Progressives Gone Wild [Archive] - HungAngels - Guide to TGirls and Transsexuals

broncofan

11-18-2021, 10:16 PM

Nick Danger

11-19-2021, 01:13 AM

I read the article but I have a brain so I have a different take than you.

One of the biggest problems with the Republican party is that they claim they merely want to avoid excessive offense over insensitive words yet they defend overt racism. Your party seems to make excuses for the kind of dehumanizing racism that gets people killed. If for instance Marjorie Taylor Greene were able to get her way would she kill Muslims? I'd have trouble arguing that she wouldn't. Would she kill Jews? If believing Jews were evil and should be harmed were a Republican dogma I believe she'd happily go along with it. Afterall, she thinks we control lasers from outer space.

Paul Gosar recently posted a meme that threatened the life of AOC. This isn't merely insensitive. It's a threat to civilized society.

In this article you linked, the girl in question clearly subscribed to a worldview where Jews are not to be trusted and are behind everything she doesn't like including Hillary Clinton's debate performance. She engages in a conversation with someone who says "God will kill the Jews" repeatedly and she says nothing. She was young enough that she can redeem herself but how normal is it to engage in conspiratorial antisemitism or talk about exterminating people? Shouldn't we take that seriously? Is it an excuse if she implies that kind of talk is common in North Africa? I don't think dehumanizing speech should be relativized or normalized.

I think you're going to have a lot of trouble convincing civilized people that it should be normal to threaten people (like Gosar) or call people subhuman or subscribe to a worldview where specific people are considered agents of any misfortune you suffer. Without question there is a problem holding people accountable for past words (particularly when they're teenagers). At what point have they changed? But Republicans really seem to have gotten to the point where they think present racism and threats of violence are okay.

You're missing the humor of the story, Bronco. I mean you've got this antisemitic (big surprise) Muslim girl who's being asked to resign, which then results in accusations of "rampant anti-Muslim bigotry" and sexism against HER accusers. Woke-ism is eating itself and O.Henry couldn't have written the denouement any better.

It's interesting you should bring up racism and threats of violence, Bronco, because the Democrats are the race agitators in every situation. And they don't stop at mere threats of violence, they burn cities to the ground. Not really clear on what your point is here, Bronco, but it sounds suspiciously like the pot calling everything else in the kitchen black.

As for that Gosar video, not sure what to tell you. Haven't seen it, don't find the story particularly interesting, but I got the gist of it from the news. I don't think you've got a firm handle on exactly how badly Joe Biden is fucking up, Bronco. He won an election by the narrowest of margins behind veiled threats of Democrat thugs tearing the country to shreds, and he's treating it as a mandate to turn this nation into a welfare state. Or at least that's what his handlers are doing, I doubt Sleepy Joe even knows what state he's in from one hour to the next. I can't believe we actually have a senile old fool for a PRESIDENT now. Thanks, Big Tech.

Anyway, it's no surprise to me that people are calling for his head, and that of AOC, a literal moron with zero capacity for critical thinking, who is using her substantial platform to try to sell socialism to capitalists. "Fidel Castro with tits" probably would have been dragged through the streets by now if this were 60 years ago. Polish mercenary Rafal Ganowicz, when asked what it feels like to take a human life: "I wouldn't know, I've only ever killed communists."

I'll end this by extending to you the same invitation I extended to Stavros, Bronco. I invite you to give me one single example of actual systemic racism in this country. Just one. I'm waiting. It's a horseshit media narrative is all it is.

1354148

broncofan

11-19-2021, 02:45 AM

broncofan

11-19-2021, 02:58 AM

"Fidel Castro with tits" probably would have been dragged through the streets by now if this were 60 years ago. Polish mercenary Rafal Ganowicz, when asked what it feels like to take a human life: "I wouldn't know, I've only ever killed communists."

I don't know who this Polish mercenary is but I couldn't disagree more strongly. I have nothing in common with Communists and if someone told me they were a Communist I probably wouldn't trust their judgment on most things. I would not however think they should lose personhood status or don't deserve basic civil rights. I don't even think the Neo-Nazis from your party who stormed our capitol should be treated as subhuman or denied civil rights. There's no excuse for threatening AOC or anyone else ffs.

filghy2

11-19-2021, 08:06 AM

Nick Danger

11-19-2021, 12:21 PM

It's not that I don't see any issue with anyone's actions in the article you linked but it's far better than just turning a blind eye to racism. I don't think I'd want to hold someone accountable for things they said when they're 13. At the same time I would have appreciated a better apology from her. I don't think her being Muslim caused her to say what she said anymore than MTG's whiteness caused her delusions about practically everyone and everything.

How is the bickering outlined in the article more worrisome than Republicans inciting violence against their fellow lawmakers? I also don't see a problem condemning Kathy Griffin but I will point out that she's not a lawmaker. If she were I bet you more than two Democrats would have voted to censure her. The problem with your party is that specific threats of violence against other lawmakers have been sanctioned by almost all Republicans in Congress.

If you're interested in systemic racism you should probably look at our criminal justice system. The death penalty is more likely to be used in cases where there was a white victim than a black victim even when you adjust for rates of victimization. The numbers are more egregious for outcomes in drug cases. If you think white people are equally likely to be prosecuted for minor drug offenses as black people you should probably be drug tested. I'd be happy to provide you more info on this in the next few days. But this is where I'd start. I also think our healthcare system probably would provide a good example as well of unequal treatment producing significantly different health outcomes.

The word "worrisome" as applied to all this political banter doesn't sit right with me. Was anyone ever really "worried" that Kathy Griffin was going to chop off Donald Trump's head? Is anyone worried that Paul Gosar is going to turn into some kind of anime avatar and wreak havoc on his political opposition? Kathy Griffin was blacklisted. Paul Gosar was censured. End of story, no heads rolled and no Transformers transformed. It's all just hyperbole, but of course with (my estimate) 90% of the American populace being too intellectually under-served to vote on relevant issues in real time, hyperbole is what we have now.

I'm genuinely curious, Bronco, about your opinion on the Arab-Jewish thing. Most Arabs are raised from birth hating Jews. And vice versa. It's a hatred that extends back thousands of years, to before progressivism, to before the Anno Domini calendar, before the Roman Empire, before the Egyptian empire, before 99% of recorded history. It's a much more intense hatred than black vs white, these two groups want each other dead, they want each other's children dead, they want their pets, their beasts of burden, their livestock, dead, dead, dead, their homes and crops burned, their lands ravaged. It's a hatred from the very core of being that burns with the white-hot intensity of a thousand suns.

Whites want blacks to get their collective shit together, and blacks want whites to...well, I don't know, I came to an impasse there. But we manage to get along, overall, within the same society. Arabs and Jews can't even live across a river from each other without bombing the other side.

So how is this, uh, little problem going to fit into the progressive agenda? So far it's fitting in just fine, they simply don't talk about it. But suddenly you've got young Arabs and Jews in the same political organizations. These are not seasoned adults here, they haven't learned yet how to keep their hatreds hidden. Their agenda is ostensibly battling "racism," but meanwhile they are the absolute most adamant and unforgiving racists in the history of the planet. You think they're going to start getting along? You think they're going to bury the proverbial hatchet? Yeah, a lot of people have thought that for a long, long time.

Far as the criminal justice system, that's a legitimate debate. Are more blacks being punished by the system because they're black? Or are more blacks being punished by the system because they commit more crimes? Statistics say it's the latter. I tend to agree with you that blacks are more likely than whites to be executed by the death penalty. Most juries are mostly white. Why? Well, first of all, more people in the USA are white than black, by far. And secondly, in order to be called for jury duty, you have to be a taxpayer and a registered voter. In a mostly black city like Baltimore or Memphis you're going to get a mostly black jury. In a mostly white city you're going to get a mostly white jury. This is an "issue" that is easily questioned, but also easily explained.

And you know something, Bronco? I have personally been arrested for drugs several times in my youth. A few times for marijuana, once for cocaine, once for LSD. Simple possession, I was never a drug dealer. And I remember the penalties being quite harsh - time in jail, large fines, and years of probation. Hell, there was a (very white) judge named Turner in Sumner County TN who once told me that if I ever appeared in his court again he was going to throw the book at me; then he proceeded to read to me, verbatim, an entire chapter of Dick Nixon's War on Drugs propaganda from the early 70's regarding the harmful effects of marijuana. Luckily, by the time I did find myself in front of him again, he'd forgotten me.

My point is I never got a break for being white, and this was in the early 80's, an era when the "N" word had just recently gone out of fashion. Special treatment for whites by the criminal justice system is a myth. They do you based on what you did, it's not more complicated than that.

I don't know who this Polish mercenary is but I couldn't disagree more strongly. I have nothing in common with Communists and if someone told me they were a Communist I probably wouldn't trust their judgment on most things. I would not however think they should lose personhood status or don't deserve basic civil rights. I don't even think the Neo-Nazis from your party who stormed our capitol should be treated as subhuman or denied civil rights. There's no excuse for threatening AOC or anyone else ffs.

That Polish mercenary is nobody, just a guy who said one quote that was so awesome his name will live forever.

You know, Bronco, there is a very fundamental dissonance between capitalism and communism. They are essential opposite philosophies of government, and communism has proved to be the lesser form without question. The big problem with communism is that it's an easy sell to children. "Yes, everything SHOULD be distributed equally," thinks the inexperienced and idealistic mind of the person who has never confronted poverty or studied the USSR. That's why killing communists is so widely accepted. They're incorrigible, so killing them is in some cases the only legitimate choice to protect one's children from their damaging influence. We don't do it here in the USA because our nation is strong enough to make the case against socialism/communism to our children, as they grow up and contend with the reality of life on Planet Earth. For someone like AOC, a sheltered, upper middle-class, socialist-educated suburbanite who's never faced a real problem in her life, the day of reckoning will never come. She lives in a separate reality. But in a lesser nation they'd have simply burned her down long ago.

Nick Danger

11-19-2021, 12:42 PM

So, is this wilder that a party in which criticism of Trump's big stolen election lie or the events of January 6 is now forbidden on pain of political death? Is is wilder than Republican congressional leaders grovelling to a man who abuses them and was indifferent to their safety on January 6? Is it wilder than claiming that a President can't be investigated even after he's left office, as if he was some absolute monarch? Is is wilder than all the Republican supporters who approve of the QAnon cult?

We know how this works. The more extreme the party you support becomes, the more you have to double down to try to convince yourself that the problems are really on the other side.

You know why Jan. 6 happened Flighty? Because people absolutely could not accept that their fellow countrymen were stupid enough to elect Joe Biden as President. Cognitive dissonance, it didn't seem viable. Now me, I accept the results of the election. I'm not even sure there wasn't some shady business there, but if the Democrats did rig that election, I respect that. All's fair in politics.

Stavros

11-19-2021, 07:14 PM

Laphroaig

11-20-2021, 03:47 PM

You know why Jan. 6 happened Flighty? Because people absolutely could not accept that their fellow countrymen were stupid enough to elect Joe Biden as President. Cognitive dissonance, it didn't seem viable. Now me, I accept the results of the election. I'm not even sure there wasn't some shady business there, but if the Democrats did rig that election, I respect that. All's fair in politics.

Correction, Jan 6th happened because people were stupid enough to believe Trumps lies.

MrFanti

11-20-2021, 05:27 PM

Bill Maher has illustrated the extreme gap between Progressive Liberals and Classical Liberals - and right now, that gap is huge.

Stavros

11-20-2021, 05:54 PM

Bill Maher has illustrated the extreme gap between Progressive Liberals and Classical Liberals - and right now, that gap is huge.

a) Who is Bill Maher?
b) do you have a link to his distinctions -I can't get any from google
c) what is the difference between a classical liberal and a progressive liberal
and
d) maybe you Americans are more interested in labels as some kind of fetish, or a replacement tool than an actual discussion about ideas in politics, the economy and society?

MrFanti

11-20-2021, 07:11 PM

d) maybe you Americans are more interested in labels as some kind of fetish, or a replacement tool than an actual discussion about ideas in politics, the economy and society?
Unfortunately, Americans when they disagree instantly go the label/name calling route. And this is for BOTH Liberals and Conservatives.
Note that discussion doesn't mean that one party is inherently correct and the other is inherently incorrect.

And a problem with discussion is that each side doesn't listen to the other and instead keeps blasting away their point as if smash the other side into succession.

Nick Danger

11-20-2021, 07:11 PM

a) Who is Bill Maher?
b) do you have a link to his distinctions -I can't get any from google
c) what is the difference between a classical liberal and a progressive liberal
and
d) maybe you Americans are more interested in labels as some kind of fetish, or a replacement tool than an actual discussion about ideas in politics, the economy and society?

a) Bill Maher is a liberal talk-show host who occasionally demonstrates that he is still a normal human being by saying something conservative.
b) Distinctions? Far as I know he has not been knighted but his ratings are pretty good.
c) A classical liberal wants more spending on social programs but realizes money doesn't grow out of the human anus; a progressive liberal is an angry teenager, or an adult with fetal alcohol syndrome. Sadly this is irreversible.
d) This, uh, sounds more like a statement with a question mark at the end of it than an actual question.

