|
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 |
Northern Ireland25342 Posts
On March 02 2022 08:25 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 08:22 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 07:57 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 07:45 WombaT wrote:On March 02 2022 07:30 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 07:10 JimmiC wrote:On March 02 2022 06:37 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 06:19 WombaT wrote:
One crucial error you appear to be making is assuming that people criticising the current sorry state of the Republican Party are dyed in the wool Democrats.
At least per the thread they’re either not even Americans like myself, or reluctant Dem voters who spend as much time criticising that party.
‘What about the Dems’ doesn’t really sting if one is not a Dem.
Affirmative action in certain instances being detrimental to Asian Americans is, to me a valid area for discussion but why does it seemingly exclusively come up to deflect from any and all other credible accusations of racism in other quarters?
Other causes the wider-Asian American community bring to the fore don’t seem nearly as enthusiastically adopted, it makes one rather cynical that concern for this issue is at best myopic, at worst a disingenuous way to crowbar ‘the left are the real racists’ narratives into the discourse I think you make a lot of good points here. As I have not heard a single person defend affirmative action in this thread it sounds like you all are not the racists. I am heartened to discover this. To be fair, there is some truth, that I was using affirmative action as a crow-bar. It is a horribly racist policy and if members of my party are going to be called racists in this thread, then I am going to remind Democrats of their racist policies, both past and current. That said, the issue is near and dear to my heart. I want to point out something about affirmative action. It is bad politics. Asian Americans are for the most part very loyal Democratic voters and education is perhaps their most important issue. It makes no political sense to punish your most loyal constituents on the issue most dear to their heart. Why does the Democratic party do this? The answer is it is supported by the university administrators. They want voters to vote for more funds and they know that Asian American votes are in the bag. Asian Americans will vote to fund education even if the system is rigged against them. What the university administrations worry about is how African Americans will vote. Their well founded concern is that if too few African Americans are admitted to universities then African Americans will no longer vote to increase funding and this will hurt the bottom line of their institution and in the end their salary. For this reason the administration of universities badly want affirmative action and the Democratic party is listening to the elites in the administration instead of the rank and file who are against racial discrimination. How bad exactly do you think affirmative action has hurt Asian Americans? Are you aware the case is being brought by a white guy and is not supported by the Asian communities? If you hate racism there is at least 10,000 other things to be more mad at. You are just getting your information from the wrong sources. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/70-asian-americans-support-affirmative-action-here-s-why-misconceptions-n1247806According to the national 2020 Asian American Voter Survey, which examined almost 1,570 voters, targeting the six largest national origin groups, found that 70 percent of Asian Americans supported affirmative action, while 16 percent opposed it. Chinese Americans, who were the least likely of the ethnicities to back the program, still favored it at a majority of 56 percent.
Data on Harvard’s own admissions shows that race-conscious admissions have benefitted all communities, including Asian Americans, producing a more diverse student body, Yang said.
Harvard’s admissions statistics show that the share of its admitted class that is Asian American has grown by 27 percent since 2010, according to the university's response to the lawsuit. When looking at its class of 2023, Asian Americans make up more than 25 percent, while Latinx students comprise just over 12 percent and Black students constitute more than 14 percent. Vincent Pan, co-executive director of nonprofit Chinese for Affirmative Action, agreed, noting that while the support and leadership from the Asian American community on the issue of affirmative action is too often ignored, there does continue to be a segment of the population that is complicit in the right-wing agenda to upend race-conscious programs.
“Their positioning undermines work against anti-Asian racism that requires multiracial solidarity, making more visible the needs of less visible AAPI groups and dismantling anti-Black stereotypes," Pan said, referring to Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. https://nyunews.com/opinion/2021/04/07/asian-americans-affirmative-action/These white affirmative action opponents don’t have the interests of Asians in mind. Rather, Asian students are being weaponized against marginalized college hopefuls. Blum intentionally invokes the model minority myth by portraying all Asians as highly successful individuals unfairly hurt by affirmative action. This advances the false narrative that Asian American students are a monolith, and completely ignores Asians who do not fit the model minority stereotype. Only about half of Asian Americans hold a bachelor’s degree or higher.
