|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On July 19 2019 09:24 GreenHorizons wrote:No, he's explaining to you why revolution is the only viable (though he's doubtful even that would work) option for marginalized groups and that the people shitting on it prefer to be in WHITECLUB. Democrats condemning Trump and the like are the ones "just bitchin". Show nested quote +“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”
— Frederick Douglass
Show nested quote +"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." — JFK
Since about a year your explaining to us tha revolution is necessary, whiteout any coherent afterplan. Thats what i would call bitchin. Abolishing stuff isn't a plan, it's a simple escape.
I would love if you would stop your bitchin and start playing for real
I don't remember if anyone ever asked you this or if you just didnt answer but... what do you do for a living?
|
On July 19 2019 09:39 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 09:24 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 19 2019 09:16 Velr wrote: In other words, he's just bitchin? No, he's explaining to you why revolution is the only viable (though he's doubtful even that would work) option for marginalized groups and that the people shitting on it prefer to be in WHITECLUB. Democrats condemning Trump and the like are the ones "just bitchin". “Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.”
— Frederick Douglass
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." — JFK Since about a year your explaining to us tha revolution is necessary, whiteout any coherent afterplan. Thats what i would call bitchin.
It's not on me to come up with a "coherent afterplan" you have to understand that before you can understand why the rest of your argument or "bitchin" is misguided.
EDIT: I guess I should add what we've been talking about is how that "afterplan" will never be "coherent" to WHITECLUB because WHITECLUB doesn't exist in the afterplan.
|
If your arguing for chaos, well.. Get in line with Shredder, Dr. Evl and the bad witch from Power Rangers.. They all got more legitimate claims than you.
|
On July 19 2019 09:44 Velr wrote: If your arguing for chaos, well.. Get in line with Shredder, Dr. Evl and the bad witch from Power Rangers.. They all got more legitimate claims than you.
Literally no on is arguing for chaos, stick to what's posted and you won't go off on incoherent tangents about the power rangers (Rita Repulsa btw).
|
If i stick to what you post, all i get is "abolish/destroy/abandon/fuck it all".
What is your actual position? Since over a year, i ask you this in various forms and you are totally incapable of answering it. I don't wan't your idea of a "new society", i want to know what this new society would look and be like.
|
On July 19 2019 09:48 Velr wrote: If i stick to what you post, all i get is "abolish/destroy/abandon/fuck it all".
What is your actual position? Since over a year, i ask you this in various forms and you are totally incapable of answering it.
Several people have told you (and others) now that's simply not true (with examples) so...?
I don't wan't your idea of a "new society", i want to know what this new society would look and be like.
Are we in agreement then that revolution is necessary? OR do you prefer WHITECLUB?
|
Are you really that much of a clueless asshole?
You got no plan, you got no idea, all you know is that now is "bad". I doubt you can even explain why exactly it is bad, your just some stupid, bland ideologue, like the students i see on my way to work that sell 40 year old marxist literature that even modern marxists don't see as relevant anymore.
Your. the. worst.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On July 19 2019 09:53 Velr wrote: Are you really that much of a clueless asshole?
No?
You got no plan, you got no idea, all you know is that now is "bad". I doubt you can even explain why exactly it is bad, your just some stupid, bland ideologue, like the students i see on my way to work that sell 40 year old marxist literature that even modern marxists don't see as relevant anymore.
soo...
Your. the. worst.
You've just completely abandoned the dialogue in favor of vacuous personal attacks?
|
Which dialogue? You never engage in dialogue. Your spout your 2-3 standard phrases packed into sometimes long posts or links... but in the end? It's all the same. Your never constructive, your not even intrested to discuss the status quo.Your a black hole. Your bad for everyone around you (or at least around here).
|
On July 19 2019 09:59 Velr wrote: Which dialogue? You never engage in dialogue. Your spout your 2-3 standard phrases packed into sometimes long posts or links... but in the end? It's all the same. Your never constructive, your not even intrested to discuss the status quo.Your a black hole. Your bad for everyone around you (or at least around here).
