Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
97 Posts
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Everything Else » Religion, Sex, and Politics

Subject: Tell me why what makes sense isn't true. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi, a friend dropped this in my email today.

I'll be upfront, I know that there is bias. I've already been through how the parties "switched places" about racism and I'm not going to argue that I know that it's not true because I don't know that.

However, there are many points in this article that show that today's Democrats still are not for blacks except when it comes time to grab their votes. Everything in this article makes sense. Of course, if you are firmly convinced that the parties did indeed "switch places" then you're going to say that the historical stuff is garbage. However, how do you debunk the current stuff?

This may turn into a serious discussion on how best to help the poorest blacks in America. The best way to start is to identify how much of the following is true, and how much is made up propaganda.

Tom Trinko wrote:
The MSM Is Right: There Is a Racist Party in America

By Tom Trinko

The mainstream media (MSM) are right. There is a political party today that has racism as a core value and is working incessantly to keep blacks down. It's the Democratic Party. Of course, since Democrat politicians never say what they really believe, most Democrat voters aren't aware they're supporting racism.

Like their predecessors who fought a war to keep slavery legal, who founded the KKK, who passed the Jim Crow laws, who fought for school segregation, and who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, modern Democrat politicians are constantly working to ensure that blacks be poor, ignorant, and totally dependent on the government.

Slave-owning Democrats believed that blacks were not really smart enough to run their own lives.

Modern Democrat talking heads constantly declare that in a country where Japanese Americans could go from Democrat-mandated prison camps to having one of the highest per household incomes in America, without Democrat help, blacks somehow can't manage to do anything. It's the same paternalistic attitude that earlier Democrats used to justify slavery.

Of course, the new slavery is different from the old: instead of picking cotton for hours in the blazing sun, modern blacks only have to vote Democrat, settle for unsafe neighborhoods, and be willing to live with the fact that their children will never get a decent education.

Charter schools and private schools have proven that they can educate black inner-city children. Black parents go to extreme lengths to get their kids in those schools because blacks love their kids, too. Yet Democrat politicians are constantly opposing those schools, and the idea of school choice, because they apparently care more about the millions the teacher unions pour into Democrat coffers than they do about black children getting a decent education.

What better recipe for securing the black vote than ensuring that blacks depend on government for life itself while using the compliant MSM to convince them that their problems are all due to Republicans – who, of course, have no power in the cities those blacks live in? This is another reason why it's necessary to make sure blacks can't get a decent education. Ignorant, uneducated people of any race are more likely to fall for propaganda, after all.

Democrat politicians have even figured out how to use taxpayer dollars to pay for keeping blacks around to vote. Their slave-owning predecessors had to at least pay to feed and house their slaves.

If you're saying, "No, this can't be so," then ponder a few "inconvenient truths."

In America, thousands of blacks are shot each year in Democrat-run cities, yet Democrats who run those cities with an iron fist do nothing that works to fix the problem. While one could believe that a non-racist might think for a few years that gun control actually protects law-abiding blacks, only someone who doesn't have black interests at heart could continue to believe so after decades of failure.

Note too that it's not thousands of whites who are getting shot in Chiraq (that is, Chicago), nor is it white neighborhoods where it's unsafe during the day. If you're black, you're 12 times more likely to be shot than if you're white in Chiraq, where Democrats have ruled since dinosaurs roamed the Illinois plains.

Democrats got far more riled up about a police officer shooting a black criminal in self-defense, according to Obama's DOJ, than they did about a nine-year-old black boy being the targeted victim of a gang hit. Why? Could it be that white liberals hate the cops and don't really care about blacks?

Democrats are also big fans of Planned Parenthood even though PP's founder was an avowed racist who viewed blacks as inferior. It's possible to be pro-choice but not a racist, of course. But it makes one wonder why Democrats aren't upset about the fact that the leading cause of death for black Americans is abortion. That Democrats continue to laud PP even though 79% of PP "clinics" are in or near minority neighborhoods is also strange if Democrats really care about blacks.The recent call by Democrats for taxpayer funding of abortions because that will "save money" is nothing less than saying that aborting the babies of people on welfare will save money. Note that when rich liberal Democrats talk about people on welfare, it's really unlikely that they're thinking about whites.

If Democrat politicians really aren't racists, it's odd that there are no Democrats saying abortion should be legal but that we should do something about the fact that a black woman is five times more likely to have an abortion than a white woman.