It’s no surprise, then, that more than 135 Asian American organizations banded together to support affirmative action after Blum filed his case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Blum_(litigant) I don't know anything about the case you are referring to. The fact that some Asian Americans support discrimination against their race does not make the policy okay or not racist. Racial discrimination is racist and wrong and the fact that some Democrats and some Asian Americans support it does not make it any better. The motives of Republicans are pure on this issue and many other issues. We supported an end to slavery and 300k of us died freeing slaves not because it was easy but because it was right. We fought hard to win voting rights for African Americans knowing full well that most of them would vote against our party because it was right. There is no point winning elections if you don't use your power for good and securing voting rights for African Americans was good we are proud of our party for doing that. We oppose abortion knowing full well that most of the women getting abortions are Democrats and if we succeed there will be more children raised by Democrats and most of those children will likely become Democrats themselves and vote against our party. We know we will lose elections over this, but killing children is wrong and we would rather do good. We will smile as the children whose lives we have saved vote against us because it is their vote and their life and their choice. You should support a policy because it is the right policy. If your defense of a policy is that someone else supports it, then you are engaging in group think. 3000+ pages and that may be the most dubious claim I have yet read. I shall concede the abortion topic. While I hugely disagree, I think this is an intractable issue where the pro-life side is engaging earnestly as per their values. I don’t think the motive is to subjugate women or whatever charges people make. That may be the end result, and the rationale (often religious in nature) used to justify it is, to me incorrect, but I think it’s an earnestly held belief via that framework. I liked that he fought and died to free slaves. That was good at him. Can’t call him racist if he fought and died to free slaves. Of course if what he means is that the club he’s in did that 150 years ago but all those club members are dead and there are brand new club members now and also if you look at the writings of those club members 150 years ago they were still super fucking racist then the argument falls apart. But still, good job. Nobody wants to be exactly as anti racist as either side on the civil war. You should want to be way less racist than the least racist side. And yet somehow Confederate flags keep showing up in Republican areas. If the best argument you had was that 150 years ago the Republicans opposed the Confederacy then you don’t have a good argument. Yes my club fought and in many cases died to free the slaves. I am proud of them. They did good. Trivializing slavery as merely racist minimizes such a great travesty. The problem is not that the Democrats failed to enslave all races equally. The problem is that slavery is terrible no matter who it is purpotrated on. No they didn’t. The 150 year ago Republican Party is not the same thing as the union army. The modern Republican Party is not the same thing as the 150 year ago Republican Party. You can’t go around telling people you’re not a racist because you’re a few steps removed from having fought against the CSA, especially if you’re waving a Confederate flag at the same time.
Metallica, titans of my youth have at this stage probably put out more albums I dislike than I like, which has tapered my fandom somewhat.
But aye, there’s a direct, unbroken lineage between the party of Lincoln and today’s incarnation, makes sense.
|
United States42692 Posts
On March 02 2022 08:29 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 08:25 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 08:22 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 07:57 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 07:45 WombaT wrote:On March 02 2022 07:30 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 07:10 JimmiC wrote:On March 02 2022 06:37 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 06:19 WombaT wrote:
One crucial error you appear to be making is assuming that people criticising the current sorry state of the Republican Party are dyed in the wool Democrats.
At least per the thread they’re either not even Americans like myself, or reluctant Dem voters who spend as much time criticising that party.
‘What about the Dems’ doesn’t really sting if one is not a Dem.
Affirmative action in certain instances being detrimental to Asian Americans is, to me a valid area for discussion but why does it seemingly exclusively come up to deflect from any and all other credible accusations of racism in other quarters?
Other causes the wider-Asian American community bring to the fore don’t seem nearly as enthusiastically adopted, it makes one rather cynical that concern for this issue is at best myopic, at worst a disingenuous way to crowbar ‘the left are the real racists’ narratives into the discourse I think you make a lot of good points here. As I have not heard a single person defend affirmative action in this thread it sounds like you all are not the racists. I am heartened to discover this. To be fair, there is some truth, that I was using affirmative action as a crow-bar. It is a horribly racist policy and if members of my party are going to be called racists in this thread, then I am going to remind Democrats of their racist policies, both past and current. That said, the issue is near and dear to my heart. I want to point out something about affirmative action. It is bad politics. Asian Americans are for the most part very loyal Democratic voters and education is perhaps their most important issue. It makes no political sense to punish your most loyal constituents on the issue most dear to their heart. Why does the Democratic party do this? The answer is it is supported by the university administrators. They want voters to vote for more funds and they know that Asian American votes are in the bag. Asian Americans will vote to fund education even if the system is rigged against them. What the university administrations worry about is how African Americans will vote. Their well founded concern is that if too few African Americans are admitted to universities then African Americans will no longer vote to increase funding and this will hurt the bottom line of their institution and in the end their salary. For this reason the administration of universities badly want affirmative action and the Democratic party is listening to the elites in the administration instead of the rank and file who are against racial discrimination. How bad exactly do you think affirmative action has hurt Asian Americans? Are you aware the case is being brought by a white guy and is not supported by the Asian communities? If you hate racism there is at least 10,000 other things to be more mad at. You are just getting your information from the wrong sources. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/70-asian-americans-support-affirmative-action-here-s-why-misconceptions-n1247806According to the national 2020 Asian American Voter Survey, which examined almost 1,570 voters, targeting the six largest national origin groups, found that 70 percent of Asian Americans supported affirmative action, while 16 percent opposed it. Chinese Americans, who were the least likely of the ethnicities to back the program, still favored it at a majority of 56 percent.
Data on Harvard’s own admissions shows that race-conscious admissions have benefitted all communities, including Asian Americans, producing a more diverse student body, Yang said.
Harvard’s admissions statistics show that the share of its admitted class that is Asian American has grown by 27 percent since 2010, according to the university's response to the lawsuit. When looking at its class of 2023, Asian Americans make up more than 25 percent, while Latinx students comprise just over 12 percent and Black students constitute more than 14 percent. Vincent Pan, co-executive director of nonprofit Chinese for Affirmative Action, agreed, noting that while the support and leadership from the Asian American community on the issue of affirmative action is too often ignored, there does continue to be a segment of the population that is complicit in the right-wing agenda to upend race-conscious programs.