I think it's clear between the two of us which is attempting to engage in dialogue and which isn't.
You want an "afterplan". I told you it's not on me to provide it to you and that we have to agree on that before there's much of anywhere to go.
Instead of discussing that assertion you've gone on a rant of personal attacks accusing me of long debunked tropes.
|
I don't think either of you has said much of anything constructive. Please stop?
|
On July 19 2019 10:05 Aquanim wrote: I don't think either of you has said much of anything constructive. Please stop?
Depends on what's trying to be built I'd suppose?
|
My god.
You haven't made a single assortion despite proclaiming that "now = bad". Abolishing stuff is not an idea, it's an escape and whiteout a better idea for after you might also just fart in trumps and the democrats general direction. You haven't brought up a single constructive idea since at least 3 years.
Your lost and it's kinda sad. We probably agree on 80%++ of topics, but your not interested in actual "things" you just want to burn everything down, whiteout an idea of what should happen after. It's sad
edit: good night, gotta work in 4 hours.
|
On July 19 2019 10:10 Velr wrote: My god.
You haven't made a single assortion despite proclaiming that "now = bad". Abolishing stuff is not an idea, it's an escape and whiteout a better idea for after you might also just fart in trumps and the democrats general direction. You haven't brought up a single constructive idea since at least 3 years.
Your lost and it's kinda sad. We probably agree on 80%++ of topics, but your not interested in actual "things" you just want to burn everything down, whiteout an idea of what should happen after. It's sad.
Really I'm trying to ignore your shitty personal attacks and focus on the substance.
I've done quite a bit more over 8 years than say "now =bad" and I think someone should just call that out for the bad argument it is rather than pretend this is a "both sides" problem.
As to the substance I can extract from that post let's just rewind to the starting premise (or you can not have this conversation you dread so much you requested I be banished).
Your presumption that Democrats are working against white club is false, as GH and MLK will tell you. Democrat strongholds are often the worst offenders when it comes to shit like school segregation which is a classic symptom of limiting access to education to club members.
Democrats want all the social credibility of acknowledging privilege without any of the sweeping societal revolution needed to address it because at the end of the day being in the club is great and we'd all much rather feel bad about being in the club than close the club.
You can argue with that or not but attacking me personally is a shitty way to go about it imo.
|
United States15275 Posts
On July 19 2019 08:15 KwarK wrote:These days all people of Northern European ancestry are in white club, but it wasn't always that way. + Show Spoiler +If we take it back to the start of the US the founders were a bunch of incel neckbeards who all got in a room and said "anyone who doesn't look like us, doesn't think like us, or is poorer than us isn't in the club". No women, no blacks, no Catholics, no poors. It's not a conspiracy as you're suggesting with the insiders conspiring to undermine the others, just the monopolizing of power. You didn't employ people outside the club in skilled trades because you already knew a guy in the club who could do it and everyone knows that everyone outside of the club sucks, etc. If you're in the club and mediocre then you can train as a physician, if you're outside of the club but amazing then you can't because everyone knows girls can't be doctors and the gatekeepers are all in the club. The business owners are in the club borrowing money from the bankers who are in the club and trading with the shipping magnates who are in the club.
That's why groups which today would be considered privileged (rich white women for example) were treated so poorly for so long (not allowed to vote etc.), they may have been white but they weren't in the club, it was pretty exclusive back then. The club monopolizes power because the club monopolizes power. Take the disenfranchisement laws I keep referencing. The chief of police and the election registrar are both in the club and as long as they're both in the club they're able to restrict the people appointing them to club members in a perfect loop.