Then there's welfare. The entire supposed pivot of Democrats on racism is based on their support for welfare, which "rescued" blacks from poverty.

That hasn't worked too well, given that black poverty is still twice that of white poverty.

More importantly, welfare has contributed to the destruction of the black family and the resulting culture that makes it very hard for even very dedicated blacks to escape the ghetto. With 70% of blacks born to single mothers and with being in a single-parent family being the strongest correlation with drug use, criminality, teen pregnancy, and poverty, people who care about blacks, like the Republicans who pushed for welfare reform, would demand change.

If Democrats cared about blacks, they'd have noticed the problem by the 1970s and tried to fix it. Instead, they doubled down on the same failed approaches. But if their objective is to keep blacks dependent and scared, maybe those policies weren't failures after all.

Finally, one has only to look at how Democrats treat blacks who wander off the Democrats' thought plantation to see that love of blacks is not at the core of the Democratic Party. If any Republican had talked about Obama the way Democrats talk about Ben Carson, Justice Clarence Thomas, and any number of other black conservative intellectuals, he'd have been tarred and feathered by the MSM.

It's a crime that 52 years after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed, blacks are still being oppressed by the same Democratic Party that fought so hard for slavery 153 years ago.

Stop letting Democrat politicians get away with claiming to care when their actions show that their only concern is about votes. They helicopter into the black community every election cycle, explain how it's all the Republicans' fault, and then helicopter back to their tony neighborhoods, where their kids go to great schools and it's safe to walk at night.

Don't let Democrats get away with pretending to care about blacks while they fight tooth and nail against any policy that would give blacks a chance to earn their share of the American Dream.

It's time that America threw off the Democrat legacy of preventing blacks from reaching their true potential. It's time to end the nearly 200-year-long Democrat war on blacks and bring down the last vestiges of racism in America.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Colorado
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The Democrats will continue telling blacks that they are the party for them. That they will help them, that the republicans will keep them down, but the democrats in the end will do absolutely nothing to improve their plight since all it is is rhetoric and see you again in 4 years when we tell you the exact same thing and do the exact same thing, nothing.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Moshe Callen
Israel
Jerusalem
flag msg tools
designer
ἄνδρα μοι ἔννεπε, μοῦσα, πολύτροπον, ὃς μάλα πολλὰ/ πλάγχθη, ἐπεὶ Τροίης ἱερὸν πτολίεθρον ἔπερσεν./...
badge
μῆνιν ἄειδε θεὰ Πηληϊάδεω Ἀχιλῆος/ οὐλομένην, ἣ μυρί᾽ Ἀχαιοῖς ἄλγε᾽ ἔθηκε,/...
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Both parties in the US answer to corporate interests primarily. Both therefore end up being racist in different ways.
12 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
The number one issue I'd give you is that today's republican party bears no resemblance to the republican party of 1970.

You only need to watch the kennedy nixon debates and then watch the clinton trump debates to notice the decline.

For the other issues, when racists refuse to hire, refuse to lend, refuse to treat equally before the law then minorities (not just blacks) suffer financially which leads to instability. Reduced prospects lead to despair and hopelessness.

When racists pass laws specifically designed to disenfranchise minorities, they reduce minority power to affect positive change.

So after racists have created a problem, blaming democrats for failing to fix it when racists voted "NO" to every fix, voted "YES" to every law (many later tossed out by the courts) to disenfranchise voters, is ridiculous.

Are democrats racist? Yes, Some. Are republicans racist? Yes, More (about 300% more).


---

Attacks like this are part of a wider campaign to discredit the media and to destroy the language so people can't communicate effectively on matters of race.

When you deny a qualified minority a job because of their skin color you ARE a racist. When you deny a minority citizen the right to vote because of their skin color or the minority neighborhood they live in, you ARE a racist.

And not just a "mild" racist who thinks all jewish people are good bargainers (that's racism by definition).

No, the ones who deny minorities jobs, loans, equal court protection, equal police law enforcement, equal housing, equal quality schooling, who say blacks should be expelled from the area (neighborhood, county, state, country) are dangerously close to the kinds of racist who kill millions of people. And I'm not just talking nazis tho they are a prime example.

Some of the people associated with the alt-right are literally unamerican- they are talking like and acting like national socialist party members from germany circa the mid 1930s.