“Their positioning undermines work against anti-Asian racism that requires multiracial solidarity, making more visible the needs of less visible AAPI groups and dismantling anti-Black stereotypes," Pan said, referring to Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. https://nyunews.com/opinion/2021/04/07/asian-americans-affirmative-action/These white affirmative action opponents don’t have the interests of Asians in mind. Rather, Asian students are being weaponized against marginalized college hopefuls. Blum intentionally invokes the model minority myth by portraying all Asians as highly successful individuals unfairly hurt by affirmative action. This advances the false narrative that Asian American students are a monolith, and completely ignores Asians who do not fit the model minority stereotype. Only about half of Asian Americans hold a bachelor’s degree or higher.
It’s no surprise, then, that more than 135 Asian American organizations banded together to support affirmative action after Blum filed his case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Blum_(litigant) I don't know anything about the case you are referring to. The fact that some Asian Americans support discrimination against their race does not make the policy okay or not racist. Racial discrimination is racist and wrong and the fact that some Democrats and some Asian Americans support it does not make it any better. The motives of Republicans are pure on this issue and many other issues. We supported an end to slavery and 300k of us died freeing slaves not because it was easy but because it was right. We fought hard to win voting rights for African Americans knowing full well that most of them would vote against our party because it was right. There is no point winning elections if you don't use your power for good and securing voting rights for African Americans was good we are proud of our party for doing that. We oppose abortion knowing full well that most of the women getting abortions are Democrats and if we succeed there will be more children raised by Democrats and most of those children will likely become Democrats themselves and vote against our party. We know we will lose elections over this, but killing children is wrong and we would rather do good. We will smile as the children whose lives we have saved vote against us because it is their vote and their life and their choice. You should support a policy because it is the right policy. If your defense of a policy is that someone else supports it, then you are engaging in group think. 3000+ pages and that may be the most dubious claim I have yet read. I shall concede the abortion topic. While I hugely disagree, I think this is an intractable issue where the pro-life side is engaging earnestly as per their values. I don’t think the motive is to subjugate women or whatever charges people make. That may be the end result, and the rationale (often religious in nature) used to justify it is, to me incorrect, but I think it’s an earnestly held belief via that framework. I liked that he fought and died to free slaves. That was good at him. Can’t call him racist if he fought and died to free slaves. Of course if what he means is that the club he’s in did that 150 years ago but all those club members are dead and there are brand new club members now and also if you look at the writings of those club members 150 years ago they were still super fucking racist then the argument falls apart. But still, good job. Nobody wants to be exactly as anti racist as either side on the civil war. You should want to be way less racist than the least racist side. And yet somehow Confederate flags keep showing up in Republican areas. If the best argument you had was that 150 years ago the Republicans opposed the Confederacy then you don’t have a good argument. Yes my club fought and in many cases died to free the slaves. I am proud of them. They did good. Trivializing slavery as merely racist minimizes such a great travesty. The problem is not that the Democrats failed to enslave all races equally. The problem is that slavery is terrible no matter who it is purpotrated on. No they didn’t. The 150 year ago Republican Party is not the same thing as the union army. The modern Republican Party is not the same thing as the 150 year ago Republican Party. You can’t go around telling people you’re not a racist because you’re a few steps removed from having fought against the CSA, especially if you’re waving a Confederate flag at the same time. Metallica, titans of my youth have at this stage probably put out more albums I dislike than I like, which has tapered my fandom somewhat. But aye, there’s a direct, unbroken lineage between the party of Lincoln and today’s incarnation, makes sense.
The union army and today’s Republicans is the argument he’s making. It’s not just that the Republicans are the same entity throughout that time, it’s also that 300k Republicans died freeing the slaves. He’s co-opting not just Lincoln but also the whole union army into his argument.
This exchange reminds me of the time the Democratic Party defeated the Nazis. Over 400,000 Democrats laid down their lives in WW2.
|
On March 02 2022 08:26 Sermokala wrote:
The concept of time seems to be escaping him. I don't think he understands how long it has been from when the civil war was. Or how the people in charge of the party sometimes die and other people replace them.
I'm just waiting for him to explain Obama I've been on facebook enough to know the garbage the republican apologists say about that.
If you are saying your party has improved since 1860s and since 1960s then I agree. Obama is a huge improvement over James Buchanan, Woodrow Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt. Well done! You all have moved in the right direction. You are now against slavery and segregation. I am not trying to make fun or anything here. It is really a huge thing for the whole world that your party has improved so much in just a few generations.
|
|
|
On March 02 2022 08:35 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 08:29 WombaT wrote:On March 02 2022 08:25 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 08:22 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 07:57 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 07:45 WombaT wrote:On March 02 2022 07:30 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 07:10 JimmiC wrote:On March 02 2022 06:37 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 06:19 WombaT wrote:
One crucial error you appear to be making is assuming that people criticising the current sorry state of the Republican Party are dyed in the wool Democrats.
At least per the thread they’re either not even Americans like myself, or reluctant Dem voters who spend as much time criticising that party.
‘What about the Dems’ doesn’t really sting if one is not a Dem.
Affirmative action in certain instances being detrimental to Asian Americans is, to me a valid area for discussion but why does it seemingly exclusively come up to deflect from any and all other credible accusations of racism in other quarters?