Unfortunately it's quite difficult to completely monopolize wealth, especially when the excluded communities form their own little Ireland or whatever in Boston. If the club collectively says "no Irish", as they did, and the Irish all say "screw you guys" and make their own little place then eventually you run the risk of rich Irishmen which makes the club look bad because you can't have a club that's built on the idea that all the wealth and power is held by club members when there are outsiders with wealth and power. And so the club slowly expands, by the early 1900s rich Catholics are allowed in, as long as they're male and white. Later women are allowed in, as long as they're rich and white.
The 30s roll around and suddenly it's a difficult time to have all the rich white people dicking over everyone else all the time and there's a lot of people saying a lot of scary words like "revolution". The club can't throw open its doors entirely but what they can do is ease up on the rich requirement, while still enforcing the race requirement. By doing so they get a significant number of working class voters to effectively buy in to the system. As long as they believe that they're receiving a marginal benefit from the continuation of the status quo they'll prop it up, and it's becoming hard to prop it up without them. By this point white club is a pretty good name for it. Women and workers are allowed in. Hell, if you're rich enough you could probably even get away with being gay or Jewish, as long as you do it discreetly.
It's less exclusive than it used to be but it's still a pretty great club to be in. If you go into a bank to borrow money for a mortgage then you and the bank manager have an unofficial understanding that you're both in the club. He knows he'll have no trouble explaining why he extended a line of credit to John Smith to his underwriters because John Smith is a good club name. If you go to buy a house in a neighbourhood of club members you can rely upon being welcomed. The club is ingrained in the understanding of the world at this point, if a club member applies to be a manager alongside a non club member then it just makes sense to hire the club member, both because of your own bias and the bias of all your customers. Even if you're super progressive for the 1950s and know the club is a sham, you don't want your customers leaving. If you're in the club you have access to education, jobs, credit, investments, and resources that non members just don't have because all the people controlling those things are in the club.
The exact same still applies today. If I walk into a Porsche dealership and ask to test drive a car they're not going to mess around, they'll take a look at me and they'll recognize that I'm in the club. I look, sound, and dress like the kind of person who's in the club. It conforms to all of their internal biases, it's fine. It's the same if I go to a bank and ask for a loan, when I have to walk into a room of strangers and run a meeting, when I have an interaction with an elected official or a police officer. I'm given respect and deference because I've been born into a world where people like me get respect and deference and everyone understands that. I'm not ever going to worry that the police are going to give me a rough ride in the back of a truck because I know and they know that that kind of thing isn't done to club members. Being in the club means never having to prove your value to people. Obviously you can go the other direction, you can demonstrate that you have no value, but you've always got that great intro with your private membership.
White club isn't actively conspiring, we don't have meetings, it's the monopolization of power by the group in power through cultural conditioning.
Your presumption that Democrats are working against white club is false, as GH and MLK will tell you. Democrat strongholds are often the worst offenders when it comes to shit like school segregation which is a classic symptom of limiting access to education to club members. Democrats want all the social credibility of acknowledging privilege without any of the sweeping societal revolution needed to address it because at the end of the day being in the club is great and we'd all much rather feel bad about being in the club than close the club.
Asians aren't a homogeneous group. They're not in white club but if they're the right kind of Asian they can get honorary memberships. You're not letting the dry cleaners in but you might let in the guy who owns a chain of a hundred dry cleaners.
The overlap of white skin and white club isn't total but it's close. If your first language is Spanish, your English is heavily accented, and your last name is Gonzales then light skin isn't going to help that much. Alternatively if you're third gen Japanese American and middle class or higher than you're probably some kind of honorary member.
It's absolutely nothing like antisemitism for the simple reason that the Jews did not control all the money and power in Europe and use it to turn everyone else into a second class citizen. If you're not in the club in America you're a second class citizen. You're more likely to be arrested, you're more likely to be convicted, you're less likely to be hired for jobs, you're more likely to have your civil rights taken away, and so forth. None of that was ever true for the antisemitic ethnic Germans living in Germany.
I'm assuming this is tongue-in-cheek?