MrFanti

11-20-2021, 10:30 PM

c) what is the difference between a classical liberal and a progressive liberal?

HUGE difference between the two. There are many reads out there that define the differences, an "internet search" will provide you with a myriad of results. That being said, here is one.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/whats-the-difference-betw_b_9140
Many consider Carter, Kennedy, Bill Clinton to be "Classic" Liberals. To many, Obama is a hybrid between the Classic and Progressive Liberal.
The current US Administration is definitely Progressive Liberal IMHO.

Re: my previous comment about the divide between Classic and Progressive Liberals, here's on OpEd and the Liberal division....
https://www.cato-unbound.org/2021/02/12/kevin-vallier/classical-liberals-polarized-age-war-politics-greatest-threat-liberty/

Stavros

11-21-2021, 04:43 AM

HUGE difference between the two. There are many reads out there that define the differences, an "internet search" will provide you with a myriad of results. That being said, here is one.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/whats-the-difference-betw_b_9140
Many consider Carter, Kennedy, Bill Clinton to be "Classic" Liberals. To many, Obama is a hybrid between the Classic and Progressive Liberal.
The current US Administration is definitely Progressive Liberal IMHO.

Re: my previous comment about the divide between Classic and Progressive Liberals, here's on OpEd and the Liberal division....
https://www.cato-unbound.org/2021/02/12/kevin-vallier/classical-liberals-polarized-age-war-politics-greatest-threat-liberty/

Many thanks Mr Fanti for these two links, I have read them both. The article by David Sirota originally from 2005 actually distinguishes between a Liberal and a Progressive, so I am not sure that a 'Progressive liberal' is in fact a category. In both cases, I see differences that don't amount to much so I don't know why the distinction is made.

A further problem arises when he considers the anti-trust law know as the 'Sherman Act' of 1890. John Sherman was a Republican, and 103 years later, this is a key interpretation of justification for that law-

"The purpose of the [Sherman] Act is not to protect businesses from the working of the market; it is to protect the public from the failure of the market. The law directs itself not against conduct which is competitive, even severely so, but against conduct which unfairly tends to destroy competition itself."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sherman_Antitrust_Act_of_1890

This seems to me to reflect also the way that Republican and Democrat parties have flipped since the Anti-American War of the 1860s, as I am sure these days it is not Liberals of any type, but Conservatives and Libertarians who would argue the State should never interfere with market forces, that the provisions of the Sherman Act be dismissed and the Act and any laws related to it repealsed. The Democrats, most obviously under FDR re-defined what the relationship could be, between the State and the Citizen, even if FDR was poaching ideas from the 19thc Republicans, and I think we can agree that LBJ was sufficiently influenced by FDR to use the powers of and money raised by the Federal Govt to address issues of poverty and to increase the extent of welfare as a compensation for 'market failure' in the US -and this, it seems to me, is where the dividing line was drawn, as the 'New Deal Administation' and its thinking dominated US domestic policy until the election of Ronald Reagan who said, as I am sure you know, 'Government is not the soution to the problem, Governmet IS the problem'.

Indeed, in the more interesting article in Cato Unbound Kevin Vallier makes a strong case for the 'social trust' which he says is the essential ingredient that enables the US to hold together as a Union of 50 States, though he is reluctant to call it 'mass loyalty' -to the Constitution and its aims, let alone describe it as a Collective Understanding of what Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness means in practical terms

For this reason, he is naive when he says-

"Preserving religious liberty and expanding school choice are other ways of ensuring that our cultural choices are not imposed on those who disagree, but we must also respect the values of people who have diverse sexual orientations and gender identities. Conservative religious communities and progressive LGBTQ communities are here to stay. Let us make peace between them by preventing them from excluding the other from social life."

-because it is the so-called 'Christian Evangelists' in the US and their multi-million dollar backers who, since the emergence of the 'Moral Majority' in the late 1960s and early 1970s, have used political power to impose their views on US citizens and campaign to remove Constitutional rights from the LGBTQ citizens they regard as immoral and a threat to 'their' United States. At the same time as recognizing the damage done by the collapse of bi-partisan or Consensus politics, Vallier fails to admit that it is so-called Conservatives who have marched through the institutions to demolish Constitutional rights. His claim that the left is intent on capturing the education system is exposed as nonsense -if the left has been so influential in educating Americans, why has the two-party system endured? As for Race, it is noted by its absence, even though it has shaped the United States from Jamestown to today, and is the heartache that appears to have no soothing balm.

So I think Vallier has some valid arguments, but is too coy about calling out the people who have done so much to undermine the legtimacy of the US Constitution, the electoral process with the emergence of an aggressive 'State Power' replacing the legality of 'State's Rights'. They call themselves Conservatives, not Liberals.

But in US history, Consevatives supported the Monarch against the Revolutionaries, they sought to Conserve British America and the rule of King George. And where once, eg William F. Buckley, might have defined American Conservatism as the intellectual framework for a low-tax, minimal Govt country, the allure of absolute power by a man who has never read the Constitution let alone understood it, who has no idea what the 1776 Revolution was about, has been promoted by men and women who do know, but reject it and seek a new arrangement of power in which there is no civil society forming the basis of 'Social Trust' and the cycle of elections to the Presidency and Congress is replaced by what by any other name is a Monarchy with absolute powers.

Liberals, Libertarians, Conservatives -call them what you wish, but it looks to me as if the US is marching backwards, and too many of your fellow citizens like the view.

filghy2

11-21-2021, 11:30 AM

Nick Danger

11-21-2021, 04:23 PM

Nick Danger

11-21-2021, 05:43 PM

And I'll also add that I think it's a genuine shame that Biden's puppet-masters have already blown their whole load on this padded infrastructure bill. He's not going to get his super-spender package through the Senate, no way, there may even be party defections over it, more than just Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema are going to step up to the plate and block this ridiculous spending spree now that Biden's approval ratings are in the dirt. And that's great, I consider the entire matter settled.

But what about all of Biden's other promises? Clemency for non-violent drug offenders? Decriminalize marijuana? Transgender rights? Eliminate the federal death penalty? End for-profit detention centers? Make Social Security solvent? Restrict SuperPACs? Change the pharmaceutical industry tax code to encourage domestic production? I mean it goes on and on, but the problem is, none of this shit was a priority for Biden, all he ever really wanted to do was pass as many trillions of dollars worth of Democrat-controlled spending as he could during his brief 2-year window of opportunity. Looks like he's gonna have to settle for $1.2 trillion, but ultimately he was simply the wrong man at the wrong time for the Democrats, and all of the positive cultural changes that might have come from a moderate liberal administration are going to have to wait until at least 2028. Probably much longer, Biden's effect on the public's perception of the Democratic Party is probably going to prove just as profound as George W. Bush's was for the Republicans. People are going to start distancing themselves from him now, and it's not going to get any prettier from here on out. Any more than he's going to get less senile.

Stavros

11-21-2021, 08:10 PM

Actually, if you Americans knew any history you would know that this is the definition of classical liberal: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberalism
"Classical liberalism is a political ideology and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market, civil liberties under the rule of law with an emphasis on limited government, economic freedom, political freedom, and cultural liberalism."

In typical American fashion, you have totally screwed up the meaning of the word liberal. This is what it means elsewhere:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
"Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on liberty, consent of the governed and equality before the law. Liberals espouse a wide array of views depending on their understanding of these principles, but they generally support individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), democracy, secularism, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of religion and a market economy."

Exactly this, and thanks. The problem, I think, is that the Political Culture of the US has evolved to a stage where language has been adapted to soothe public anxiety -because of the Cold War, for example Socialism became something associated with the USSR, as if (as in the UK) there was no American Socialism pre-dating the Bolshevik Revolution, which of course there was as many immigrants arrived in the US from Europe with their politics.

Bannon Deux Chemises promotes Fascism often without naming it as such -I am sure it was he who gave Trump Mussolini's slogan 'Drain the Swamp' though as Trump used to keep a volume of Hitler's speeches in a bedside cabinet, he may also have a fascination for the Italian -but never claim that the European war of 1939-41 was an anti-Fascist war, or the voters might scratch their heads and wonder why they are being asked to support it now.

The debasement of language under Trump is understandable at one level because he is so genuinely ignorant he doesn't know what a lot of words mean. To describe the Democrats as 'Far Left' or 'Radical Left' is so preposterous as to rob the terms of any meaning. Just as, when Trump uses the word 'freedom' he is referring to idolatry, of himself mostly.

It goes beyond the childish resort to nicknames Trump uses as a crutch, just as Socialism, even Social Democracy cannot be used so as not to frighten the voters, and woe betide anyone who criticises the military. It doesn't matter how many catastrophic mistakes the military makes and at staggering cost, accountability for successive failures does not exist -whereas there was root and branch reform after the Vietnam war- and one is left with the bravery of the service men and women in spite of the hopelessness of their cause as defined by politicians and the generals -and note the the most consistent critic of the military has been Donald Trump, not out of any strategic brilliance on his part, but only in reference to himself, on the basis he would never have made the mistakes, he knows more about the military than the military and so on, and of course, his obsessive need to insult and abuse Veterans and their families if they do not idolize him, as if he were a God. Has there ever been a President who so consistently and so regularly and publicy insulted and abused Veterans, Gold Star families, even the top brass?

So to God, and the fetish which makes it impossible to deny the existence of God and get elected to public office, not even to be sceptical, or critical of the so-called 'Churches' which in the US, have turned the Gospels according to Jesus of Nazareth into nothing more, and nothing less than a commercial opportunity- to watch those 'Evangelicals' is no different from watching teleshopping where you are assured this offer for those dinner plates will never be repeated. And to think these shameless frauds insist on imposing their bogus morals on Americans, invading their libraries and their bedrooms to wag their finger at the 'immorality' of a society which in reality does not interest them beyond its willingness to pay.

filghy2

11-22-2021, 11:51 AM

Pretty sure we're going to get a classical Republican president in 2024 - maybe Ron DeSantis. I know Trump has to be getting pressure not to run, at this point it's starting to look like any Republican can beat Biden. Time for a return to sanity.

What exactly have you seen this year that makes you think that any Republican politician will have the guts to stand up to Trump, or that he could be persuaded to let it go? Two things we know about Trump are that he can't bear to be seen as a loser and he is obsessed with getting even.

Nick Danger

11-22-2021, 04:03 PM

What exactly have you seen this year that makes you think that any Republican politician will have the guts to stand up to Trump, or that he could be persuaded to let it go? Two things we know about Trump are that he can't bear to be seen as a loser and he is obsessed with getting even.

The so-called Trump Base is a myth. I mean, yeah, he's got a base - conservative voters. Conservative voters aren't like liberal voters. I told you I voted for Obama twice but that's because the only other choices were a half-senile war hawk with an insane maniac for a running mate, or a religious fanatic. Other than that I've always voted straight Republican and that's how most conservative voters are - simply will not vote for a Democrat unless HIGHLY offended by the Republican offering and slightly impressed by the Democratic candidate.

I can tell you right now that the Democrats have no one to run in 2024. It can't be Kamala Harris, AKA The Cackler. She's managed to turn "off-putting" into an art form. To be frank I doubt it will be Joe Biden. He's talking now like he wants it but as time goes on in this sad little administration, we're going to start finding out more and more about his rapidly declining cognitive powers. They've already started covering it up with this recent physical, but it can't stay hidden for long, he's the President, he's going to have to do some speaking, and in spite of their best efforts he's going to wing it on occasion. Prepare for one planetary facepalm after another. There's undoubtedly someone at the highest levels of the DNC who's already figured out that Biden '24 is a non-starter.

It looks like they're grooming Pete Buttigieg to run, and I mean, yeah, no, he can't win. He's not particularly qualified and he's got an image problem - that problem being that every time someone looks at him they get a mental image of him bent over taking the high hard one. America MIGHT be ready for a gay President (probably not), but the first gay President is gonna at least have to be a top.

So anyway yeah, it's like that for the Democrats. It doesn't seem to matter WHO the Republicans run, they've got the mid-terms AND 2024 locked up. So why run a one-termer for President? Trump can't serve 2 terms if he wins, he's already served one. Not saying Trump would gladly step aside. Not saying it will be pretty to push him out as the candidate. But I'm pretty certain there are senior Republican strategists talking about this very subject quite a lot these days.