Other causes the wider-Asian American community bring to the fore don’t seem nearly as enthusiastically adopted, it makes one rather cynical that concern for this issue is at best myopic, at worst a disingenuous way to crowbar ‘the left are the real racists’ narratives into the discourse I think you make a lot of good points here. As I have not heard a single person defend affirmative action in this thread it sounds like you all are not the racists. I am heartened to discover this. To be fair, there is some truth, that I was using affirmative action as a crow-bar. It is a horribly racist policy and if members of my party are going to be called racists in this thread, then I am going to remind Democrats of their racist policies, both past and current. That said, the issue is near and dear to my heart. I want to point out something about affirmative action. It is bad politics. Asian Americans are for the most part very loyal Democratic voters and education is perhaps their most important issue. It makes no political sense to punish your most loyal constituents on the issue most dear to their heart. Why does the Democratic party do this? The answer is it is supported by the university administrators. They want voters to vote for more funds and they know that Asian American votes are in the bag. Asian Americans will vote to fund education even if the system is rigged against them. What the university administrations worry about is how African Americans will vote. Their well founded concern is that if too few African Americans are admitted to universities then African Americans will no longer vote to increase funding and this will hurt the bottom line of their institution and in the end their salary. For this reason the administration of universities badly want affirmative action and the Democratic party is listening to the elites in the administration instead of the rank and file who are against racial discrimination. How bad exactly do you think affirmative action has hurt Asian Americans? Are you aware the case is being brought by a white guy and is not supported by the Asian communities? If you hate racism there is at least 10,000 other things to be more mad at. You are just getting your information from the wrong sources. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/70-asian-americans-support-affirmative-action-here-s-why-misconceptions-n1247806According to the national 2020 Asian American Voter Survey, which examined almost 1,570 voters, targeting the six largest national origin groups, found that 70 percent of Asian Americans supported affirmative action, while 16 percent opposed it. Chinese Americans, who were the least likely of the ethnicities to back the program, still favored it at a majority of 56 percent.
Data on Harvard’s own admissions shows that race-conscious admissions have benefitted all communities, including Asian Americans, producing a more diverse student body, Yang said.
Harvard’s admissions statistics show that the share of its admitted class that is Asian American has grown by 27 percent since 2010, according to the university's response to the lawsuit. When looking at its class of 2023, Asian Americans make up more than 25 percent, while Latinx students comprise just over 12 percent and Black students constitute more than 14 percent. Vincent Pan, co-executive director of nonprofit Chinese for Affirmative Action, agreed, noting that while the support and leadership from the Asian American community on the issue of affirmative action is too often ignored, there does continue to be a segment of the population that is complicit in the right-wing agenda to upend race-conscious programs.
“Their positioning undermines work against anti-Asian racism that requires multiracial solidarity, making more visible the needs of less visible AAPI groups and dismantling anti-Black stereotypes," Pan said, referring to Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. https://nyunews.com/opinion/2021/04/07/asian-americans-affirmative-action/These white affirmative action opponents don’t have the interests of Asians in mind. Rather, Asian students are being weaponized against marginalized college hopefuls. Blum intentionally invokes the model minority myth by portraying all Asians as highly successful individuals unfairly hurt by affirmative action. This advances the false narrative that Asian American students are a monolith, and completely ignores Asians who do not fit the model minority stereotype. Only about half of Asian Americans hold a bachelor’s degree or higher.
It’s no surprise, then, that more than 135 Asian American organizations banded together to support affirmative action after Blum filed his case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Blum_(litigant) I don't know anything about the case you are referring to. The fact that some Asian Americans support discrimination against their race does not make the policy okay or not racist. Racial discrimination is racist and wrong and the fact that some Democrats and some Asian Americans support it does not make it any better. The motives of Republicans are pure on this issue and many other issues. We supported an end to slavery and 300k of us died freeing slaves not because it was easy but because it was right. We fought hard to win voting rights for African Americans knowing full well that most of them would vote against our party because it was right. There is no point winning elections if you don't use your power for good and securing voting rights for African Americans was good we are proud of our party for doing that. We oppose abortion knowing full well that most of the women getting abortions are Democrats and if we succeed there will be more children raised by Democrats and most of those children will likely become Democrats themselves and vote against our party. We know we will lose elections over this, but killing children is wrong and we would rather do good. We will smile as the children whose lives we have saved vote against us because it is their vote and their life and their choice. You should support a policy because it is the right policy. If your defense of a policy is that someone else supports it, then you are engaging in group think. 3000+ pages and that may be the most dubious claim I have yet read. I shall concede the abortion topic. While I hugely disagree, I think this is an intractable issue where the pro-life side is engaging earnestly as per their values. I don’t think the motive is to subjugate women or whatever charges people make. That may be the end result, and the rationale (often religious in nature) used to justify it is, to me incorrect, but I think it’s an earnestly held belief via that framework. I liked that he fought and died to free slaves. That was good at him. Can’t call him racist if he fought and died to free slaves. Of course if what he means is that the club he’s in did that 150 years ago but all those club members are dead and there are brand new club members now and also if you look at the writings of those club members 150 years ago they were still super fucking racist then the argument falls apart. But still, good job. Nobody wants to be exactly as anti racist as either side on the civil war. You should want to be way less racist than the least racist side. And yet somehow Confederate flags keep showing up in Republican areas. If the best argument you had was that 150 years ago the Republicans opposed the Confederacy then you don’t have a good argument. Yes my club fought and in many cases died to free the slaves. I am proud of them. They did good. Trivializing slavery as merely racist minimizes such a great travesty. The problem is not that the Democrats failed to enslave all races equally. The problem is that slavery is terrible no matter who it is purpotrated on. No they didn’t. The 150 year ago Republican Party is not the same thing as the union army. The modern Republican Party is not the same thing as the 150 year ago Republican Party. You can’t go around telling people you’re not a racist because you’re a few steps removed from having fought against the CSA, especially if you’re waving a Confederate flag at the same time. Metallica, titans of my youth have at this stage probably put out more albums I dislike than I like, which has tapered my fandom somewhat. But aye, there’s a direct, unbroken lineage between the party of Lincoln and today’s incarnation, makes sense. The union army and today’s Republicans is the argument he’s making. It’s not just that the Republicans are the same entity throughout that time, it’s also that 300k Republicans died freeing the slaves. He’s co-opting not just Lincoln but also the whole union army into his argument. This exchange reminds me of the time the Democratic Party defeated the Nazis. Over 400,000 Democrats laid down their lives in WW2.