On July 19 2019 04:46 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: I personally believe that women are more than capable of running the world, if given the chance, better than men. And I'm hoping we get some AOC Speaker or Presidency out of this in the coming years (once we accept democratic socialism as the heir to democracy).
Yeah...that's not true. Also AOC is unfit to be a personal secretary, let alone a president.
On July 19 2019 09:28 Jockmcplop wrote: I'm watching Marianne Williamson's interview with Dave Rubin and I actually really like her. I can see most people thinking she's a bit mad but she really schooled Rubin in a way that should be eye opening for people who watch right wing youtube thinking those guys are smart or insightful.
Who thinks Dave Rubin is insightful?
On July 19 2019 09:15 KwarK wrote: No changes. The idea of a group in power voluntarily giving up their power isn’t realistic. You can’t expect the direct beneficiaries of racism to mobilize themselves to address it. Hell, most of them deliberately refuse to see it.
Simultaneously, the attempts of powerful groups to fortify and expand their position often lead to its unintentional collapse in unexpected ways. No group, no matter how or well-informed, can predict how the future unfolds. Nor can it be assumed that they will rally behind each other as a homogeneous group. Much of recorded history concerns internecine warfare within a dominant social group in attempts to gain even more power.
|
On July 19 2019 08:10 RvB wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 04:46 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 19 2019 04:34 NewSunshine wrote:On July 19 2019 04:21 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:About the point of those being American not loving America enough, what do you all say to this guy? Smedley Darlington Butler (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940) was a United States Marine Corps major general, the highest rank authorized at that time, and at the time of his death the most decorated Marine in U.S. history. During his 34-year career as a Marine, he participated in military actions in the Philippines, China, in Central America and the Caribbean during the Banana Wars, and France in World War I. Butler later became an outspoken critic of U.S. wars and their consequences. He also exposed an alleged plan to overthrow the U.S. government.
By the end of his career, Butler had received 16 medals, five for heroism. He is one of 19 men to receive the Medal of Honor twice, one of three to be awarded both the Marine Corps Brevet Medal (along with Wendell Neville and David Porter) and the Medal of Honor, and the only Marine to be awarded the Brevet Medal and two Medals of Honor, all for separate actions.
In 1933, he became involved in a controversy known as the Business Plot, when he told a congressional committee that a group of wealthy industrialists were planning a military coup to overthrow Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Butler selected to lead a march of veterans to become dictator, similar to Fascist regimes at that time. The individuals involved all denied the existence of a plot and the media ridiculed the allegations, but a final report by a special House of Representatives Committee confirmed some of Butler's testimony.
In 1935, Butler wrote a book titled War Is a Racket, where he described and criticized the workings of the United States in its foreign actions and wars, such as those he was a part of, including the American corporations and other imperialist motivations behind them. After retiring from service, he became a popular advocate, speaking at meetings organized by veterans, pacifists, and church groups in the 1930s SourceI bring it up because you don't have to hate America to want better for the nation. There's nothing anti-American about criticizing America. If anything, it shows a willingness to see the defects and argue/fight for a better outcome. Also this is quite accurate. When you're creating anything, anything at all, if you want to make it better you have to get it criticized to hell first. A functioning nation is no exception. The problem is, with the "Democrats hate America" crowd, "America" is code for "America exactly as it was", and not actually America. First you have to decipher the code, then you can spot it for the dogwhistle that it is. Just like how "traditional family values" actually means subjecting women to a life of child-rearing and servitude to men. Precisely. This man operated on 3 continents and still came back to the US to criticize the government. Doesn't make him less American all of a sudden. And it doesn't make any of the women charged by trump any less American. How many F500 companies have foreign born CEOs? How many inventions are credited to foreign born Americans(and minority Americans) that we enjoy today? Once you get away from racist beliefs and start really seeing America, not what she is, but what she can be, you will also begin to criticize it. I personally believe that women are more than capable of running the world if given the chance better than men. And I'm hoping we get some AOC Speaker or Presidency out of this in the coming years (once we accept democratic socialism as the heir to democracy). I agree with the first part of your post. Some of the most famous inventors are actually immigrants (Einstein for example).Immigrants are also more likely to be an entrepreneur and usually make the economy more dynamic. The second part I find questionably though. Why would women be better than men? That seems to be as sexists as claiming men are better than women just the other way around. Notice I said "more than capable" Not "more capable". That little difference makes a world of difference when discussing whether or not women should hold power in the government at the highest levels. We have RBG, but other than that, we're sorely missing a woman in a high position that just rekts.
