actually wanted to free the slaves or if he just wanted to use the slaves as a political tool against the south, because the end result was the same. The only reason I would care is if I had reason to believe that his motives one way or another resulted in a less favourable situation for black people in the US than would have otherwise happened. Keep in mind I'm not denying that motives are entirely irrelevant, to the extent that these motives might result in future underhanded actions. For example, someone giving a donation might want something out of it and attach strings to the donation, versus someone just donating out of the good of their heart. But again, this comes down to difference in actions, and to me it's useless to consider motives if the end result is exactly the same. This is also why murder and manslaughter deserve to be different crimes; someone who killed someone with intent has a different predisposition to commit more crimes than someone who killed someone unintentionally, and they should be treated differently based on that, whether in terms of future support or protecting society from them. I'm not really trying to paint the Union as moral, I just don't think that the Union's actions are in any way a reflection of what the Confederacy was. The Confederacy wanted to keep slaves and was founded on a cornerstone of racism, which is in stark contrast with the Union, which while also racist for many years also didn't have racism codified as a central belief. I don't think honouring Confederate symbols and figures is something that people should protect because of what the Confederacy represented. It's impossible to disentangle those ideas and symbols from slavery and racism. The Union did a lot of bad stuff during the war and they absolutely perpetrated racism, including systematic racism, for many years. But I really don't give a shit because that barely has anything to do with my original point. I understand the Union was majority Republican. I also understand that political parties change over many years. To my understanding, the Republican party was respectable and generally more aligned with my beliefs until Nixon's presidency. This makes a lot of sense to me in a lot of ways. -edit If your interested I think this piece does quite a bit to outline true systemic issues in the US law with great respect to intention and morality https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl6yXjdMlHI -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 801] Auteur : rumox Date : July 9th, 2020 11:56 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism I agree context is important but the way Ganelon did it was flawed and annoying. "South is racist but so was the North" to sum it up. Like, no duh that isn't the point. I haven't read this thread in awhile but if memory serves me right this happened a lot. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 802] Auteur : oops_ur_dead Date : July 11th, 2020 06:43 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sherman didn't go far enough. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- [Post 803] Auteur : Marshmallow Marshall Date : July 12th, 2020 01:18 PM Title : Re: Right-wing liberalism vs Conservvatism Sherman didn't go far enough. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JhvvjEysHU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6JhvvjEysHU WHILE WE WERE MARCHING THROUGH... wait what is this place I'm locking this thread. The actual serious discussion was done lol, and the thread is horribly off-topic now. Just read the title and then read the most recent pages if you don't believe me ;). -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-