The Republican party is co-opting the Republican party? That is something our party did and it was great! You should be congratulating us. It is true that there were Democrats in the Union army as well, but most Democrats were fighting to extend slavery in the South. It is 100% true that were many Democrats in the union army and they deserve even more credit than the Republicans in my opinion since they were going against their party. It is good of you to point that out.
Likewise while FDR did lead us against the Nazis, the Republican party was of course in full support.
To be charitable to the Democrat party we should recognize that they more or less invented modern Democracy by extending the right to vote to nearly all free men what circa 1800 was nearly unheard of. Essentially the rest of the world has copied the Democratic party and for that we should all be grateful.
|
|
|
Northern Ireland25342 Posts
On March 02 2022 08:50 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 08:47 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 08:35 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 08:29 WombaT wrote:On March 02 2022 08:25 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 08:22 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 07:57 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 07:45 WombaT wrote:On March 02 2022 07:30 meadbert wrote:I don't know anything about the case you are referring to. The fact that some Asian Americans support discrimination against their race does not make the policy okay or not racist. Racial discrimination is racist and wrong and the fact that some Democrats and some Asian Americans support it does not make it any better. The motives of Republicans are pure on this issue and many other issues. We supported an end to slavery and 300k of us died freeing slaves not because it was easy but because it was right. We fought hard to win voting rights for African Americans knowing full well that most of them would vote against our party because it was right. There is no point winning elections if you don't use your power for good and securing voting rights for African Americans was good we are proud of our party for doing that. We oppose abortion knowing full well that most of the women getting abortions are Democrats and if we succeed there will be more children raised by Democrats and most of those children will likely become Democrats themselves and vote against our party. We know we will lose elections over this, but killing children is wrong and we would rather do good. We will smile as the children whose lives we have saved vote against us because it is their vote and their life and their choice. You should support a policy because it is the right policy. If your defense of a policy is that someone else supports it, then you are engaging in group think. 3000+ pages and that may be the most dubious claim I have yet read. I shall concede the abortion topic. While I hugely disagree, I think this is an intractable issue where the pro-life side is engaging earnestly as per their values. I don’t think the motive is to subjugate women or whatever charges people make. That may be the end result, and the rationale (often religious in nature) used to justify it is, to me incorrect, but I think it’s an earnestly held belief via that framework. I liked that he fought and died to free slaves. That was good at him. Can’t call him racist if he fought and died to free slaves. Of course if what he means is that the club he’s in did that 150 years ago but all those club members are dead and there are brand new club members now and also if you look at the writings of those club members 150 years ago they were still super fucking racist then the argument falls apart. But still, good job. Nobody wants to be exactly as anti racist as either side on the civil war. You should want to be way less racist than the least racist side. And yet somehow Confederate flags keep showing up in Republican areas. If the best argument you had was that 150 years ago the Republicans opposed the Confederacy then you don’t have a good argument. Yes my club fought and in many cases died to free the slaves. I am proud of them. They did good. Trivializing slavery as merely racist minimizes such a great travesty. The problem is not that the Democrats failed to enslave all races equally. The problem is that slavery is terrible no matter who it is purpotrated on. No they didn’t. The 150 year ago Republican Party is not the same thing as the union army. The modern Republican Party is not the same thing as the 150 year ago Republican Party. You can’t go around telling people you’re not a racist because you’re a few steps removed from having fought against the CSA, especially if you’re waving a Confederate flag at the same time. Metallica, titans of my youth have at this stage probably put out more albums I dislike than I like, which has tapered my fandom somewhat. But aye, there’s a direct, unbroken lineage between the party of Lincoln and today’s incarnation, makes sense. The union army and today’s Republicans is the argument he’s making. It’s not just that the Republicans are the same entity throughout that time, it’s also that 300k Republicans died freeing the slaves. He’s co-opting not just Lincoln but also the whole union army into his argument. This exchange reminds me of the time the Democratic Party defeated the Nazis. Over 400,000 Democrats laid down their lives in WW2. The Republican party is co-opting the Republican party? That is something our party did and it was great! You should be congratulating us. It is true that there were Democrats in the Union army as well, but most Democrats were fighting to extend slavery in the South. It is 100% true that were many Democrats in the union army and they deserve even more credit than the Republicans in my opinion since they were going against their party. It is good of you to point that out. Likewise while FDR did lead us against the Nazis, the Republican party was of course in full support. To be charitable to the Democrat party we should recognize that they more or less invented modern Democracy by extending the right to vote to nearly all free men what circa 1800 was nearly unheard of. Essentially the rest of the world has copied the Democratic party and for that we should all be grateful. No one is diputing history. They are talking about reality now.
www.comicsands.com
Just the most recent source I came on, I’m sure there are better.