|
United States41989 Posts
On July 19 2019 10:20 CosmicSpiral wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 08:15 KwarK wrote:These days all people of Northern European ancestry are in white club, but it wasn't always that way. + Show Spoiler +If we take it back to the start of the US the founders were a bunch of incel neckbeards who all got in a room and said "anyone who doesn't look like us, doesn't think like us, or is poorer than us isn't in the club". No women, no blacks, no Catholics, no poors. It's not a conspiracy as you're suggesting with the insiders conspiring to undermine the others, just the monopolizing of power. You didn't employ people outside the club in skilled trades because you already knew a guy in the club who could do it and everyone knows that everyone outside of the club sucks, etc. If you're in the club and mediocre then you can train as a physician, if you're outside of the club but amazing then you can't because everyone knows girls can't be doctors and the gatekeepers are all in the club. The business owners are in the club borrowing money from the bankers who are in the club and trading with the shipping magnates who are in the club.
That's why groups which today would be considered privileged (rich white women for example) were treated so poorly for so long (not allowed to vote etc.), they may have been white but they weren't in the club, it was pretty exclusive back then. The club monopolizes power because the club monopolizes power. Take the disenfranchisement laws I keep referencing. The chief of police and the election registrar are both in the club and as long as they're both in the club they're able to restrict the people appointing them to club members in a perfect loop.
Unfortunately it's quite difficult to completely monopolize wealth, especially when the excluded communities form their own little Ireland or whatever in Boston. If the club collectively says "no Irish", as they did, and the Irish all say "screw you guys" and make their own little place then eventually you run the risk of rich Irishmen which makes the club look bad because you can't have a club that's built on the idea that all the wealth and power is held by club members when there are outsiders with wealth and power. And so the club slowly expands, by the early 1900s rich Catholics are allowed in, as long as they're male and white. Later women are allowed in, as long as they're rich and white.
The 30s roll around and suddenly it's a difficult time to have all the rich white people dicking over everyone else all the time and there's a lot of people saying a lot of scary words like "revolution". The club can't throw open its doors entirely but what they can do is ease up on the rich requirement, while still enforcing the race requirement. By doing so they get a significant number of working class voters to effectively buy in to the system. As long as they believe that they're receiving a marginal benefit from the continuation of the status quo they'll prop it up, and it's becoming hard to prop it up without them. By this point white club is a pretty good name for it. Women and workers are allowed in. Hell, if you're rich enough you could probably even get away with being gay or Jewish, as long as you do it discreetly.
It's less exclusive than it used to be but it's still a pretty great club to be in. If you go into a bank to borrow money for a mortgage then you and the bank manager have an unofficial understanding that you're both in the club. He knows he'll have no trouble explaining why he extended a line of credit to John Smith to his underwriters because John Smith is a good club name. If you go to buy a house in a neighbourhood of club members you can rely upon being welcomed. The club is ingrained in the understanding of the world at this point, if a club member applies to be a manager alongside a non club member then it just makes sense to hire the club member, both because of your own bias and the bias of all your customers. Even if you're super progressive for the 1950s and know the club is a sham, you don't want your customers leaving. If you're in the club you have access to education, jobs, credit, investments, and resources that non members just don't have because all the people controlling those things are in the club.