---

When someone starts using words in a way different than they are defined- be very suspicious of their motives.

rac·ism
ˈrāˌsizəm/
noun
noun: racism

1 the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
2 prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
34 
 Thumb up
0.55
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
C Bazler
United States
Bronx
New York
flag msg tools
"Come, and trip it as you go..."
badge
"...on the light fantastic toe."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Because it's not racist at all to assume that black people are incapable of knowing what's good for themselves, and aren't capable of making informed decisions about how to vote...

whistle
20 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
cbazler wrote:
Because it's not racist at all to assume that black people are incapable of knowing what's good for themselves, and aren't capable of making informed decisions about how to vote...

whistle


And blacks are not a monolithic group anyway. Some (not many) are conservative. Many (but not all) are liberal. Some are well off. Some are professionals. Appearance wise, there are as more kinds of blacks than there are tribes in africa. Some are tall, some are short, some have dark skin, others have lighter skin. Some are religious. Some are not.

Many were able to rise out of poverty after the boot was taken off the back of their neck by anti-racism laws passed by the democratic party . (Laws which some republicans around the country seem eager to repeal).

Ultimately, it's about poverty, education, and job opportunities more than race.
19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Walking on eggshells is not my style
United States
North Pole
Alaska
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
cbazler wrote:
Because it's not racist at all to assume that black people are incapable of knowing what's good for themselves, and aren't capable of making informed decisions about how to vote...

whistle


White people, however...
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Koldfoot wrote:
cbazler wrote:
Because it's not racist at all to assume that black people are incapable of knowing what's good for themselves, and aren't capable of making informed decisions about how to vote...

whistle


White people, however...


There sure are not many minority skinhead neo-nazi's.

I'm sure there are some but not many.

Large numbers of whites are angry over a level playing field that doesn't mean they get to start the 100 yard dash at the 60 yard mark any more.

Minorities are more angry that they had to start at the 120 yard mark, on the other side of a brick wall.

Both angry but one over injustice, the other over the end of privilege.

11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Tagge
Germany
Frankfurt
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:
Ultimately, it's about poverty, education, and job opportunities more than race.
I would say a fair number of problems we think of as race related are actually about culture. It's why Asians aren't considered diversity employees, they use the same behavior norms that "white America" does.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Dearlove
United Kingdom
Isleworth
Middx
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
mtagge wrote:
maxo-texas wrote:
Ultimately, it's about poverty, education, and job opportunities more than race.
I would say a fair number of problems we think of as race related are actually about culture. It's why Asians aren't considered diversity employees, they use the same behavior norms that "white America" does.

Well duh. There is no such thing as race, scientifically. America is crippling itself obsessing about race. It stops people who are fairly culturally homogeneous from being treated together.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Seth Brown
United States
North Adams
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Since you're asking for debunking, I'll give a brief overview. There are arguments to be had, but I may not follow up to have all of those arguments.
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:

I'll be upfront, I know that there is bias. I've already been through how the parties "switched places" about racism
[q="Tom Trinko"]
Like their predecessors who fought a war to keep slavery legal, who founded the KKK, who passed the Jim Crow laws, who fought for school segregation, and who opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, modern Democrat politicians are constantly working to ensure that blacks be poor, ignorant, and totally dependent on the government.

As you noted, Dixiecrats.

Quote:

Charter schools and private schools have proven that they can educate black inner-city children. Black parents go to extreme lengths to get their kids in those schools because blacks love their kids, too. Yet Democrat politicians are constantly opposing those schools, and the idea of school choice, because they apparently care more about the millions the teacher unions pour into Democrat coffers than they do about black children getting a decent education.

What better recipe for securing the black vote than ensuring that blacks depend on government for life itself while using the compliant MSM to convince them that their problems are all due to Republicans – who, of course, have no power in the cities those blacks live in? This is another reason why it's necessary to make sure blacks can't get a decent education. Ignorant, uneducated people of any race are more likely to fall for propaganda, after all.

Democrats tend to be better about funding public education, Republicans are bigger on private schools. Wealthier black (and non-black) families can absolutely do better at private or charter schools. Not everyone can attend charter schools, even with vouchers to help defray the cost. So if charter schools flourish at the expense of public schools, poorer black (and non-black) families will do worse. Disingenuous to frame it as racism, it's a bigger argument, and good points to be made on both sides.