But aye the contemporary GOP has no issues in this domain…
|
United States42692 Posts
I shouldn’t have replied and fed the troll. Sometimes the bait is just too tasty. My recommendation is that we ignore him going forward.
|
On March 02 2022 08:54 KwarK wrote:
I shouldn’t have replied and fed the troll. Sometimes the bait is just too tasty. My recommendation is that we ignore him going forward.
I was not trolling I have been serious the whole time. Thank you for engaging respectfully. I respect all of you who engaged. Evem though we disagree it is good we can talk. I will now bow out until someone else accuses the Republican party of racism. My best regards to all!
|
On March 02 2022 05:32 RenSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 05:06 meadbert wrote:On March 02 2022 02:06 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 01 2022 14:45 Doc.Rivers wrote:On March 01 2022 13:54 Mohdoo wrote:On March 01 2022 13:52 Doc.Rivers wrote:On March 01 2022 13:19 micronesia wrote:
What would be some reasons not to vote to remove members from committees for making racists and antisemitic statements (other than endorsing racism ant antisemitism)? Aat the time I'm not sure that it was quite as clear cut that racism and antisemitism were at issue. IIRC it was more like, Greene said that Israel has space lasers. I'm not sure that that's any more anti Semitic than saying that Israel's lobbyists have control over US politics through their money, power and influence. But aside from that, there are issues at play like internal party politics and not capitulation to the overzealous dem media outrage machine. You didn't actually say anything here. What do you think separated the 11 republicans who voted against Greene from the other 199? This feels like the weirdest, slimiest deflection. I will of course refrain from responding in kind to the statements that I'm posting "nonsense," I'm being "awful," I'm being "weird," and I'm being "slimy." All I'm saying is that the republican party is not a racist party. Would you accept the statement "The Republican party is the party containing a disproportionately high number of racist leaders, racist constituents, and racist beliefs?" The Republican party is not the party that promoted slavery for 80 years. It is the party that ended slavery. The Republican party is not the party that promoted Jim Crow laws and segregation for 90 years. That party was the Democratic party. The Republican party is not the party that currently discriminates against Americans of Asian ancestry because of their race in college admissions. That party is the Democratic party. The Democratic party currently has more racists than the Republican party. If you believe in discriminating against Asians in college admissions, then you are a racist and I am calling out your racism. It seems you’ve got a bit of history, but your history stopped sometime before the 60s. In the 60s, the Southern Strategy happened. Essentially, the Democrats abandoned their Dixiecrat portion (the racist part of the Democrat party) and in turn, the Republicans absorbed the Dixiecrats. As the Republicans embraced the racists, there was a massive shift of black voters out of the Republican Party and into the Democrats. I don’t like racial criteria in college admissions either, but I recognize a portion of the Democrats is trying to use it to right a past wrong. As in sports, I think “make-up calls” are wrong and the best path forward is a colorblind approach moving forward. However, I have no delusion that the Democrats are the more racist party. Since the 60s, the Republicans have and continue to embrace racists. They continue to pass policies that negatively target black people. Sometimes their reasoning is quite openly racist. Other times they’re quiet about their motives for passing laws that negatively target black people. I don’t find the Democrats perfect, but I typically vote for them because they are clearly the lesser evil on things like race. They’re sometimes misguided on racial policies, but even that comes from a place of wanting to right past wrongs. When it comes to Republicans, they’re pretty repugnant. The one redeeming quality is a stated desire for limited government; however, they always seem to increase government control when they’re in charge and even openly support someone who tried to become a dictator. Hell no. Check your history after the 1950s.
While not endorsing everything said nor the tone with which it was said, it is true that the "Southern Strategy" is wildly overhyped and the test really is what actually happened in elections.
The south began a slow movement to the Republicans after WWII, as suburbanization thanks to things like air conditioning made it a more attractive place to live. The south swings back and forth on the presidential level based on a lot of factors, the senate moves slowly, and the house moves the most slowly. the GOP didnt win a majority of southern seats until 1994. An awful long time for a "racial backlash." Southern states basically grew their way to Republicanism.
An excellent book on this topic is The End of Southern Exceptionalism, which looks at partisan change in the post-wr south. It was written pre-2010 so it's a little dated, but it's good for most things before that. Been some time since I read it, but from what I recall incumbency mattered a bunch. People get kind of myopic, only looking at Nixon and Reagan, who won stomping victories anyways, which kind of limits the usefulness of those elections (1968 was closer, but still).
|
On March 02 2022 08:47 meadbert wrote:
Likewise while FDR did lead us against the Nazis, the Republican party was of course in full support.
Sorry to interrupt your Gish Gallop, but, um, no. The Republican party was against intervening in WW2, and said as much in their 1940 party platform.
On June 24 1940 the Republican Party wrote:
The Republican Party is firmly opposed to involving this Nation in foreign war.