MrFanti

11-23-2021, 02:03 AM

Liberals, Libertarians, Conservatives -call them what you wish, but it looks to me as if the US is marching backwards, and too many of your fellow citizens like the view.
I wouldn't lump Libertarians in the same group as Conservatives nor would I lump them in the same group as Liberals.
IMHO, Libertarians support some aspects of Conservatism and some aspects of Liberalism - which is most like why BOTH groups don't like them.

filghy2

11-23-2021, 03:57 AM

The so-called Trump Base is a myth. I mean, yeah, he's got a base - conservative voters. Conservative voters aren't like liberal voters. I told you I voted for Obama twice but that's because the only other choices were a half-senile war hawk with an insane maniac for a running mate, or a religious fanatic. Other than that I've always voted straight Republican and that's how most conservative voters are - simply will not vote for a Democrat unless HIGHLY offended by the Republican offering and slightly impressed by the Democratic candidate.

You are evidently out of touch with the majority of your fellow partisans. If Trump runs the polls suggest they would support him by a 4 to 1 margin over the next most favoured candidate.
https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2024-republican-presidential-nomination/

It's startling how deep in denial you are about what has been happening within the Republican Party. It is no longer primarily the party of small government and free enterprise. It is increasingly the party that wants to aggressively use the power of the state to protect what it sees a a threatened 'culture'.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/11/19/22787269/conservatives-america-chris-rufo-patrick-deneen

filghy2

11-23-2021, 04:19 AM

I told you I voted for Obama twice but that's because the only other choices were a half-senile war hawk with an insane maniac for a running mate, or a religious fanatic.

So you didn't vote for Romney because he is a Mormon. What exactly is the evidence that his religious views have influenced his policy positions, as opposed to Trump's cynical moves to ingratiate himself with the Christian fundamentalists?

Nick Danger

11-23-2021, 04:51 AM

You are evidently out of touch with the majority of your fellow partisans. If Trump runs the polls suggest they would support him by a 4 to 1 margin over the next most favoured candidate.
https://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2024-republican-presidential-nomination/

It's startling how deep in denial you are about what has been happening within the Republican Party. It is no longer primarily the party of small government and free enterprise. It is increasingly the party that wants to aggressively use the power of the state to protect what it sees a a threatened 'culture'.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2021/11/19/22787269/conservatives-america-chris-rufo-patrick-deneen

It's Trump's nomination to take or pass, never said it wasn't. They are going to have to convince him to do what's best for the Republican Party, and what's best for the Republicans is to get a moderate Republican in office with no political baggage, to serve two terms and fix all the things the Democrats are currently fucking up. It's not as if Trump doesn't have an honorable way out - he'll be 78 years old in 2024. All he has to do is retire gracefully and his legacy is secure.

If he doesn't, it will be 4 more years of Trump and I'm good with that too.

It surprises me how vulnerable you are to political propaganda, Flighty. I mean look at yourself, you just read one article about one political extremist and suddenly the entire Republican Party wants to tear down the house. On the other hand, a lot of conservatives (and moderate liberals) are starting to understand that there is no tyranny quite as repressive as progressive tyranny. They've got us right on the edge of a real Orwellian dystopia now, "thought-crime" is no longer a fictional concept.

But if the conservatives of this country ever do take to the streets like the liberals have, we won't have any of these problems anymore. You think we're going to burn down courthouses? Loot shoe stores?

So you didn't vote for Romney because he is a Mormon. What exactly is the evidence that his religious views have influenced his policy positions, as opposed to Trump's cynical moves to ingratiate himself with the Christian fundamentalists?

I don't have any evidence regarding Romney. But I know Mormons.

Stavros

11-23-2021, 08:44 AM

I wouldn't lump Libertarians in the same group as Conservatives nor would I lump them in the same group as Liberals.
IMHO, Libertarians support some aspects of Conservatism and some aspects of Liberalism - which is most like why BOTH groups don't like them.

I understand the point you are making and agree with it in terms of political theory, whereas my point in the previous post was to suggest that all three of these political persuasions have played, and are playing a role in the legitimacy crisis that is undermining the integrity of your Union of 50 States. If we must assume that the Democrats are Liberals, then their failure to arrest and prosecute Donald Trump and hs various campaign staff in 2016 -for violating the law on election campaigns; in 2020-21 for organizing and encouraging a seditious attack upon the USA, means they have failed to defend the Rights of Man as both a legal and a natural right in the contexts of the Constitution in particular and the law in general. One cannot hope to rely on so-called Libertarians as they are interested only in a Utopia which will never exist, though they repudiate most of what currently comprises the political, economic and legal realities of the US, while so-called Conservatives have become Trumpet players for a Orchestra of hate and lies that seeks less to Conserve than to destroy.

Out of that soup of brackish fluids a tasty dish cannot be made. How the US recovers its original purpose now I don't know, so the question remains -can the US survive this crisis? Or is the fate of the US to decay into an assortment of quasi-independent States? And to think the pivot for this decay has been the resentmen of one man that The People did not vote for him! But as I said befoe, this suits those with their own agenda, and I would rather call them New Wave Fascists rather than Lberals, Libertarians or Conservatives. It is a new old movement, and though it might not succeed in capturing the US, it can certainly bring it to an end.

broncofan

11-26-2021, 07:41 AM

filghy2

11-26-2021, 11:14 AM

When he said the Economist was far left I looked up what their views are. They are pro free markets and deregulation. But they apparently don't support immigration policy aimed at trying to maintain white hegemony. As a result they're FAR left.

Looks like mainstream economics is far left these days. He probably read that they favour a market-based solution to reduce greenhouse emissions, or some such crazy left idea.

Nick Danger

11-26-2021, 11:56 AM

When he said the Economist was far left I looked up what their views are. They are pro free markets and deregulation. But they apparently don't support immigration policy aimed at trying to maintain white hegemony. As a result they're FAR left.

And the term globalism or globalist seems to have nothing to do with economics (now) but has more to do with a debate between pluralism and narrow nationalism. You're a globalist if you don't have seizures upon hearing someone speak Spanish. Republicans don't know what they want. They didn't know they were anti-vax until educated people started telling them vaccines could save lives. Now a picture of Fauci can send them into a rabid frenzy.

Republicans know exactly what they want, Bronco - WHITE CULTURAL HEGEMONY.

Has nothing to do with racism, has everything to do with the fact that white culture is objectively superior to other cultures. Oh, that IS racism? Sorry.

You know, Democrats, globalists, communists, whatever you want to call them, all they really want is a piece of the American pie without having to work for it. They want to do whatever the fuck they want, and be supported financially by everyone else. That's their full agenda.

What most people consider to be white culture is wrong. White culture is simply living life responsibly. Anyone can participate in white culture, you don't have to be white to do it.

Hallmarks of white culture include educating our children, fostering a strong work ethic, encouraging personal financial responsibility, having a long-term plan, and abiding by an unspoken social contract to treat people decently. You want some of that? All you have to do is get your shit together, move to the suburbs, and stop being an asshole. We don't ask much, but if you move into our neighborhoods and bring the ghetto with you, you're gonna have problems. You're gonna think we're racist. But all we ever wanted you to do was display some class, it never had anything to do with your race.

And that's what racism in the USA really is - class-ism. You can't convince me that there's systemic racism in the USA when we elected a 2-term black President. What does Obama have that's so special? He embraced white culture.

White culture isn't evil or oppressive. In fact it's boring as fuck, it's the most boring culture ever - the end-game is you, at an old-folks home, watching Family Feud, eating canned peaches and nilla wafers, and fading in and out of consciousness. But we like it. We built it, and we like it, and there's nothing wrong with it, and we're tired of being called racists. Like, so tired of it that you're about to find out what white backlash really is in these next two election cycles. Yes, I speak for all white people, I just got out of a Zoom conference with the lot of them.

Stavros

11-26-2021, 05:32 PM

When he said the Economist was far left I looked up what their views are. They are pro free markets and deregulation. But they apparently don't support immigration policy aimed at trying to maintain white hegemony. As a result they're FAR left.

The Economist occupies a position somewhere between the Institute for Economic Affairs and the Financial Times, but I doubt either of these mean much to people outside the UK. The IEA [f.1955] is rooted in the ideas of Hayek, von Mises and economists of that type, while the FT is focused on daily analysis of business and markets with short medium and long term analysis -and all three have their criticisms of Government and policy.

In the days when I was a reguar reader of the Economist, mostly during the Thatcher era, it had some interesting writers and a touch of sarcasm and sardonic wit, but once I started work in the private sector I realised the magazine can't be taken seriously and have not bothered with it since, I think it's best days are long gone. I read quite a lot of the IEA stuff, mostly because I had to, but to describe the Economist as 'Far Left' is plain ignorance, or a provocation for the sake of it, like condemning Marjorie Taylor Greene for being a Communist, or Joe Biden as the same if not worse.

At some point, and I think we reached it some time ago, the debasement of language disqualifies its terms, while journalism is by definition a temporary if necessary reporter for current events, but no match for sustained analysis of cause and effect.

One can see this in the annual Amercan ritual of 'Thanksgiving'- a celebration of racial violence (1610) or the proof that racial violence can be healed (1864)-? The Economist might well put it 'Thanks for not Giving, just Taking'.

broncofan

11-26-2021, 10:33 PM

Republicans know exactly what they want, Bronco - WHITE CULTURAL HEGEMONY.

Has nothing to do with racism, has everything to do with the fact that white culture is objectively superior to other cultures. Oh, that IS racism? Sorry.
It's not that upon first hearing this I would automatically assume championing "white culture" is racist. It's only upon realizing it has no meaning or logically consistent usage that I realize it is. The things you want to claim as aspects of white culture are neither exclusive to white people nor universal among them. I wouldn't even argue in most places they're more prevalent among white people. I recall a white kid in university complaining about Asian students in pre-med studying very hard and denying him his rightful place in medical school. Was this work ethic not the work ethic he had in mind? When an Asian person works hard how can we denigrate them?

You seem to think that working hard or being wealthy is intrinsically white. I'd argue it's been made easier by the lack of institutional barriers to becoming wealthy for most white people, but I also think you would only champion wealth for white people and you'd think it has a different character when wielded by a non-white. Would a Middle Eastern oil baron be seen as good? Would a Jewish financier been seen as good or somehow unseemly? Even more than all the wasps who got wealthy by taking over major industries, abusing their workers, and creating American dynasties of spoiled rich shmucks? What about a Black person who gets rich? Are you going to be okay with that or will you suddenly argue that there's something different about their wealth? Or that the way they're rubbing your face in it is now unseemly? If a Black person who is richer than you buys a nice car will he lack the same dignity as a rich white person who buys a yacht and wears stupid golf pants?

I think this racist essentialism is laid bare by the history of exclusive country clubs in this country. These clubs did not simply want rich members. If you were Desi Arnaz and Cuban you were undesirable. Desi was rich. Desi was funny and worked hard. But was there something different about his wealth or his work ethic?

Nick Danger

11-27-2021, 02:16 AM

It's not that upon first hearing this I would automatically assume championing "white culture" is racist. It's only upon realizing it has no meaning or logically consistent usage that I realize it is. The things you want to claim as aspects of white culture are neither exclusive to white people nor universal among them. I wouldn't even argue in most places they're more prevalent among white people. I recall a white kid in university complaining about Asian students in pre-med studying very hard and denying him his rightful place in medical school. Was this work ethic not the work ethic he had in mind? When an Asian person works hard how can we denigrate them?

You seem to think that working hard or being wealthy is intrinsically white. I'd argue it's been made easier by the lack of institutional barriers to becoming wealthy for most white people, but I also think you would only champion wealth for white people and you'd think it has a different character when wielded by a non-white. Would a Middle Eastern oil baron be seen as good? Would a Jewish financier been seen as good or somehow unseemly? Even more than all the wasps who got wealthy by taking over major industries, abusing their workers, and creating American dynasties of spoiled rich shmucks? What about a Black person who gets rich? Are you going to be okay with that or will you suddenly argue that there's something different about their wealth? Or that the way they're rubbing your face in it is now unseemly? If a Black person who is richer than you buys a nice car will he lack the same dignity as a rich white person who buys a yacht and wears stupid golf pants?

I think this racist essentialism is laid bare by the history of exclusive country clubs in this country. These clubs did not simply want rich members. If you were Desi Arnaz and Cuban you were undesirable. Desi was rich. Desi was funny and worked hard. But was there something different about his wealth or his work ethic?

Who are these wealthy black people being discriminated against? Did Snoop Dogg get kicked out of his HOA or something? Oprah being forced to use a different bathroom at Tiffany's?

White culture arose from capitalism, it's ALL about money. All our behaviors which, as you say, are not exclusive to white culture but are definitely part of it, came about from the requirements of living in capitalism. It's not that having money automatically makes you okay to have as a neighbor. It's that the standards via which most people achieve financial success in this country automatically dictate that if you have enough money to be my neighbor, you must adhere to most of those standards, which ideally should add up to you being a quality human being.