Quote:

Democrat politicians have even figured out how to use taxpayer dollars to pay for keeping blacks around to vote. Their slave-owning predecessors had to at least pay to feed and house their slaves.

Good to have this in case anyone isn't sure if there's a strong tilt here. shake

Quote:

In America, thousands of blacks are shot each year in Democrat-run cities, yet Democrats who run those cities with an iron fist do nothing that works to fix the problem. While one could believe that a non-racist might think for a few years that gun control actually protects law-abiding blacks, only someone who doesn't have black interests at heart could continue to believe so after decades of failure.

Note too that it's not thousands of whites who are getting shot in Chiraq (that is, Chicago), nor is it white neighborhoods where it's unsafe during the day. If you're black, you're 12 times more likely to be shot than if you're white in Chiraq, where Democrats have ruled since dinosaurs roamed the Illinois plains.

Democrats got far more riled up about a police officer shooting a black criminal in self-defense, according to Obama's DOJ, than they did about a nine-year-old black boy being the targeted victim of a gang hit. Why? Could it be that white liberals hate the cops and don't really care about blacks?

Some Democrat-run cities have definitely failed in various ways. One could argue that this creates systemic racism insofar as it has had negative outcomes for blacks, but one could argue that about most of America's large-scale systems (e.g. capitalism) as well, and while I certainly know some people who would claim capitalists are therefore racist, I am loath to ascribe racism to someone because their (non-race-based) politics ended up having a negative outcome for minorities. But it's not an unreasonably argument -- which makes it stand out in this piece.

He's also arguing that gun control is similarly systemic racism but I think that's a much weaker claim, and that painting opposition to gun control as racism is disingenuous; it's clearly about a much bigger philosophical difference. And the whole "why more of a stink when cops shoot than when gangs shoot?" annoys me for two reasons:
1) Generally speaking I am irritated when people on Facebook try to compare two things and say, "Why do you waste time posting about X when you're silent about Y?" It's a diversion; the value of talking about X is not related to the importance of Y. Address X on its own merits, and then if you want to start a campaign for Y in the meantime, I will support it if deserved. Don't poop on things for not being your favorite issue.
2) While we would like both criminals and police to do less unnecessary harm to citizens, one of those groups is on the government payroll and should be much easier to change the behavior of.

Quote:

Democrats are also big fans of Planned Parenthood even though PP's founder was an avowed racist who viewed blacks as inferior. It's possible to be pro-choice but not a racist, of course. But it makes one wonder why Democrats aren't upset about the fact that the leading cause of death for black Americans is abortion. That Democrats continue to laud PP even though 79% of PP "clinics" are in or near minority neighborhoods is also strange if Democrats really care about blacks.The recent call by Democrats for taxpayer funding of abortions because that will "save money" is nothing less than saying that aborting the babies of people on welfare will save money. Note that when rich liberal Democrats talk about people on welfare, it's really unlikely that they're thinking about whites.

If Democrat politicians really aren't racists, it's odd that there are no Democrats saying abortion should be legal but that we should do something about the fact that a black woman is five times more likely to have an abortion than a white woman.

For those who don't view fertilized eggs as people, aborting a fertilized egg is not a "death". Pro-choice and Democrat tend to align as pro-life and Republican do. Thus the whole "saving money" spiel is likely a (possibly misguided) attempt to woo Republicans who tend to think fiscally, while pro-choice supporters tend to be big on the woman's volition. (Also the things Democrats would like to do about abortion include more sex ed and birth control, but these tend to be blocked by people who ostensibly dislike the abortions they would prevent. But that's a debate for elsewhere.)

Quote:

Then there's welfare. The entire supposed pivot of Democrats on racism is based on their support for welfare, which "rescued" blacks from poverty.

That hasn't worked too well, given that black poverty is still twice that of white poverty.

More importantly, welfare has contributed to the destruction of the black family and the resulting culture that makes it very hard for even very dedicated blacks to escape the ghetto. With 70% of blacks born to single mothers and with being in a single-parent family being the strongest correlation with drug use, criminality, teen pregnancy, and poverty, people who care about blacks, like the Republicans who pushed for welfare reform, would demand change.

So he claims the entire pivot of democrats on racism was based on welfare, not the dixiecrats leaving for the republican party, not the southern strategy, not any belief in equality or such things, it was all based on welfare. This, again, seems a bit disingenuous.