There was debate within the GOP between isolationists and internationalists, but the party didn't materially oppose the Axis until it was impossible to do otherwise because of Pearl Harbor. FDR, by contrast, pushed to supply the Allies well before (over Republican objections).
That's not even relevant to a discussion of the modern-day Republican party since none of the people involved hold power today (and nearly all of them are dead). But if you're going to make claims about history, learn at least a smidge of it. Your view of the Republican party is built on demonstrable lies.
|
|
|
On March 02 2022 09:25 Severedevil wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 08:47 meadbert wrote:
Likewise while FDR did lead us against the Nazis, the Republican party was of course in full support.
Sorry to interrupt your Gish Gallop, but, um, no. The Republican party was against intervening in WW2, and said as much in their 1940 party platform. Show nested quote +On June 24 1940 the Republican Party wrote:
The Republican Party is firmly opposed to involving this Nation in foreign war.
There was debate within the GOP between isolationists and internationalists, but the party didn't materially oppose the Axis until it was impossible to do otherwise because of Pearl Harbor. FDR, by contrast, pushed to supply the Allies well before (over Republican objections). That's not even relevant to a discussion of the modern-day Republican party since none of the people involved hold power today (and nearly all of them are dead). But if you're going to make claims about history, learn at least a smidge of it. Your view of the Republican party is built on demonstrable lies.
The 1937 act was before World War 2 right? I thought Poland was invaded in 1939.
Congress voted nearly unanimously to go to war after Pearl Harbor.
I don't know what the initial reactions of the parties were after Germany and Russia invaded Poland. I would be interested to read if anyone has a link. I do know that the Republican party was isolationist and wanted to stay out of European wars in general but I don't know the specifics of 1939.
EDIT:
The 1940 Republican platform atleast answers the Republican side of the question.
They basically flame Roosevelt for too much taxes and spending. They follow that up by flaming him for not spending enough on defense. Finally they promise to spend whatever he needs for defense but they object to involving ourselves in the war.
Some things never change.
EDIT #2: Here is the Democratic platform
https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/1940-democratic-party-platform
Basically the Democrats agree about increasing defense spending while trying to avoid war. So in 1940 the political parties have similar war platforms.
|
On March 02 2022 08:54 KwarK wrote:
I shouldn’t have replied and fed the troll. Sometimes the bait is just too tasty. My recommendation is that we ignore him going forward.
Thank you (and others) for taking the bait, so that I didn't have to ask Obama to show his birth certificate 
|
On March 02 2022 08:03 WombaT wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 07:41 BlackJack wrote:On March 02 2022 06:48 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 06:40 BlackJack wrote:
Felons/convicts are far more likely to vote for and support Democratic candidates. So in fairness we should call the Republican party the party of racists and the Democrat party the party of criminals. That way we get to generalize both parties by their most unsavory members. I trust this is a satisfactory compromise for all involved in the discussion. That’s quite a logical leap. Firstly it combines voters and the party. Republicans politicians are racists enacting racist policies. You’re making a parallel between Republican politicians and Democratic voters. It doesn’t really work. The parallel would have to be politicians and unfortunately Republican politicians and criminal activity aren’t as far removed as you’d want for that parallel. Secondly there’s no support provided for the assertion that felons vote for Democrats. And that’s before we even look at felon disenfranchisement, a lot of them don’t vote at all. Thirdly the link between felons and a party of criminality isn’t really made. Criminal as a term is undefined here. I speed from time to time, am I a criminal? Are we talking people who commit crimes, people who are currently incarcerated, people who have previously served time but are free citizens? Fourthly the support of a group doesn’t imply that it is reciprocal. A party can receive support from a group without supporting the ideals of that group. All in all I’d rate your post I for Idiotic. I’m sure you tried your best though. It's a shame you couldn't formulate that same question for the topic at hand. Is "racist" a well defined term in this conversation? Is white people being superior to black people part of the Republican platform? Are any Republican politicians on the record stating that white people are a superior race? Exactly what definition of racist are you using to label the Republican party racist? If it's about "enacting racist policies" then as meadfast points out, the policies that discriminate against Asian-Americans are not coming from the Republican party so that will need to be addressed. Is Joe Biden a racist for saying "Poor kids are just as bright as white kids." Or calling Obama the first mainstream African-American that is bright and articulate and clean? Or how about saying "You can't go to 7/11 or Dunkin Donuts without having a slight Indian accent." Or saying his kids would grow up in a "racial jungle" if schools were desegregated. Or how about Biden lamenting how difficult it is to get "Latinx" vaccinated against COVID because they are worried they will get deported? Seems like some pretty racist stuff there. Biden had some extremely harmful, bad positions as it pertained to race. And frequent gaffes that exposed a more benign, but still existent form of racism pretty much to this day, far as I can tell. So yes. Hugely ingrained societal association and racial bias, in some form is hard, if not impossible to avoid, in one form or another. Biden’s historical positions, especially on school segregation should have seen him given a harder ride, as he consciously chose to take those positions in a deliberate fashion. They weren’t merely some gaffe stemming from stereotypes.