White people are hard on each other. Any hint of scandal or criminal behavior is frowned on. Any sign that you're not financially and emotionally self-reliant is taken as a sign you don't belong. There's plenty of hypocrisy, but it's the standard that matters, not the individual. Our favorite farewell is "Take care!" As in, "Take care of yourself because no one else is going to fucking take care of you."

And I suppose what you envision is some nouveau riche black lottery winner straight out of the housing projects, suddenly finding himself living in the middle of Whitopia. Pretty sure there have been sitcoms and movies about that, but in reality it isn't something to concern yourself over. People adjust.

Sometimes the wrong people are forced to adjust. Sometimes the adjustment being demanded represents injustice. That's at the core of the current racial unrest. That and the non-stop race baiting by the liberal media.

Far as our exclusive country clubs, Bronco, well, I mean, so? Nearly all of them are being sued into compliance with modern standards of non-discrimination based on race and gender, but I think that's ridiculous. Is there simply no acceptable circumstance under which white men are allowed to enjoy each other's company? Can't even have a round of golf together, too evil?

filghy2

12-01-2021, 05:41 AM

I think this racist essentialism is laid bare by the history of exclusive country clubs in this country. These clubs did not simply want rich members. If you were Desi Arnaz and Cuban you were undesirable. Desi was rich. Desi was funny and worked hard. But was there something different about his wealth or his work ethic?

The giveaway is the Republican attitude these days towards non-white immigration , especially Hispanics. We are talking about people who predominantly want to come to the US to work hard and better themselves, who believe in religion and family, and come from a European heritage - all supposedly Republican values. And this is not just about illegal immigration - the Trumpists sharply cut the authorised immigration program and wanted to go even further.

Nick Danger

12-01-2021, 06:08 AM

The giveaway is the Republican attitude these days towards non-white immigration , especially Hispanics. We are talking about people who predominantly want to come to the US to work hard and better themselves, who believe in religion and family, and come from a European heritage - all supposedly Republican values. And this is not just about illegal immigration - the Trumpists sharply cut the authorised immigration program and wanted to go even further.

Zero immigration is what I favor, Flighty. Is that a problem for you? Sorry, we're full unless you've got something to contribute besides one more vote for Democratic charity. Under what set of guidelines, moral or otherwise, is the USA obligated to accept immigrants? Yours?

filghy2

12-01-2021, 07:13 AM

Zero immigration is what I favor, Flighty. Is that a problem for you?

As I've already told you, I live in a normal, civilised country so why would I want to move to your 'shithole' country?

Nick Danger

12-01-2021, 05:11 PM

As I've already told you, I live in a normal, civilised country so why would I want to move to your 'shithole' country?

Then why in God's name do you give the slightest fuck what our immigration policy is?

filghy2

12-02-2021, 02:36 AM

Then why in God's name do you give the slightest fuck what our immigration policy is?

People have no reason to care about anything that doesn't affect them directly? I guess that's another handy reason to dismiss any racism concerns.

I hesitate to ask, but would your rationale for zero immigration be something like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

Nick Danger

12-02-2021, 06:00 AM

People have no reason to care about anything that doesn't affect them directly? I guess that's another handy reason to dismiss any racism concerns.

I hesitate to ask, but would your rationale for zero immigration be something like this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy

My objection to immigration is purely cultural. I don't believe in multi-culturalism. Are my ears supposed to perk up on hearing that my new neighbor is from some 3rd-world shithole, or worse yet, Europe? "Oh, that's fantastic, now I'm going to learn new dances! We'll eat boiled aardvark testicles at cookouts and pick lice off each other's heads!" Nah, give me a guy I can talk college football with instead.

filghy2

12-02-2021, 06:47 AM

Nick Danger

12-02-2021, 09:06 AM

Well that's okay. You're not a racist, just a xenophobe. Are you one of those people who goes overseas and insists on eating exactly what you eat at home? Or maybe one of the two-thirds of Americans who don't even have a passport?

I’m not any kind of “-phobe” Flighty. Who are these people who spend their lives trembling in fear? I’m a magnificent apex predator, an alpha male in the alpha city of the alpha state of the alpha nation on the alpha planet of the alpha galaxy. I’m a force of nature, the reckoning of the unbeliever, the arbiter of good and evil. Prostrate yourself before me and tremble.

But yeah I don’t care much for spicy food.

I also don’t much feel compelled to explain why I prefer the company of my fellow Americans, seems kinda self-explanatory unless you’re one of those people who insist there’s some obscure benefit to inviting foreigners across your border to live off government charity and rape your women.

I actually have two passports now. Thought I’d misplaced it so a few months ago got a new one. That was a $400 mistake, the old one turned up in my laundry room.

filghy2

12-03-2021, 03:00 AM

I also don’t much feel compelled to explain why I prefer the company of my fellow Americans, seems kinda self-explanatory unless you’re one of those people who insist there’s some obscure benefit to inviting foreigners across your border to live off government charity and rape your women.

So how many immigrants from 3rd world countries are living in your neighbourhood in St George Utah? It's funny how exaggerated concerns about the impact of immigrants tend to rise in inverse proportion to the likelihood of actually encountering them.

It's a good thing you are not a bigot though.

broncofan

12-03-2021, 03:19 AM

But yeah I don’t care much for spicy food.

I didn't read the rest of it. But this is highly lame. Korean food? Mexican food? Indian food? Sichuan Chinese food? Yeah better stick to hotdogs and hamburgers.

broncofan

12-03-2021, 03:33 AM

But yeah I don’t care much for spicy food.

https://redfortcuisine.com/menu/

Apparently for good Korean food you got to go to Washington Utah. But Indian food is available in St. George. Since you don't like spicy food I recommend you start out with some daal soup. Then you can either go with the Chicken Makhani or Lamb Rogan Josh. Get a side of garlic naan. Beer-your choice but get something imported. I noticed they're even carrying some of your local bullshit beers so they're obviously making an effort.

Stavros

12-03-2021, 05:11 AM

I didn't read the rest of it. But this is highly lame. Korean food? Mexican food? Indian food? Sichuan Chinese food? Yeah better stick to hotdogs and hamburgers.

Food can often be a substitute topic for negative views on race. If we are going to get personal, many years ago when looking for accommodation in London I spoke to a landlady who described the room on offer but added that 'cooking curry is not allowed' or words to that effect, but I do recall the reason why 'or this will become like the black country'. I hung up and looked for a room elsewhere.

So when an American attacks multi-cuturalism they are, in effect attacking America. They might as well say it is 'UnAmerican' to eat spicy food and related ingedients, and it isn't long before the very same people -like Bannon Deux Chemises- cherry pick their Old Europeans, and no it doesn't include the Jews, who are not and never can be 'Legacy Americans'.

In the UK, this often takes the form of people objecting to Halal butchery as an expression of their anti-Muslim views, and when asked if they also include Kosher butchery, the answer is yes, even though they are happy to endorse Bannon's definition of 'Legacy' as Judeo-Christian Civilization, though in the current case of your American Nigel, not even Old Europe with its Judeo-Christian Civilization defines his America, presumably a country made by Davy Crockett, Paul Revere and John Birch.

So don't tell him doughnuts by origin (like Fish 'n Chips in the UK) is Jewish food, the impact on local law enforcement, even in Utah could be devastating.

Nick Danger

12-03-2021, 06:07 AM

So how many immigrants from 3rd world countries are living in your neighbourhood in St George Utah? It's funny how exaggerated concerns about the impact of immigrants tend to rise in inverse proportion to the likelihood of actually encountering them.

It's a good thing you are not a bigot though.

I don't know every single person in the 'hood, but most of them are good old home-grown Americans of assorted European heritage. There are a couple of Asian families around who mostly keep to themselves. If you venture into some of the more affordable areas of town, you will definitely find immigrants. We have a lot of Pacific Islanders here, relative to other cities - Samoans and Tongans mainly. The Mormons bring them. In fact, anywhere the Mormons have missionaries, which is everywhere, you'll find representatives of those races in Utah, though not necessarily in SG - it's a very hot climate and some people can't hang. The islanders like the climate.

How am I a bigot, Flighty, I'm not following your chain of reasoning. It's bigotry to have social preferences? I'm a bigot for preferring to spend my time among people with similar interests, backgrounds, and values? Do I have to move to a housing project in Detroit and take up the bongos to not be a bigot? See, it's this kind of liberal "logic" that leaves the rest of us facepalming.

Apparently for good Korean food you got to go to Washington Utah. But Indian food is available in St. George. Since you don't like spicy food I recommend you start out with some daal soup. Then you can either go with the Chicken Makhani or Lamb Rogan Josh. Get a side of garlic naan. Beer-your choice but get something imported. I noticed they're even carrying some of your local bullshit beers so they're obviously making an effort.

I may very well look into that, Bronco. I'm mostly a meat and potatoes guy. I do eat ethnic food but I usually inquire about the spiciness level before I order. Some people seem to get a real kick out of hot and spicy, I'm just not one of those people, my digestive system doesn't appreciate when I get too adventurous. I, uh, AM allowed to have a personal preference on food, right? Whew, that's a relief.

Food can often be a substitute topic for negative views on race. If we are going to get personal, many years ago when looking for accommodation in London I spoke to a landlady who described the room on offer but added that 'cooking curry is not allowed' or words to that effect, but I do recall the reason why 'or this will become like the black country'. I hung up and looked for a room elsewhere.

So when an American attacks multi-cuturalism they are, in effect attacking America. They might as well say it is 'UnAmerican' to eat spicy food and related ingedients, and it isn't long before the very same people -like Bannon Deux Chemises- cherry pick their Old Europeans, and no it doesn't include the Jews, who are not and never can be 'Legacy Americans'.

In the UK, this often takes the form of people objecting to Halal butchery as an expression of their anti-Muslim views, and when asked if they also include Kosher butchery, the answer is yes, even though they are happy to endorse Bannon's definition of 'Legacy' as Judeo-Christian Civilization, though in the current case of your American Nigel, not even Old Europe with its Judeo-Christian Civilization defines his America, presumably a country made by Davy Crockett, Paul Revere and John Birch.

So don't tell him doughnuts by origin (like Fish 'n Chips in the UK) is Jewish food, the impact on local law enforcement, even in Utah could be devastating.

Aw hell, for a minute there I actually thought it was okay to eat what I want.

filghy2

12-04-2021, 04:00 AM

How am I a bigot, Flighty, I'm not following your chain of reasoning. It's bigotry to have social preferences? I'm a bigot for preferring to spend my time among people with similar interests, backgrounds, and values? Do I have to move to a housing project in Detroit and take up the bongos to not be a bigot? See, it's this kind of liberal "logic" that leaves the rest of us facepalming.

You are obviously prepared to believe every negative stereotype about people who are different from you without much need for evidence. In fact, you don't seem able to conceive of them other than in terms of those stereotypes.

If you say you don't want immigrants because they are allegedly dirty, lazy, criminal and generally weird then you are not expressing a cultural preference - you indulging in bigotry. Are you really so different from your father, other than that you are more careful about what you say when not posting anonymously on the internet?

It's funny that when challenged you always come back to this argument that you shouldn't have to do things you don't like. That is just a straw man. How exactly are immigrants forcing you to do things you don't like? Do you think they want to pass laws forcing you to eat spicy food or stop watching American sports?

All we are saying is that you should stop making ridiculous derogatory generalisations about other cultures and stop rationalising the actions of racists. How is it that you interpret that as demanding that you give up your preferred lifestyle?

filghy2

12-04-2021, 06:32 AM

[URL] Beer-your choice but get something imported. I noticed they're even carrying some of your local bullshit beers so they're obviously making an effort.

Don't you know that only pretentious cosmopolitan liberals drink imported beers, bronco? Real Americans drink Bud, Miller and Coors.

I think Nick's inspiration must be this character from Dr Strangelove.
“It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids, without the knowledge of the individual, certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard-core Commie works.” Sterling Hayden - Brig. Gen. Jack D. Ripper
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1KvgtEnABY

I wonder what he thinks about multi-grain bread. A high-fibre diet certainly sounds like some nefarious liberal plot to corrupt the American digestive system. What next - no Coke for breakfast?

Nick Danger

12-04-2021, 02:55 PM

You are obviously prepared to believe every negative stereotype about people who are different from you without much need for evidence. In fact, you don't seem able to conceive of them other than in terms of those stereotypes.

If you say you don't want immigrants because they are allegedly dirty, lazy, criminal and generally weird then you are not expressing a cultural preference - you indulging in bigotry. Are you really so different from your father, other than that you are more careful about what you say when not posting anonymously on the internet?

It's funny that when challenged you always come back to this argument that you shouldn't have to do things you don't like. That is just a straw man. How exactly are immigrants forcing you to do things you don't like? Do you think they want to pass laws forcing you to eat spicy food or stop watching American sports?

All we are saying is that you should stop making ridiculous derogatory generalisations about other cultures and stop rationalising the actions of racists. How is it that you interpret that as demanding that you give up your preferred lifestyle?