The exact same still applies today. If I walk into a Porsche dealership and ask to test drive a car they're not going to mess around, they'll take a look at me and they'll recognize that I'm in the club. I look, sound, and dress like the kind of person who's in the club. It conforms to all of their internal biases, it's fine. It's the same if I go to a bank and ask for a loan, when I have to walk into a room of strangers and run a meeting, when I have an interaction with an elected official or a police officer. I'm given respect and deference because I've been born into a world where people like me get respect and deference and everyone understands that. I'm not ever going to worry that the police are going to give me a rough ride in the back of a truck because I know and they know that that kind of thing isn't done to club members. Being in the club means never having to prove your value to people. Obviously you can go the other direction, you can demonstrate that you have no value, but you've always got that great intro with your private membership.
White club isn't actively conspiring, we don't have meetings, it's the monopolization of power by the group in power through cultural conditioning.
Your presumption that Democrats are working against white club is false, as GH and MLK will tell you. Democrat strongholds are often the worst offenders when it comes to shit like school segregation which is a classic symptom of limiting access to education to club members. Democrats want all the social credibility of acknowledging privilege without any of the sweeping societal revolution needed to address it because at the end of the day being in the club is great and we'd all much rather feel bad about being in the club than close the club.
Asians aren't a homogeneous group. They're not in white club but if they're the right kind of Asian they can get honorary memberships. You're not letting the dry cleaners in but you might let in the guy who owns a chain of a hundred dry cleaners.
The overlap of white skin and white club isn't total but it's close. If your first language is Spanish, your English is heavily accented, and your last name is Gonzales then light skin isn't going to help that much. Alternatively if you're third gen Japanese American and middle class or higher than you're probably some kind of honorary member.
It's absolutely nothing like antisemitism for the simple reason that the Jews did not control all the money and power in Europe and use it to turn everyone else into a second class citizen. If you're not in the club in America you're a second class citizen. You're more likely to be arrested, you're more likely to be convicted, you're less likely to be hired for jobs, you're more likely to have your civil rights taken away, and so forth. None of that was ever true for the antisemitic ethnic Germans living in Germany. I'm assuming this is tongue-in-cheek? Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 04:46 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote: I personally believe that women are more than capable of running the world, if given the chance, better than men. And I'm hoping we get some AOC Speaker or Presidency out of this in the coming years (once we accept democratic socialism as the heir to democracy). Yeah...that's not true. Also AOC is unfit to be a personal secretary, let alone a president. Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 09:28 Jockmcplop wrote: I'm watching Marianne Williamson's interview with Dave Rubin and I actually really like her. I can see most people thinking she's a bit mad but she really schooled Rubin in a way that should be eye opening for people who watch right wing youtube thinking those guys are smart or insightful.
Who thinks Dave Rubin is insightful? Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 09:15 KwarK wrote: No changes. The idea of a group in power voluntarily giving up their power isn’t realistic. You can’t expect the direct beneficiaries of racism to mobilize themselves to address it. Hell, most of them deliberately refuse to see it. Simultaneously, the attempts of powerful groups to fortify and expand their position often lead to its unintentional collapse in unexpected ways. No group, no matter how or well-informed, can predict how the future unfolds. Nor can it be assumed that they will rally behind each other as a homogeneous group. Much of recorded history concerns internecine warfare within a dominant social group in attempts to gain even more power. All my posts are tongue in cheek. I tend to show my issues with the status quo by nakedly advocating for the bits that people try not to acknowledge.
Also AOC is clearly a very driven and capable young woman. She didn’t get swept to where she is by forces outside of her control or rely upon nepotism and cronyism. She saw something she wanted and had the drive to earn it. Whether or not you agree with her policies she’s certainly a high achiever. It’s not like her daddy was a senator or whatever.
|
Dammit KwarK. That was my response.
To velr being banned...wtf? He's only saying (albeit rudely) what I've said previously. When confronted with a question of how his supposed "revolution" plays out and the outcome, GH doesn't offer anything. He's challenged me and I've answered the call. Yet he still refuses to give people his details of his plan. Or at least a semblance of one.