Welfare, minimum wage, basic income, can all be debated. He's making an argument that the results contribute to systemic racism. Again, I think it's a weak argument and disagree.

Quote:

If Democrats cared about blacks, they'd have noticed the problem by the 1970s and tried to fix it. Instead, they doubled down on the same failed approaches. But if their objective is to keep blacks dependent and scared, maybe those policies weren't failures after all.

Finally, one has only to look at how Democrats treat blacks who wander off the Democrats' thought plantation to see that love of blacks is not at the core of the Democratic Party. If any Republican had talked about Obama the way Democrats talk about Ben Carson, Justice Clarence Thomas, and any number of other black conservative intellectuals, he'd have been tarred and feathered by the MSM.

Stop letting Democrat politicians get away with claiming to care when their actions show that their only concern is about votes. They helicopter into the black community every election cycle, explain how it's all the Republicans' fault, and then helicopter back to their tony neighborhoods, where their kids go to great schools and it's safe to walk at night.

My black friends, anecdotally, have seemed a lot more scared in the past two weeks.

The Democrats objective is not scaring blacks. Loving blacks may not be at the core of their party either, although equality is becoming an ever-larger part of the platform. But it's true that they care most about votes, and put party before race -- as all political parties seem to.

...so yeah, to me, a very slanted accusatory rant that has one valid charge (systemic racism from policy results) nestled in with a lot of traditional partisan philosophical arguments (where disagreement is labeled racism) and some preposterous charges.
24 
 Thumb up
0.35
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Stuart
United States
Los Alamos
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'll try to use polite language. This is what we in the trade call 'redirection'. "It's not us who are the racists, it's them! When we spout hatred, when we appoint to high office people who embrace the most racist organizations which have arisen out of the cesspool of our society, it's not because we hate black people -- oh no! We love them! It's our opponents who really hate them! When we keep them from voting it's because we're trying to protect them! Oh yes! That's why we, with our honest, hate-spouting rhetoric, will be the ones to give them freedom! We're the ones who want them to be happy! We have policies which will make them happy!"

Now, let's get real: there is a serious problem with racism in America. Not as serious as it was 50 years ago, but still serious. Unlike 50 years ago, there are far more white people who aren't part of the problem -- I think (you'd really have to ask people of color about that; being white myself, I wouldn't be able to judge it as well as people who are closer to the receiving end). So I do think American society is less racist today than it was -- but, clearly, there is still a serious problem. This problem transcends political affiliation. There are elements of truth in the article: white people in both parties have been part of the problem, or have been too willing to let it continue. So it's an issue which transcends party lines. But that doesn't let anyone -- and certainly not any political party -- off the hook.

Some 30 years ago I had two friends, one a Reagonite and one a 'liberal', who used to argue incessantly about racism in America. The liberal would accuse the Reagonite of supporting policies which were repressive against black people. The Reagonite would constantly point out the liberal's hyprocrisy in his personal life. They were friends, so the arguments were always polite. I used to sit silently, listening to them. One day I decided to say something, and I said something like this: "In my view attitudes have to change to the point at which what we call 'interracial marriage' will no longer be an issue. When white and black freely intermarry, just like, today, white people from, say, English and Italian backgrounds freely intermarry, it will become a powerful force towards peace." There was dead silence. They never argued in front of me again. And that, to me, illustrates the problem and points to what must ultimately be a sign that we have truly progressed towards a solution.

Do we really believe that all humanity is one, tightly related species? Because it is. Amazingly, the genetic diversity of the entire human race is less, so I have read, than the genetic diversity between groups of chimpanzees living in separate parts of the African rainforest!
23 
 Thumb up
1.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oliver Dienz
United States
Shelburne
Vermont
flag msg tools
I am always wary of something that "sounds true". Because at least some of it is not true when looking at the numbers. Republican controlled cities are not better in keeping homicide rates down:

Quote:
So what relationship, if any, is there between the political affiliation of a city’s mayor and the local homicide rate? The Trace examined five years of murder statistics from the 60 largest U.S. cities with populations that exceed 250,000. The analysis found that cities under Republican control were slightly less likely to have experienced an increase in homicides than those run by Democrats — but that the percentage difference, factoring in the very small sample size, is not significant.

https://www.thetrace.org/2016/11/homicide-rates-spike-major-...