You really think I just do whatever I want, Flighty? Maybe I do now, but that's because I've been working my ass off for decades to put myself in that position. And now you think I should take the word of a bunch of brainwashed college children and their political enablers that I'm living my life wrong? I'm guilty of something awful for working hard, obeying the law, building a business, and generally behaving responsibly, so now I need the guidance of street criminals and teenagers?

Class warfare is reality, Flighty. Do you think we're making progress? There's MUCH MORE RACISM NOW than there ever was before the George Floyd incident. And there's zero talk of partisanship on the Republican side of the aisle now that we've been forced to reckon with the fact that progressives are immune to reason.

The basis of class warfare is pretty simple. Joe Responsible educates himself, works hard, trusts his elders and the system, and ends up, in mid-life, highly successful and financially independent because of the responsible choices and sacrifices he's made.

Johnny Dipshit does as he pleases. He's a problem child, a narcissist, and oh he has a good time with it. But it leads to a life of poverty and legal problems.

Then one day Johnny Dipshit looks at Joe Responsible and thinks he wants what Joe's got. He's a human, he breathes, he was born, shouldn't he have the nice house in the suburbs, the late-model vehicles, the 9/10 wife and 2.5 kids? This is when progressivism says we need to take some of what Joe Responsible's got and give it to Johnny Dipshit until both of them can live in an apartment and drive a Hyundai. Conservatism says fuck Johnny Dipshit, he's a fucking dipshit.

And see, Flighty, I've been Johnny Dipshit, and now I'm Joe Responsible. The reason I was able to climb that ladder is because when I was Johnny Dipshit and took a hard look at Joe Responsible, I realized I was the problem and that I needed to get MY shit together. I didn't go out on the corner holding up a sign demanding someone give me some of Joe Responsible's shit. I went to work.

If you can't see the moral of the story I don't know what to tell you. There's never going to be a time when I'm going to say people are living in poverty because the system isn't fair. The system is 100% neutral.

Nick Danger

12-04-2021, 03:14 PM

All we are saying is that you should stop making ridiculous derogatory generalisations about other cultures and stop rationalising the actions of racists. How is it that you interpret that as demanding that you give up your preferred lifestyle?

And oh yeah, Flighty, on the topic of racism, I'm not really interested in hearing more of your racism accusations until you accept MY challenge, issued to both Stavros and Bronco, neither of whom have responded, and now to you, to tell me exactly what the hell racism you're talking about. Give me an example. Of systemic racism. In the USA. Just one. And then we can talk more about racism.

Stavros

12-04-2021, 08:04 PM

MY challenge, issued to Stavros and Bronco, neither of whom have responded, and now to you, to tell me exactly what the hell racism you're talking about. Give me an example. Of systemic racism. In the USA. Just one. And then we can talk more about racism.

There is a simple reason why I do not respond to your posts. When you claimed Sandy Hook was a 'false flag' event and I was able to use factual evidence to refute the ingedients of your fantasy, you rejected the truth for a fantasy that merely reinforces your prejudice.
Why should I engage with someone who so publicly and so mercilessly gloats over the pain of bereaved parents?
In one and the same post you have claimed there is no racism in America while demonstrating that there is -but were I to point out the existence of racism in the language and imagery you have used in your own posts, you would deny it.

We see and hear this garbage every day, people in the media and politics making inflammatory remarks to get attention (or in Murdoch's case, click-paying customers), whether it is the Greene in DC or Tucker Carlson, or Piers Morgan here or Nigel Farage-Farage: it is all vapid bullshit with no substance designed to undermine the legitimacy of representative democracy, to weaken people's faith in the Truth, to grind the machinery of Government to a halt.

And for what? To appease Cry-Baby Trump? To sow the seeds of a counter-Revolution? Meanwhile the bridges are not-quite falling down; the reservoir walls are just holding; the pot-holes in the road getting larger; the school-house leaking in the rain; and debt feeding debt feeding debt that has become a taboo subject- but hey, I expect you to reject the Truth and Carry on Lying, it's what you do, with no concern for the damage it may cause.

https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-every-violation-of-truth-is-not-only-a-sort-of-suicide-in-the-liar-but-is-a-stab-at-ralph-waldo-emerson-43-74-97.jpg

Nick Danger

12-05-2021, 01:57 AM

There is a simple reason why I do not respond to your posts. When you claimed Sandy Hook was a 'false flag' event and I was able to use factual evidence to refute the ingedients of your fantasy, you rejected the truth for a fantasy that merely reinforces your prejudice.
Why should I engage with someone who so publicly and so mercilessly gloats over the pain of bereaved parents?
In one and the same post you have claimed there is no racism in America while demonstrating that there is -but were I to point out the existence of racism in the language and imagery you have used in your own posts, you would deny it.

We see and hear this garbage every day, people in the media and politics making inflammatory remarks to get attention (or in Murdoch's case, click-paying customers), whether it is the Greene in DC or Tucker Carlson, or Piers Morgan here or Nigel Farage-Farage: it is all vapid bullshit with no substance designed to undermine the legitimacy of representative democracy, to weaken people's faith in the Truth, to grind the machinery of Government to a halt.

And for what? To appease Cry-Baby Trump? To sow the seeds of a counter-Revolution? Meanwhile the bridges are not-quite falling down; the reservoir walls are just holding; the pot-holes in the road getting larger; the school-house leaking in the rain; and debt feeding debt feeding debt that has become a taboo subject- but hey, I expect you to reject the Truth and Carry on Lying, it's what you do, with no concern for the damage it may cause.

https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-every-violation-of-truth-is-not-only-a-sort-of-suicide-in-the-liar-but-is-a-stab-at-ralph-waldo-emerson-43-74-97.jpg

You're delusional if you think you've ever won an argument, Stavros, let alone with me. Sandy Hook was a hoax. I made the case in this thread - http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/showthread.php?110689-The-Viper-Room-NO-SCRUBS - and sent you running away like an 11-year-old crack dealer. I shut you down so hard that you actually refused to speak to me anymore, like a child. No surprise considering your child-like argument that the "massacre" happened - "Why would they lie?" being pretty much the full extent of it. Folding up your tent and refusing to argue anymore isn't how debates are won. I'll totally have the same debate again with you right now if you want, Stavros, that's how strongly I feel about it.

And you wouldn't know the truth if it were a 12-inch BBC pushing past your tonsils and tickling your solar plexus. I mean I get it, you read the liberal media and it tells you everything you need to hear - nothing is your fault, it's the system. It rings true because you're weak, Stavros, you can't break through your confirmation bias to the critical-thinking plateau. The truth is that everything is your fault and you'll always be a miserable bastard who loses arguments with me unless you get your shit together.

filghy2

12-05-2021, 03:24 AM

And oh yeah, Flighty, on the topic of racism, I'm not really interested in hearing more of your racism accusations until you accept MY challenge, issued to both Stavros and Bronco, neither of whom have responded, and now to you, to tell me exactly what the hell racism you're talking about. Give me an example. Of systemic racism. In the USA. Just one. And then we can talk more about racism.

Here's two for starters.

1. Black Americans are over 3 times as likely as whites to be killed during a police encounter. Note that we are talking about percentages of those having a police encounter, so the explanation can't be that blacks are more likely to be doing crimes.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/blacks-whites-police-deaths-disparity/

2. Black drivers are 20% more likely to be pulled over by the police. Interestingly, the disparity is lower after dark when it is harder to tell the driver's skin colour. When stopped, they are searched 1.5 to 2 times more than white drivers.
https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may/black-drivers-more-likely-to-be-stopped-by-police.html

Stavros

12-05-2021, 03:51 AM

I'll totally have the same debate again with you right now if you want, Stavros, that's how strongly I feel about it.

But you don't debate, you stake out a position and defend it, even when your assertions are shown to be false. It is not for me to make the calculation which of us has 'won' an argument, the mere fact that you subscribe to the obscene, offensive rubbish concerning Sandy Hook undermines your position but it is for others to make the judgment which of us is right, and so far, nobody has supported your views.

One small point -the reason I don't offer links to the Telegraph and The Times is due to their articles being locked behind a paywall that I am not willing to enter via subscription, and the same is true of the New York Times. I was a regular reader of the Telegraph before its bilionaire owner(s) locked me out, and have also been an occasional reader of the Spectator, watch clips from Fox News, and am also a reglar reader of anti-left, Establishment BBC here in the UK, so there are practical reasons why it is wrong to imply I only get my news and views from the Liberal media. But I doubt this will mean anything to you, as you have summed me up for your own purposes, and I am therefore just a label rather than a thinking, and sometimes critical observer of the scene I was once a small part of.

filghy2

12-05-2021, 03:59 AM

If you can't see the moral of the story I don't know what to tell you. There's never going to be a time when I'm going to say people are living in poverty because the system isn't fair. The system is 100% neutral.

If the system is neutral then how come a person's economic position in the US is so strongly correlated with their parent's economic position? Why is it more so than in other developed countries that have less inequality? And why is it more so than in the past?
https://voxeu.org/article/intergenerational-mobility-us
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States
1355671

Do you actually have any views that are not based on crude generalisations and stereotypes, that are supported by proper evidence?

filghy2

12-05-2021, 05:12 AM

You're delusional if you think you've ever won an argument, Stavros, let alone with me.

Self-assessments are not worth much, dude, especially from a self-admitted egotist. Any fool can convince themselves they won an argument if they refuse to accept any objective standard of evidence. It's just a matter of thick-skinned stubbornness.

broncofan

12-05-2021, 08:23 AM

But you don't debate, you stake out a position and defend it, even when your assertions are shown to be false.
There have been a few occasions where I haven't responded to something false he wrote and it wasn't even out of laziness. It was just a sense of pure futility. Something akin to the beginning stages of major depressive disorder. :tongue:

Nick Danger

12-05-2021, 03:43 PM

Here's two for starters.

1. Black Americans are over 3 times as likely as whites to be killed during a police encounter. Note that we are talking about percentages of those having a police encounter, so the explanation can't be that blacks are more likely to be doing crimes.
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/blacks-whites-police-deaths-disparity/

2. Black drivers are 20% more likely to be pulled over by the police. Interestingly, the disparity is lower after dark when it is harder to tell the driver's skin colour. When stopped, they are searched 1.5 to 2 times more than white drivers.
https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2020/may/black-drivers-more-likely-to-be-stopped-by-police.html

I'll tell you the #1 way to survive an encounter with the police, Flighty - don't be a criminal.

Barring that, there are still other ways. You can follow lawful orders from the officer. You can volunteer information instead of forcing him to drag it out of you. You can not reach for a weapon. You can make it clear that you have no intention of reaching for a weapon by keeping your hands in view. You can address the officer with respect instead of contempt. You can cooperate with the investigation.

There is absolutely no question that blacks have a harder time dealing with police than whites. Video of blacks behaving completely inappropriately during police encounters is all over the internet. One begins to wonder if it might not be a black cultural issue rather than a systemic racism issue when one views enough of these videos.

Regarding more black drivers being pulled over and searched, well, it seems like they're not going far enough with that at only 20% more. A random black person is in fact 8 times more likely to be a criminal than a random white person. Statistically. And I realize the popular liberal stance is that police should be handicapped by not being allowed to use statistics in their enforcement efforts. Why? Don't we all agree that less crime is a goal worth pursuing?

If there were 4 black gangster-types riding up and down my street in some hoopty, I would FULLY expect the police to fabricate some reason to pull that car over and find out what the hell they're doing there. Why, because I hate black people? Not at all. If they were 4 black men wearing business suits and driving a Volvo I'd think nothing of it. But in this case I'm 100% sure they have no legitimate reason to be on my street. Liberals would say I must ignore that logic. But logic says I must ignore those liberals.

Nick Danger

12-05-2021, 04:15 PM

But you don't debate, you stake out a position and defend it, even when your assertions are shown to be false. It is not for me to make the calculation which of us has 'won' an argument, the mere fact that you subscribe to the obscene, offensive rubbish concerning Sandy Hook undermines your position but it is for others to make the judgment which of us is right, and so far, nobody has supported your views.

I don't need support for my views in this forum, Stavros, we all know exactly what the paradigm is here, liberals vs me.

I made a very cogent point-by-point argument regarding why I believe Sandy Hook was a hoax perpetrated by an insular group of gun-control fanatics, and you failed to address even one of my many points. Instead you argued something about there being two Veronicas among the victims or something of that nature - something TOTALLY IRRELEVANT TO THE MUCH MORE IMPORTANT (and ultimately undisputed) FACTS I HAD BROUGHT TO YOUR ATTENTION. Yeah, I sent you scurrying away from that argument in a hurry when you realized there was no counterargument to most of what I presented. It's okay, Stavros, nobody really wins an internet argument...I mean unless you can actually make the other person publicly proclaim that he's never speaking to you again, that's a pretty solid W by internet standards.