Impossible is right. Everyone has prejudices and biases. So if the definition of racist is so broad that even the guy that served under the first black president fits the bill then it kind of loses its bite. The reason I find this discussion so obnoxious is because there's nothing insightful to glean here. The only purpose is to play the game of let's find the nazi/confederate flag in the crowd so the group can be wholly dismissed as "the side that stands with people with swastikas." Why have actual discourse when can all just call each other racists or fascists or nazis or whatever.
|
|
|
United States24682 Posts
On March 02 2022 11:10 BlackJack wrote:
So if the definition of racist is so broad that even the guy that served under the first black president fits the bill then it kind of loses its bite.
Serving under the first black president as a white man doesn't necessarily make you "not racist." Many racist people have done major things that seem inconsistent with them being racist at first glance.
This understanding of racism is overly simplistic.
|
It's really not that complex. Joe Biden will do whatever they tell him to to accrue as much money as he can.
|
Northern Ireland25342 Posts
On March 02 2022 11:10 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2022 08:03 WombaT wrote:On March 02 2022 07:41 BlackJack wrote:On March 02 2022 06:48 KwarK wrote:On March 02 2022 06:40 BlackJack wrote:
Felons/convicts are far more likely to vote for and support Democratic candidates. So in fairness we should call the Republican party the party of racists and the Democrat party the party of criminals. That way we get to generalize both parties by their most unsavory members. I trust this is a satisfactory compromise for all involved in the discussion. That’s quite a logical leap. Firstly it combines voters and the party. Republicans politicians are racists enacting racist policies. You’re making a parallel between Republican politicians and Democratic voters. It doesn’t really work. The parallel would have to be politicians and unfortunately Republican politicians and criminal activity aren’t as far removed as you’d want for that parallel. Secondly there’s no support provided for the assertion that felons vote for Democrats. And that’s before we even look at felon disenfranchisement, a lot of them don’t vote at all. Thirdly the link between felons and a party of criminality isn’t really made. Criminal as a term is undefined here. I speed from time to time, am I a criminal? Are we talking people who commit crimes, people who are currently incarcerated, people who have previously served time but are free citizens? Fourthly the support of a group doesn’t imply that it is reciprocal. A party can receive support from a group without supporting the ideals of that group. All in all I’d rate your post I for Idiotic. I’m sure you tried your best though. It's a shame you couldn't formulate that same question for the topic at hand. Is "racist" a well defined term in this conversation? Is white people being superior to black people part of the Republican platform? Are any Republican politicians on the record stating that white people are a superior race? Exactly what definition of racist are you using to label the Republican party racist? If it's about "enacting racist policies" then as meadfast points out, the policies that discriminate against Asian-Americans are not coming from the Republican party so that will need to be addressed. Is Joe Biden a racist for saying "Poor kids are just as bright as white kids." Or calling Obama the first mainstream African-American that is bright and articulate and clean? Or how about saying "You can't go to 7/11 or Dunkin Donuts without having a slight Indian accent." Or saying his kids would grow up in a "racial jungle" if schools were desegregated. Or how about Biden lamenting how difficult it is to get "Latinx" vaccinated against COVID because they are worried they will get deported? Seems like some pretty racist stuff there. Biden had some extremely harmful, bad positions as it pertained to race. And frequent gaffes that exposed a more benign, but still existent form of racism pretty much to this day, far as I can tell. So yes. Hugely ingrained societal association and racial bias, in some form is hard, if not impossible to avoid, in one form or another. Biden’s historical positions, especially on school segregation should have seen him given a harder ride, as he consciously chose to take those positions in a deliberate fashion. They weren’t merely some gaffe stemming from stereotypes. Impossible is right. Everyone has prejudices and biases. So if the definition of racist is so broad that even the guy that served under the first black president fits the bill then it kind of loses its bite. The reason I find this discussion so obnoxious is because there's nothing insightful to glean here. The only purpose is to play the game of let's find the nazi/confederate flag in the crowd so the group can be wholly dismissed as "the side that stands with people with swastikas." Why have actual discourse when can all just call each other racists or fascists or nazis or whatever.
Well one can also ask the question ‘why are there people with Nazi/confederate flags at my rally, what’s up with that?’
Or not, it’s up to people themselves to consider if that’s a question worth asking or not. One doesn’t necessarily get a choice in enemies in this world, you do when it comes to who’s sharing your bed.
Instead an inordinate amount of energy is given up to either zoning in on a particularly overt definition of racism, whataboutery, or proclaiming one’s personal colourblindness.
Speaking in generalities mind. The simplest, effective way to get those pesky lefties saying you’re racist off your back is to say ‘I personally absolutely disavow this behaviour’.
Be a conservative, there’s plenty of good ideas in the tradition, I don’t see why defending the current incarnation of the GOP has to come with the territory.
Then maybe the civil discourse so often demanded can occur, instead of 4+ years trying to get any kind of concession that Trump is maybe not a great guy, or elements of the GOP enjoy courting racism, or me sitting on my deathbed still hearing ‘but what about Hillary’s emails?’ from the attending nurse.
Everyone has prejudices and biases yes, we do have agency in how we choose to react and respond to them. I would certainly rather not have the prejudices I have, but at an instinctual level I cannot remove them. They cease to be an issue when any degree of familiarity is obtained, so while I would consider myself racially biased by my environment, a racist no.
|
Does anyone else hear about the "infrastructure bill" and just think about how many hundreds of billions of dollars are going straight into the pockets of contractors and subcontractors?
Joe Biden is describing all the problems he and his party caused and then saying that he was the solution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