It is easy to blame democrats for the high number of homicides because most larger cities are controlled by democrats. The perception is simply a problem of different sample sizes.

Nevertheless, I will give you that the economic policies of the "Republican light" party have not been any better to the poor regardless of either race. There were just more poor African Americans to begin with.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Walt
United States
Orange County
California
flag msg tools
In memorium. Bob Hoover died 25 Oct 2016 at 94. In WWII he was shot down in a Spitfire and stole an FW-190 to escape. He spent decades at air shows flying Ole Yeller, shown
badge
Please contact me about board gaming in Orange County.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
This may turn into a serious discussion on how best to help the poorest blacks in America. The best way to start is to identify how much of the following is true, and how much is made up propaganda.

Quoting a one-sided rant is not the way to start a "serious discussion." It's just a screed by proxy.
22 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
fightcitymayor
United States
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
badge
Proprietor and Chairman Emeritus of The Naughty Palace
Avatar
mb
Tall_Walt wrote:
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
This may turn into a serious discussion on how best to help the poorest blacks in America. The best way to start is to identify how much of the following is true, and how much is made up propaganda.

Quoting a one-sided rant is not the way to start a "serious discussion." It's just a screed by proxy.
Exactly.
And this is the modern rightwing method of discourse: Toss around slanted email forwards & cliche' FB posts and then let "the liberals" waste their time trying to teach you that the crazy, crooked, biased garbage that your bubble constantly spews forth is actually indeed crooked garbage.
No thanks.
17 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Les Marshall
United States
Woodinville
Washington
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaitlyn. This is simple horseshit. It's like this. Anyone who breaks the speed limit on the interstate must first pass through 10, 20 and 30 MPH. Because EVERY speeder drives at these lower speeds you could argue that the lower speeds CAUSED them to become speeders. It simply confuses coincidence with causation.

Sure, many large cities are run by Democratic governments. That doesn't really answer why so many urban citizens are Democrats nor why so much black on black crime exists. It merely assumes their is cause and that such cause is intentional.

I grew up in Los Angeles in the 60's and 70's. We had gangs back then including many latino and black. Despite the occasional tif over colors or turf violent clashes were not typically lethal. Once the 80's came along and the War on Drugs ramped up there was a suddenly a scarce market for a highly desired substance which provided the LA gangs with lots of money and the motivation to obtain lots of lethal weaponry. Since then we've seen lot's of hyper violent behavior and record levels of incarceration.

While the drug problem spanned culture from black to white and poor to wealthy, prosecutions weren't necessarily balanced across that spectrum. It's easy to burn street users and dealers while those at the higher end could invoke political influence and afford better legal representation. Blacks and Latinos were also more likely to have difficulty with juries much of the time. Black men wound up in jails and prisons sundering families even more than during the civils right era of the late 60's.

Drugs are still raging pandemic in the US and our model of enforcement has been typically more about punishment than treatment for perhaps way too long. Liberal politics have tried to focus more on stemming the demand while conservative politics have tended to more punitive measures like three strikes laws and mandatory minimum sentencing.

This imbalance has probably contributed far more to the corrosive inner city experience than some nefarious left wing conspiracy.

Welfare is something consumed by whites as well as blacks and in rather significant numbers. What is the narrative to explain that which is consonant with this writers philosophy. Are democrats trying to keep the white man down too? What's the racial difference here?

As to planned parenthood it's worth noting that birth rates have been declining in many western societies and this tends to coincide with wealth. Wealthier families tend to have fewer kids. They invest a greater ratio of resources in those few while growing the family assets for future security. IT's much harder to support a large family especially a single parent or broken family. Having control over ones body isn't about trying to keep down the population but about allowing the population to try and control it's own future.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mac Mcleod
United States
houston
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
What are your thoughts on this Kaitlyn?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
maxo-texas wrote:
What are your thoughts on this Kaitlyn?
I have to study these replies more carefully. I have read them all, and the posters have asked me to take the following on faith:

Rulesjd wrote:
Kaitlyn. This is simple horseshit.


However, if I were to take the list of replies and send it to the person who sent me the email, or the person who sent her the email or the person who sent him the email, or the author, they would speak of the explanations given to me by the RSP respondents:

some conservatives wrote:
Kaitlyn. This is simple horseshit.


and would expect me to take that on faith.