Nick Danger

12-05-2021, 04:45 PM

If the system is neutral then how come a person's economic position in the US is so strongly correlated with their parent's economic position? Why is it more so than in other developed countries that have less inequality? And why is it more so than in the past?
https://voxeu.org/article/intergenerational-mobility-us
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socioeconomic_mobility_in_the_United_States
1355671

Do you actually have any views that are not based on crude generalisations and stereotypes, that are supported by proper evidence?

Not sure from where your questions arise, Flighty. Are you saying it's unusual that a person's station in life should be the same as his parents? I'm not gonna lie, I'm worth a little more than my dad now. But for the most part we have followed very similar paths in life - which to me seems like it should be no surprise to anyone.

You know, Flighty, I think my main motivation in life was always to prove to my father that I could be the man he was. Having accomplished that, I lost the motivation to push further up the ladder of success, I'm comfortable here, on my old man's level. It's not in me to be some jet-setting corporate overlord, I'm a small business owner just like my father was.

You can pluck any human being out of any one of those statistic blocks on that graphic and that person can be successful in the USA if he simply lives responsibly. In some families that value takes hold more than in others - in some cultures it's more prevalent than others. But there's one thing all the families at the top of the economic food chain have in common, and that's a long history of living responsibly.

There are economic classes, Flighty, what are you going to do about that? It's hard to move from class to class because the behaviors learned from your family are likely going to be the behaviors required to survive in their economic class. But social mobility in the USA can be done and is done all the time, by exceptional individuals with the motivation to do it.

filghy2

12-06-2021, 04:41 AM

I'll tell you the #1 way to survive an encounter with the police, Flighty - don't be a criminal.

Barring that, there are still other ways. You can follow lawful orders from the officer. You can volunteer information instead of forcing him to drag it out of you. You can not reach for a weapon. You can make it clear that you have no intention of reaching for a weapon by keeping your hands in view. You can address the officer with respect instead of contempt. You can cooperate with the investigation.

There is absolutely no question that blacks have a harder time dealing with police than whites. Video of blacks behaving completely inappropriately during police encounters is all over the internet. One begins to wonder if it might not be a black cultural issue rather than a systemic racism issue when one views enough of these videos.

Regarding more black drivers being pulled over and searched, well, it seems like they're not going far enough with that at only 20% more. A random black person is in fact 8 times more likely to be a criminal than a random white person. Statistically. And I realize the popular liberal stance is that police should be handicapped by not being allowed to use statistics in their enforcement efforts. Why? Don't we all agree that less crime is a goal worth pursuing?

Your entire argument is built on circular reasoning. The police would not be harassing people unless they were doing something wrong. Therefore, anyone harassed (or worse) by police must have done something wrong.

You mean videos like the Rodney King beating? I guess must have he asked for it by not being sufficiently respectful.

I'm surprised you haven't taken your argument to it's logical conclusion. Why not just get rid of the presumption of innocence for black defendants? After all, they are statistically likely to be guilty.

filghy2

12-06-2021, 05:15 AM

Regarding more black drivers being pulled over and searched, well, it seems like they're not going far enough with that at only 20% more. A random black person is in fact 8 times more likely to be a criminal than a random white person. Statistically. And I realize the popular liberal stance is that police should be handicapped by not being allowed to use statistics in their enforcement efforts. Why? Don't we all agree that less crime is a goal worth pursuing?

What I am is anti-lockdown. Anti-mask, anti-travel restriction, anti-mandate. I don't care if millions of people die, hell, I don't care if BILLIONS of people die. There are 8 billion people on the planet, half of that would be objectively better. We've identified the at-risk demographic. They should be in quarantine and taking personal responsibility for their survival, letting the rest of us get on with life, it's their problem.

I should add that your attitude toward the rights of black people is glaringly inconsistent with your attitude toward your own rights. You insist on your right to do as you like regardless of society's interest in limiting the spread of a contagious disease, but you are happy for the rights of black individuals to be subordinated to the goal of reducing crime.

filghy2

12-06-2021, 05:29 AM

Not sure from where your questions arise, Flighty. Are you saying it's unusual that a person's station in life should be the same as his parents? I'm not gonna lie, I'm worth a little more than my dad now. But for the most part we have followed very similar paths in life - which to me seems like it should be no surprise to anyone.

My point is simply that the playing field is far from level. If you are born into a wealthy family it is hard not to be rich, no matter how stupid you are (eg Donald Trump, Jared Kushner). If you are born into a poor family the dice are loaded against you. A few may succeed, but statistically it's a low probability. If the government can do things to level the playing field (eg assistance to poor families, taxing big inheritances), then why should it not do that rather than just accepting the situation as if it were God-given?

filghy2

12-06-2021, 06:09 AM

There have been a few occasions where I haven't responded to something false he wrote and it wasn't even out of laziness. It was just a sense of pure futility. Something akin to the beginning stages of major depressive disorder. :tongue:

I sometimes ask myself why respond at all, rather than ignoring him until he goes away? I guess there's a few reasons:
1. Arguing is addictive.
2. Making a good rebuttal is satisfying in it's own right, and a good skill to practice.
3. There is small chance that some other reader might be influenced by his arguments.
4. Despite his bluster, I know the arrows sometimes strike home. The giveaway is that he drops the point and shifts to another line of argument, and often gets a bit snarky and defensive.

Stavros

12-06-2021, 08:42 AM

I sometimes ask myself why respond at all, rather than ignoring him until he goes away?

You probably know the line from one of Judith Wright's famous poems 'and there all a world I made in me' -only her celebration of pregnancy here gives birth to a monster of his own making. Once someone has convinced themselves of their own invincibility, tragedy must surely follow -the only way is down. Immunity of the body becoming a solipsism of the self. The mere fact that I trashed every one of his bogus claims about Sandy Hook is in itself unacceptable to him, and I would not be surprised if he questions the facts about the Holocaust or thinks slavery wasn't all that bad.

Not holding my breath here, and about to go away for Christmas and the New Year anyway, for the music, the art, and the convivial conversations with intelligent people over well-cooked meals. Im anfang war die essen!

I wish everyone a Christmas and New Year of peace and serenity, of warmth of heart and hope.

Nick Danger

12-06-2021, 04:40 PM

I should add that your attitude toward the rights of black people is glaringly inconsistent with your attitude toward your own rights. You insist on your right to do as you like regardless of society's interest in limiting the spread of a contagious disease, but you are happy for the rights of black individuals to be subordinated to the goal of reducing crime.

To say I'm happy about it is really just taking my very objective attitude toward the matter and trying to make something offensive out of it. You don't live here, Flighty, so maybe you actually aren't aware that we have a gang problem in this country. And a growing street crime epidemic. And an increasingly obtuse cadre of progressive legislators who are enabling the entire mess by pushing us to defund our police and handcuff them in a variety of other ways.

Now we definitely DO HAVE a police brutality problem in this country. Any swinging dick with a high school diploma and a clean criminal record can be a cop in most USA jurisdictions. With that kind of gold employment standard, it shouldn't be a big surprise that the Law Enforcement system in general has degenerated into just as much of a criminal enterprise as that against which it's intended to protect us. Some places in this country, if a hit-man is after you, it's just as likely a cop as a thug.

Nonetheless police officers and the rule of law must be respected. You see the results of not doing so in nearly every major Democrat-controlled metropolitan area in the country right now - NYC, Chicago, Atlanta, San Francisco, all in chaos, out of control, all these cities are going to have to literally be tamed like wild west mining camps now. IF we ever get back to sane reasoning about our need for Law Enforcement as a society again. Good or bad, we have to accept it and try to force it to be as good as we can.

But my point is, if black people are committing most of the crimes, why can't police look at that as a clue? Oh, a bodega on Grape Street was robbed at gunpoint again? It's probably one of the Grape Street Crips like it was the last 19 times but I'm going to go shake down a few white people in the suburbs for info. No, wrong, if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and eats crackers, it's a goddamn duck.

I agree it's offensive - to publicly say, okay, police are going to start solving crimes by first looking around for any young black thugs in the area. So they don't say it, they just do it. That's the source of your statistical anomaly.

filghy2

12-07-2021, 08:42 AM

But my point is, if black people are committing most of the crimes, why can't police look at that as a clue?

That is not true. In 2019, 60% of those arrested for violent crimes in the US were white and 35% were black. For property crimes, 68% were white and 28% were black. So if nothing is known about the suspect, it is about twice as likely to be a white person.
https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/table-43

It is true that 51% of those arrested for murder were black; however, the great majority were black-on-black murders. In cases where the perpetrator is known, 81% of white victims were killed by another white person.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States

Obviously the per capita offending rates are much higher for blacks, but if you were to get murdered, assaulted or robbed it is still much more likely to be by a white person than a black person.

Nick Danger

12-07-2021, 03:55 PM

That's because there are more whites than blacks in the USA, Flighty, are you really special enough to need that spelled out for you?

filghy2

12-08-2021, 11:07 AM

There have been a few occasions where I haven't responded to something false he wrote and it wasn't even out of laziness. It was just a sense of pure futility. Something akin to the beginning stages of major depressive disorder. :tongue:

It's really got to that point all over, hasn't it? Just when you lower your expectations to the point where it seems impossible to over-estimate him, he outdoes himself.

filghy2

12-09-2021, 08:10 AM

Nick Danger

12-09-2021, 08:44 AM

Time for a simple IQ test:

1. Are these two statements logically equivalent (yes/no)?
(a) A black person is more likely to be convicted of a crime than the rest of the population.
(b) A crime if more likely to be committed by a black person than the rest of the population.

2. African-Americans account for one-third of violent and property crimes in US and 12% of the population. How many times more likely is it that a random African- American will commit a crime than the rest of the population?

3. African-Americans account for 1% of the population of Utah. Would it make sense for the Utah police to focus their crime investigations predominantly on African-Americans?

At last a coherent argument from a lefty on this board. One that ignores the simple argument of proportion that easily rebuts it, but coherent.

Obviously where you are makes all the difference, Flighty. Around here, it’s true, very few blacks live here. Don’t know if it’s the heat, the Mormons, the location, or just the overwhelming whiteness of the place, but blacks stay away in droves.

Tell you what they do like this place for though - victimizing people. Before Utah passed a law against printing someone’s mugshot before they’re convicted, our local news was lousy with black faces from LA, Vegas, and other crime-ridden cities west of here. They come here for the easy pickings but often leave in the passenger seat of an extradition van, our cops don’t fuck around.

And hey, sometimes it’s Mexicans. But most often it’s young black males with gang affiliations. We have some homegrown white crime too - the usual blend of white-collar theft, domestic violence, and drunken antics. But if it’s a good old-fashioned robbery, burglary, rape, or murder, literally half the time it’s a young black gangsta who doesn’t live here, selling drugs or running prostitutes out of a cheap motel room.

Again Flighty, all I can tell you is, you have to live here to understand the extent of the crime problem rooted in black hip-hop culture.

broncofan

12-11-2021, 05:54 PM

At last a coherent argument from a lefty on this board. One that ignores the simple argument of proportion that easily rebuts it, but coherent.

In the exam question 1, a and b are not logically equivalent. Tell us why.

Race is a terrible proxy for investigating crime when compared to most facts.

Consider that you have a minority group where each individual is statistically 3x more likely than the average member of the population to have committed a crime. Now weigh this against the statistical increase in likelihood that someone committed a particular crime based on any piece of evidence. If it's a murder and you're canvassing the neighborhood, how much more likely is a person with blood on their shirt to have committed the crime than a random member of said minority group? Or a person who is seen having left the particular house in question? Or a person who knew the murdered victim and was heard threatening them a week prior?

In the last example, this evidence by itself would not get you anywhere near a burden of proof to convict someone. And yet, they are probably more than a 1000x more likely to have committed the murder than a random member of the overrepresented minority group. Let's say you find car owners are more than 3x as likely to commit a crime. Does that mean you discount non car owners? Does it mean there is much evidence against a random car owner? No and no.

broncofan

12-11-2021, 06:01 PM

You might think if a minority group is overrepresented by a certain factor then the average member of that group warrants attention in proportion to that factor. But the average member of the public, whether in that group or not, is very unlikely to have committed any particular crime. Even the weakest piece of particular evidence swallows any difference in rates of commission between groups.

Nick Danger

12-12-2021, 02:03 AM

Race is a terrible proxy for investigating crime when compared to most facts.

Okay, Columbo, what you're basically talking about there is TV crime, where there's a detective following a chain of clues, maybe got some pictures on a peg-board, rifling through a stack of gun-store receipts or a box full of hotel registries or something. Most crime isn't that complicated. Most crime, it was the Jesus-bearded guy living in the U-Haul behind Walmart who swore vengeance at you for stealing his mother's kidney and is now wearing your shoes and texting your friends on your cellphone asking them to mail gift cards to a post office box to save you from mob vengeance over horse-racing debts. Or the guy with the claw-marks on his face who matches the DNA profile from under your fingernails. Or the guy who outright posted the entire crime on Facebook.