Stop bitchin' and start producing. Sir.
|
On July 19 2019 10:20 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 08:10 RvB wrote:On July 19 2019 04:46 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On July 19 2019 04:34 NewSunshine wrote:On July 19 2019 04:21 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:About the point of those being American not loving America enough, what do you all say to this guy? Smedley Darlington Butler (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940) was a United States Marine Corps major general, the highest rank authorized at that time, and at the time of his death the most decorated Marine in U.S. history. During his 34-year career as a Marine, he participated in military actions in the Philippines, China, in Central America and the Caribbean during the Banana Wars, and France in World War I. Butler later became an outspoken critic of U.S. wars and their consequences. He also exposed an alleged plan to overthrow the U.S. government.
By the end of his career, Butler had received 16 medals, five for heroism. He is one of 19 men to receive the Medal of Honor twice, one of three to be awarded both the Marine Corps Brevet Medal (along with Wendell Neville and David Porter) and the Medal of Honor, and the only Marine to be awarded the Brevet Medal and two Medals of Honor, all for separate actions.
In 1933, he became involved in a controversy known as the Business Plot, when he told a congressional committee that a group of wealthy industrialists were planning a military coup to overthrow Franklin D. Roosevelt, with Butler selected to lead a march of veterans to become dictator, similar to Fascist regimes at that time. The individuals involved all denied the existence of a plot and the media ridiculed the allegations, but a final report by a special House of Representatives Committee confirmed some of Butler's testimony.
In 1935, Butler wrote a book titled War Is a Racket, where he described and criticized the workings of the United States in its foreign actions and wars, such as those he was a part of, including the American corporations and other imperialist motivations behind them. After retiring from service, he became a popular advocate, speaking at meetings organized by veterans, pacifists, and church groups in the 1930s SourceI bring it up because you don't have to hate America to want better for the nation. There's nothing anti-American about criticizing America. If anything, it shows a willingness to see the defects and argue/fight for a better outcome. Also this is quite accurate. When you're creating anything, anything at all, if you want to make it better you have to get it criticized to hell first. A functioning nation is no exception. The problem is, with the "Democrats hate America" crowd, "America" is code for "America exactly as it was", and not actually America. First you have to decipher the code, then you can spot it for the dogwhistle that it is. Just like how "traditional family values" actually means subjecting women to a life of child-rearing and servitude to men. Precisely. This man operated on 3 continents and still came back to the US to criticize the government. Doesn't make him less American all of a sudden. And it doesn't make any of the women charged by trump any less American. How many F500 companies have foreign born CEOs? How many inventions are credited to foreign born Americans(and minority Americans) that we enjoy today? Once you get away from racist beliefs and start really seeing America, not what she is, but what she can be, you will also begin to criticize it. I personally believe that women are more than capable of running the world if given the chance better than men. And I'm hoping we get some AOC Speaker or Presidency out of this in the coming years (once we accept democratic socialism as the heir to democracy). I agree with the first part of your post. Some of the most famous inventors are actually immigrants (Einstein for example).Immigrants are also more likely to be an entrepreneur and usually make the economy more dynamic. The second part I find questionably though. Why would women be better than men? That seems to be as sexists as claiming men are better than women just the other way around. Notice I said "more than capable" Not "more capable". That little difference makes a world of difference when discussing whether or not women should hold power in the government at the highest levels. We have RBG, but other than that, we're sorely missing a woman in a high position that just rekts.
"I personally believe that women are more than capable of running the world, if given the chance, better than men."
As it reads, "I personally believe that women are more than capable of running the world [] better than men." I don't mean to align myself with anyone's reasoning, but I did want to point out that I -also- read it as "women could run world better than men"
|
On July 19 2019 11:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:To velr being banned...wtf? He's only saying (albeit rudely) what I've said previously. Regardless of the merits of his sentiment he was really very rude.
(If you want to follow up this conversation Website Feedback seems like a better place.)
|
|
|
|