Maybe you guys live in more diverse places than me, hell, it's almost certain you do. But I mean seriously, in the real world, around here, you see a young black guy dressed like a hoodlum, he's got no real reason to be here, he's looking for a crime of opportunity. We have some young black people around here, mostly students at the local university, but they don't have any problems, they dress for and participate in polite society and nobody thinks twice about the fact they're black. They don't become suspects for crimes based on being black, if anything they are treated with social deference because it's appreciated that they are integrated with the predominant culture. But that black kid no one's ever seen before with the saggy jeans and the facial tattoo staying at the weekly motel? Yeah, maybe worth checking out on that car-jacking, I don't know.

If I said, "The statistics are wrong and I'm wrong," would that be a satisfactory conclusion to this argument for you? What is the correct answer, Bronco, to ignore the tremendous portion of crime coming from the black segment of the population?

filghy2

12-12-2021, 10:05 AM

Nick Danger

12-12-2021, 01:41 PM

Right-wing extremists have been responsible for most terrorist attacks and plots in the US in recent times. Since 9/11 they have killed more Americans than have Islamic extremists, and far more than left-wing extremists.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/sep/08/post-911-domestic-terror
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2021/domestic-terrorism-data/
https://www.csis.org/analysis/escalating-terrorism-problem-united-states

We know that such people are likely to fit a certain profile; expressing certain racial views, sporting confederate insignia, wearing militia gear etc. People fitting this profile are far more likely to be involved in violent white supremacists activity than others. If racial profiling is logical then why shouldn't the same logic be applied to this group; eg pull them over for searches if they 'look the type'?

From the conservative perspective, there's no such thing as "far right terrorism." I doubt you understand the full extent of the media-driven divide in this country now. A large percentage of conservatives do not consider liberals to be their fellow citizens with differing political views. They view THEM as terrorists. Terrorists who established their own independent sovereign nation within the city limits of Portland Oregon, tore down cities all over the country for months on end, murdered innocent motorists for merely trying to pass through their illegal street barricades, burned courthouses, tore down statues of men who fought to FREE THE SLAVES because they're essentially too fucking stupid to know the difference, attacked police officers all over the nation, and generally made it known that the rule of law no longer applied to them. They were supported in these efforts by the liberal media and liberal politicians. So you know, are they our brethren now? Nope. Is this our country, or theirs? Ours.

Most cops are conservatives. Thank God. It's because they've seen up-close and personal the results of liberal policies, the poverty and the resulting criminal sub-culture. So yeah, they might see a group of well-armed good ol' boys and just pass 'em right by - probably related to one or two of them on the mother's side. Guess that's a factor liberals didn't take into account when they decided to go the street violence route to success.

broncofan

12-12-2021, 07:59 PM

From the conservative perspective, there's no such thing as "far right terrorism."
From the conservative perspective there's no such thing as fact-checking, far right terrorism, racism, detective work (should be renamed black guy with a face tattoo detecting), epidemiology, and immunology. Anything else?

Nick Danger

12-13-2021, 03:36 PM

From the conservative perspective there's no such thing as fact-checking, far right terrorism, racism, detective work (should be renamed black guy with a face tattoo detecting), epidemiology, and immunology. Anything else?

Meh, it's a simple matter of fact vs fiction, Bronco. Am I a racist because the media tells me I'm a racist? Am I actually a racist? Or am I maybe not a racist at all? I consider every angle.

I wasn't aware of the full extent of the liberal media's race-baiting until the Atlanta massage parlor murders. The narrative quickly became anti-Asian racism. Then the shooter came out and actually said he was an incel who hates sex workers. But the media absolutely refused to let go of the anti-Asian narrative, even when the truth - that the killer was some kind of quasi-religious sex deviant - became widely known. The truth is irrelevant if it contradicts the narrative.

broncofan

12-14-2021, 01:27 AM

Nick, have you ever wondered whether you want people to call you racist because it fuels your grievance based politics? I occasionally meet people on the left who will insist on narratives that are false for ideological reasons but it's far from the majority of us and far from the mainstream. But there seems to be a drive by people on the right to keep pushing the envelope so that you can claim you're being persecuted by cancel culture. Let me illustrate how non-existent cancel culture is.

Mel Gibson has denied the Holocaust in multiple interviews, propagated all sorts of crazy theories about Jews infiltrating the Vatican, ranted about Jews while driving drunk, called Winona Ryder an "oven dodger", used the n word in a rant, admitted to punching his wife in the face while she was holding her child, made really grotesque homophobic comments, and he made a Christmas movie last year. The thing about people ranting and raving about cancel culture and political correctness is that they give the impression that they don't believe anything is bigoted or that people can be genuinely disgusted by bad behavior.

I've seen some unreasonable people on the left (out of 50% of the population there will be some embarrassing moments), but it has overtaken your entire movement. You can't even get rid of overt Islamophobia from your congressmen and women. I'm not entirely certain you guys don't see Islamophobia as justified or normal. Look at MTG and that Boebert idiot?

broncofan

12-14-2021, 01:54 AM

Meh, it's a simple matter of fact vs fiction, Bronco. Am I a racist because the media tells me I'm a racist? Am I actually a racist? Or am I maybe not a racist at all? I consider every angle.

I wasn't aware of the full extent of the liberal media's race-baiting until the Atlanta massage parlor murders. The narrative quickly became anti-Asian racism. Then the shooter came out and actually said he was an incel who hates sex workers. But the media absolutely refused to let go of the anti-Asian narrative, even when the truth - that the killer was some kind of quasi-religious sex deviant - became widely known. The truth is irrelevant if it contradicts the narrative.
You say the "shooter came out and actually said he was an incel who hates sex workers." You do realize people don't take the word of murderers when it comes to their motivations. Something is a confession when it's against penal interest. If it benefits the defendant then it's received more skeptically.

But let's say the opinion pieces had it wrong. Or that it was a case of mixed motive and it's difficult to disentangle the murderer's motivation and it wasn't a bias crime. How did this affect you? You really are defending the honor and integrity of someone who murdered a bunch of innocent people over his own sexual hangups?

There have been a lot of anti-asian hate crimes in the last year. I've seen video of a number of them and they're ugly. I can't imagine being so worked up that the media speculated about a murderer's motive that I lost sight of the fact that people are being assaulted left and right because they're Asian.

Nick Danger

12-14-2021, 08:17 AM

What is Islamophobia Bronco? Fear of people with a strong tendency toward suicide bombing and a long history of hating me? Laughable that they actually made a word out of it, of course people are afraid of those nut-jobs. It’s the media trying to paint a picture of a world where we shouldn’t be afraid of insane religious maniacs that’s the real gaslighting here. Again, Bronco, fact vs fiction. I believe in freedom of religion for all religions except the one that believes in wiping out all the other religions. We don’t need these assholes in our country at all, let alone agitating for tolerance in Congress. But that’s Minnesota for you - chill white guilt to the exact right temperature and you end up with a towel-head in Congress.

As for Asian hate crime, no, denied, it isn’t happening, Earth to Bronco, come in Bronco, we’re losing you pal...

filghy2

12-14-2021, 12:04 PM

From the conservative perspective, there's no such thing as "far right terrorism." I doubt you understand the full extent of the media-driven divide in this country now. A large percentage of conservatives do not consider liberals to be their fellow citizens with differing political views. They view THEM as terrorists.

That speaks volumes about the so-called conservative perspective these days. It appears the security agencies do not agree (see pages 17-19). https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/2020_10_06_homeland-threat-assessment.pdf
"Among domestic violent extremists (DVEs), racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists—specifically white supremacist extremists (WSEs)—will remain the most persistent and lethal threat in the Homeland."

Nick Danger

12-14-2021, 03:42 PM

That speaks volumes about the so-called conservative perspective these days. It appears the security agencies do not agree (see pages 17-19). https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/2020_10_06_homeland-threat-assessment.pdf
"Among domestic violent extremists (DVEs), racially and ethnically motivated violent extremists—specifically white supremacist extremists (WSEs)—will remain the most persistent and lethal threat in the Homeland."

The alphabet agencies are a free-for-all these days. Whether or not you're a terrorist, criminal, or seditionist depends entirely on the political affiliation of the goon helming the agency. Interesting choice to capitalize "Homeland," has kind of a Fourth Reich feel to it.

The full truth is that a lot of these white supremacist organizations are gaining traction from the behavior of the liberal media. "At least someone thinks white people are okay" goes the line of reasoning.

Here's an interesting thought experiment: What if I am a racist, but not a white supremacist? What if, for example, I'm a white person who thinks Mexican people are lower than me but Asian people are higher? As a white Asian supremacist, am I in a morally questionable position? Or is that an acceptable view? What if we discount the negative view of Mexicans altogether - I believe everyone is equal except for Asians, who are superior. I'm white. Am I deplorable?

broncofan

12-14-2021, 09:29 PM

The alphabet agencies are a free-for-all these days. Whether or not you're a terrorist, criminal, or seditionist depends entirely on the political affiliation of the goon helming the agency. Interesting choice to capitalize "Homeland," has kind of a Fourth Reich feel to it.
You're a person for whom the distinction between fact and fiction no longer exists. There's no other explanation for your views. Even Republicans who prosecute other Republicans for breaking the law are suspected of being secret Democrats or of being biased. I could provide you with a statute and you'd simply engage in hand-waving. Provide you with data and you'd immediately impeach the data by claiming someone biased compiled it. It reminds me of Joe Pesci's character in Casino who would collect on his bets when he won but not pay out the losers. The only information you assimilate is that which supports your priors. Anything inconvenient is waved away or quickly forgotten.

Are you deplorable? Worse than that. You're boring and limited. You've decided to fear what you don't understand, which is a great deal, while telling yourself you're a big alpha predator. Your next debate is with your mirror.

Nick Danger

12-14-2021, 10:48 PM

You're a person for whom the distinction between fact and fiction no longer exists. There's no other explanation for your views. Even Republicans who prosecute other Republicans for breaking the law are suspected of being secret Democrats or of being biased. I could provide you with a statute and you'd simply engage in hand-waving. Provide you with data and you'd immediately impeach the data by claiming someone biased compiled it. It reminds me of Joe Pesci's character in Casino who would collect on his bets when he won but not pay out the losers. The only information you assimilate is that which supports your priors. Anything inconvenient is waved away or quickly forgotten.

Are you deplorable? Worse than that. You're boring and limited. You've decided to fear what you don't understand, which is a great deal, while telling yourself you're a big alpha predator. Your next debate is with your mirror.

Well then I guess I only have one thing left to say to you Bronco. Peyton Manning was Denver's 2nd greatest quarterback. Craig Morton was #1.

filghy2

12-16-2021, 11:21 AM

The full truth is that a lot of these white supremacist organizations are gaining traction from the behavior of the liberal media. "At least someone thinks white people are okay" goes the line of reasoning.

Here's an interesting thought experiment: What if I am a racist, but not a white supremacist? What if, for example, I'm a white person who thinks Mexican people are lower than me but Asian people are higher? As a white Asian supremacist, am I in a morally questionable position? Or is that an acceptable view? What if we discount the negative view of Mexicans altogether - I believe everyone is equal except for Asians, who are superior. I'm white. Am I deplorable?

Some people have said unkind things about people like me. This leaves me no choice but to become a fascist. Is that your 'reasoning'?

What you are is an imbecile who is incapable of seeing people unlike you as anything other than crude stereotypes.

filghy2

12-16-2021, 11:42 AM

Are you deplorable? Worse than that. You're boring and limited. You've decided to fear what you don't understand, which is a great deal, while telling yourself you're a big alpha predator. Your next debate is with your mirror.

Something like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YSm-K5_zZo

Nick Danger

12-16-2021, 05:40 PM

Some people have said unkind things about people like me. This leaves me no choice but to become a fascist. Is that your 'reasoning'?

What you are is an imbecile who is incapable of seeing people unlike you as anything other than crude stereotypes.

Flighty, an imbecile has an IQ of 26-50. Could I make sentences if I were an imbecile? I assure you my IQ is nearly double that of an imbecile.

As happens more and more frequently, I'll take the opportunity of pointing out your reading comprehension fail on the matter of MY reasoning. I said that would be the reasoning of those gravitating toward white supremacy these days. I'm not a white supremacist. If anything I'm a Jewish supremacist, those guys have seriously got their shit together.

Something like this?

I'm coming for you, Flighty. I done kilt me two liberals on this board. Kilt just about everything that whines or agitates at one time or another. And now I'm coming for you, Flighty. For what you did to Ned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfOfV7U35PU

broncofan

12-17-2021, 01:39 PM

Flighty, an imbecile has an IQ of 26-50. Could I make sentences if I were an imbecile? I assure you my IQ is nearly double that of an imbecile.

As happens more and more frequently, I'll take the opportunity of pointing out your reading comprehension fail on the matter of MY reasoning. I said that would be the reasoning of those gravitating toward white supremacy these days. I'm not a white supremacist. If anything I'm a Jewish supremacist, those guys have seriously got their shit together.
I haven't met a Jew or gentile who is intelligent enough to respond to the compliment of being labeled a model minority. Asians will sometimes see it as well but it's a trap. You encourage resentment of the group you set up as a model because they are being used to make negative comparisons of other groups. You invite negative comments to counter your compliments because fairness and reciprocity demand that with compliments comes acceptance of criticism. But the criticism would be in the form of attributing to us characteristics as a group, just as the compliments are, and so both must be illegitimate.

I did a project in college on iq testing and frequently heard white supremacists eager to label some groups as inferior say that they weren't using psychometrics for that purpose because they believe Asians are more intelligent. But when I dug into the comments, they would then argue that Asians excelled at spatial abilities but not verbal, or that Asians had higher average intelligence but a lower standard deviation of intelligence so it was really the white man who produced more geniuses (and more idiots the reasoning should in fairness then argue). When they discussed Ashkenazi Jews, they would say Jews possess great verbal ability, which enables them to swindle or manipulate, and while solid in math, are weak in spatial reasoning which must account for whatever deficits they want to point out in their quest for knowledge.

The use of the model minority is really an attempt to denigrate and essentialize people while pretending to offer a concession to prove one's objectivity.

Nick Danger

12-17-2021, 09:23 PM

I haven't met a Jew or gentile who is intelligent enough to respond to the compliment of being labeled a model minority. Asians will sometimes see it as well but it's a trap. You encourage resentment of the group you set up as a model because they are being used to make negative comparisons of other groups. You invite negative comments to counter your compliments because fairness and reciprocity demand that with compliments comes acceptance of criticism. But the criticism would be in the form of attributing to us characteristics as a group, just as the compliments are, and so both must be illegitimate.

I did a project in college on iq testing and frequently heard white supremacists eager to label some groups as inferior say that they weren't using psychometrics for that purpose because they believe Asians are more intelligent. But when I dug into the comments, they would then argue that Asians excelled at spatial abilities but not verbal, or that Asians had higher average intelligence but a lower standard deviation of intelligence so it was really the white man who produced more geniuses (and more idiots the reasoning should in fairness then argue). When they discussed Ashkenazi Jews, they would say Jews possess great verbal ability, which enables them to swindle or manipulate, and while solid in math, are weak in spatial reasoning which must account for whatever deficits they want to point out in their quest for knowledge.

The use of the model minority is really an attempt to denigrate and essentialize people while pretending to offer a concession to prove one's objectivity.

Thought I'd lost you, Bronco. Looks like my victory lap was premature. Can't give back the champagne now though.

That's a pretty serious comment so I will reply in all seriousness.

A big problem with the liberal approach to racism is the language. "White Supremacy" isn't even a real thing in suburban America. Neither is "White Privilege." I mean, these things are real to poor people - a lot of whom are not white (but a lot of whom are). Poor people will buy into any reason they are poor besides the fact that they suck at life. They look around, see a lot of white people doing very well in a country built by and for white people, and they are perfect little puppets for anyone who wants to dangle the strings of racism in an effort to control the political narrative.

Problem is none of it is real, Bronco. It's illusion. You look at any one of these videos of police brutality toward blacks that has the liberal media so "outraged," and in every one, it's the perpetrator's fault. Every time. They're reaching for weapons. They're trying to run over the police with their cars. They're refusing lawful orders. Even George Floyd was in the middle of a couple of felonies, a misdemeanor, and resisting arrest. He resisted the wrong asshole that day, but again, we have no evidence, not even empirical evidence, that Derek Chauvin was a racist or that his actions were racially motivated. He was an asshole cop and George Floyd happened to be black, that's what we know.

America has a history of racism. So does every other fucking country on the planet. You want to talk about racist countries, let's talk about Israel. Japan, China, both Koreas, every Middle Eastern country, so racist and so completely uncriticized for it.

Meanwhile in America, we have every race, they can all vote, they are all legally protected against discrimination, they are all economically-advantaged via affirmative action programs...sorry, but American racism is an absolute media hoax sponsored by, you guessed it, the Democratic National Committee - a committee that has no other purpose than to promote racism and division, to save itself from political irrelevance.

Your statement about using model minorities as some kind of virtue-signaling device touches a nerve. No, wrong, I don't care to virtue-signal, more like just the opposite - I'd rather people assume I'm a tyrannical asshole and then be pleasantly surprised that I'm not than vice versa. But this is a symptom of the disease of identity politics - overthinking the problem.

To me there's no problem at all. A disproportionately large percentage of the black population need to get their shit together, that's the core truth behind all the bullshit. We can address this problem via education, motivation, or by force, it's strictly up to each individual. Blacks have really missed an opportunity here to get middle-class whites firmly in their corner, I didn't know a single person who wasn't pretty upset by the George Floyd incident. But "upset" quickly turned to "indifferent" when we were confronted by riots, threats, and false accusations. The truth and the narrative simply don't match, Bronco. I've practically begged you cats to show me some real examples of institutional racism in the USA and of course, there's nothing. Not sure why you won't just admit it.

broncofan

12-17-2021, 10:04 PM

You want to talk about racist countries, let's talk about Israel. Japan, China, both Koreas, every Middle Eastern country, so racist and so completely uncriticized for it.
I've planned to go to Israel but have never actually been. I've heard that there is a lot of racism there, not just in their human rights violations against Palestinians but also in Israeli society. Problems with racism in Israel wouldn't signify racism is not a problem here. Nor would it mean I have to make any assumptions about random Israelis or Americans I meet.

I have by the way been irritated by other countries calling out racism in the U.S. when it's obvious they're hypocritical or just being opportunistic. Have you seen the Iranian Ayatollah on twitter? You think I give a shit about what he has to say about anything? Do you think I give a shit about what Putin says about human rights or whatever idiot mouthpiece the People's Republic of China has talking when they literally make people disappear for criticizing their regime (or in the case of tennis player Peng Shuai; a kind of hostage situation that is far creepier than even Matt Gaetz).

You simply want American racism to be treated as a phantom concern. It's not. BTW I think filghy answered your request for info about institutional racism in America quite well. A shame you ignored it.

I am not sure whether the model minority discussion is a virtue signaling device but I think it doesn't really make sense. If someone told me they were merely criticizing Jews as opposed to complimenting us I would also be confused because it's unclear what one means when they compliment a group. If someone said Jews are good at accounting, should a Jew who is bad at accounting feel flattered? I do think the point of it is to pretend that prejudice against other groups is conditioned on their behavior and not something that begins with assumptions and malice.

Nick Danger

12-17-2021, 10:47 PM

I've planned to go to Israel but have never actually been. I've heard that there is a lot of racism there, not just in their human rights violations against Palestinians but also in Israeli society. Problems with racism in Israel wouldn't signify racism is not a problem here. Nor would it mean I have to make any assumptions about random Israelis or Americans I meet.

I have by the way been irritated by other countries calling out racism in the U.S. when it's obvious they're hypocritical or just being opportunistic. Have you seen the Iranian Ayatollah on twitter? You think I give a shit about what he has to say about anything? Do you think I give a shit about what Putin says about human rights or whatever idiot mouthpiece the People's Republic of China has talking when they literally make people disappear for criticizing their regime (or in the case of tennis player Peng Shuai; a kind of hostage situation that is far creepier than even Matt Gaetz).

You simply want American racism to be treated as a phantom concern. It's not. BTW I think filghy answered your request for info about institutional racism in America quite well. A shame you ignored it.

I am not sure whether the model minority discussion is a virtue signaling device but I think it doesn't really make sense. If someone told me they were merely criticizing Jews as opposed to complimenting us I would also be confused because it's unclear what one means when they compliment a group. If someone said Jews are good at accounting, should a Jew who is bad at accounting feel flattered? I do think the point of it is to pretend that prejudice against other groups is conditioned on their behavior and not something that begins with assumptions and malice.

What is a phantom concern? One that goes unaddressed? We have addressed the racism issue, Bronco.

The 13th Amendment. The 14th Amendment. The 15th Amendment. The Civil Rights Acts of 1870, 1871, 1875, 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965, 1987, and 1991. The Voting Rights Act. The Fair Housing Act. All in the interest of (progressively) helping black people prosper in the USA. But we're there now. Black leaders looked at the overall situation in 1991 and said, "Okay, no more legislation could possibly make things any better for black people." If they wanted more they'd have gotten more. The real question though...IS there anymore? What else can we possibly do for black people? Cash payout? Apparently that's on the table.

Can't stop private individuals from being racist, obviously. But according to all that legislation, if you are a black man in this country and you are treated any differently than a white man is treated, you are now set for life, as soon as you win your lawsuit. Pretty sweet deal IMHO.

Not sure what Flighty linked that served as evidence of systemic racism. Crime numbers don't demonstrate anything except the fact that blacks commit more crimes than whites. And really, Bronco, if it were just statistics, I might be open to questioning them. But I've also contended with black criminality in real life on real time, and I know from personal experience that blacks commit more crimes than whites. A good portion of the black population simply does not give a shit about the law - open defiance of it is all they really respect. Thanks, rap music.

No assumptions here, Bronco. No malice. Just real talk about black people and their propensity to engage in criminal behavior. Any discussion that sweeps that subject under the carpet is not a real discussion about racism, it's lip service.

filghy2

12-18-2021, 09:36 AM

America has a history of racism. So does every other fucking country on the planet. You want to talk about racist countries, let's talk about Israel. Japan, China, both Koreas, every Middle Eastern country, so racist and so completely uncriticized for it.

That is obviously untrue. Israel gets of lot of criticism for its treatment of Palestinians, as does China for its treatment of Uighurs.

More to the point, can you name any other developed democracy in which a large part of he country maintained an apartheid system up to the 1960s, or where police turned a blind eye to whites murdering blacks (or were involved themselves)? Not only that, but the rest of the country largely tolerated this situation until the 1950s. This is not ancient history - it was within your lifetime, I assume. No, the US is not like every other country.

filghy2

12-18-2021, 10:41 AM

Nick Danger

12-18-2021, 11:43 AM

That is obviously untrue. Israel gets of lot of criticism for its treatment of Palestinians, as does China for its treatment of Uighurs.

More to the point, can you name any other developed democracy in which a large part of he country maintained an apartheid system up to the 1960s, or where police turned a blind eye to whites murdering blacks (or were involved themselves)? Not only that, but the rest of the country largely tolerated this situation until the 1950s. This is not ancient history - it was within your lifetime, I assume. No, the US is not like every other country.

You're right, Flighty, racism has happened in my lifetime. When I was a kid in the 70's there was a family of long-unemployed black sharecroppers living in the woods behind my house in a tar-paper shack, surviving off the land and out of people's garbage. I was friends with their kid, his dad had a huge oil barrel full of porn mags and didn't care if we sat on the porch and read them. "Mixing" was discouraged by most parents, mine included, blacks were widely viewed as inferior humans. There was a carved wooden sign nailed to a tree beside a one-lane bridge leading into a particular part of one community near my neighborhood that said "N***** don't let the sun set on your black ass around here." "Negro" was the politically-correct term for black people.

But that's all changed, Flighty. Lawd have mercy we have seen the light! You can't treat people that way. Not and expect them to like you anyway. Racism has been outlawed. And rightfully so.

So now what? As you say, it isn't ancient history, but it's been 30 years now since the last time black leaders and white leaders looked at the situation from the legislative perspective and decided we're being more than fair to blacks now. There's genuinely not much more we can do for them besides free money, free food, free housing, free education, preferred treatment in the workplace, and tightly-enforced legal protection against discrimination. I suppose it's possible enough time hasn't passed. But to me the situation seems to be deteriorating rather than getting better.

And this problem - that there's nothing more we can do for blacks - has become a real problem now for progressives. Defunding the police is a strong example of a very warped political perspective - blacks are having problems with the criminal justice system so the criminal justice system needs to adjust? Instead of taking the problem to the black community and demanding less crime, we are allowing the progressive community to come to us and demand less enforcement? Is this really where we're at in the race negotiations now - "Let us commit more crimes!?" Or have we, in fact, long ago passed the point of negotiations, having already reached a more-than-fair agreement, and are now entering the realm of lunacy?

You're right about one thing - the USA certainly has its own brand of black people. But they are starting to lose my attention, I have more important matters to attend, and black people are not my problem. For the most part they are their own problem.

Nice try, but the document was dated October 2020, so the person in charge was a Trump appointee. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chad_Wolf

Interesting. Less than a month before he was declared an unlawful appointee.