The problem is that both sides' arguments make sense.

However, I do appreciate all the responses and the lack of sniping in this thread. I'll reread them today to see if I can take something from here that definitively makes the article's detractors correct.



4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
When I was outside this morning taking my smoke break, I talked with a charming woman who is married to a (white) South African. I noted that my wife had watched an episode of "House Hunters-International" over the weekend and the couple was searching for a house in South Africa.

"Were there bars on the windows?," she asked me.

"Yes there were. Is that for people or to keep the lions out?," I replied, trying to be humorous.

"Nope, it's because the blacks destroy everything," she said.

"Well," I said, "if you oppress people for a couple of centuries, they tend to get pissed."

She changed the subject.

******

That's the gist of the "common sense" encapsulated in that article. Why should blacks be upset, many people argue. We gave them civil rights in 1964, right? And they get preferential treatment in college admissions and jobs, right? And how about all that welfare we pay them from our taxpayer dollars so they can sit around, smoke dope, and pump out babies, right?

Racism wasn't solved by government action, merely moderated. Affirmative Action has helped hundreds of thousands of black people, but it came at a price. My black friends tell me they have to be better than all the white guys in their workplace or they get accused of getting a job because they're black. (Women tell me much the same thing). Electing a (half) black president didn't solve things, it made them worse, right?

No. Electing a half-black president brought the issue to the forefront, and we have all found out we have been desperately ignoring the real issue of racial animus against blacks. That was disconcerting to many white people, who assumed everything was just hunky-dory with their black co-workers and the only ones who caused trouble were the criminals in inner cities.

Certainly, individuals who are black are responsible for their actions. But when a black doctor I know gets pulled over twice in a half hour because he's driving to a party at HIS OWN HOUSE in a rich neighborhood in northern Oklahoma City and is told "you don't look like you live around here," what does that say?

Democrats have imperfectly tried to do something about racism. To be fair, Republicans have been imperfect in how they address the issue as well. Until the majority of Americans face up to the fact that a lot, and I mean A LOT of whites judge black people instantly by the color of their skin and try to change that attitude, it's not going to get better.

And Katie? That article isn't common sense. Nor does it make sense. It's deflecting the blame onto a particular group of people so another group can delude themselves into thinking they're smarter, better, and more noble.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kaitlyn Smith
United States
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
remorseless1 wrote:
And Katie? That article isn't common sense. Nor does it make sense. It's deflecting the blame onto a particular group of people so another group can delude themselves into thinking they're smarter, better, and more noble.
I hear that a lot. An awful lot. Republicans say that about Democrats. Democrats say that about Republicans. I am asking the question simply because I am wondering if I've been deluding myself. Frankly both sides can make their points sound good. The top Democrats are accused of being elitists that think they know what is good for everybody and that people can't take of themselves without a lot of help from the government. The Republicans are saying... well you can see what they're saying in the OP.

Republicans on the other hand, are accused of being against the working class, against minorities, against women, against old people, essentially against everything except making rich old white men get richer. They are also accused of being bigoted, racist, and misogynist, and pushing these agendas (maybe I just repeated myself there?)

In any event, it is a highly bitter, divisive situation and there are a lot of people that believe one side or the other, and to me, it seems likely that both sides' claims against the other side lack merit.

I posted the Republican side in the OP simply because I get to see the Democratic side in almost every other thread so there is no shortage of seeing the constant caterwauling of "Racist!" and the like in these forums.

The Democrats on this site (and another one) can't even agree. Many say that when Hillary was talking about a basket of deplorables, that I was not one of the people she was talking about, while others say that I very vividly represent who she was maligning. You might understand why I would have more sympathy for the Republican point of view when some of the Democrats are saying I'm deplorable and no Republicans do. However, I can also see why some Democrats cling to their side when Republicans are calling them uninformed dupes.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
Koldfoot wrote:
White people, however...
maxo-texas wrote:


There sure are not many minority skinhead neo-nazi's.
cool M-O-R-E-! than there WERE: 'blind' NUDISTS within 'Blind' NUDIST "Band Camp"! They aught try "Avocado Goggles" at least. googoo
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
J.D. Hall
United States
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
In any event, it is a highly bitter, divisive situation and there are a lot of people that believe one side or the other, and to me, it seems likely that both sides' claims against the other side lack merit.


Good for you. When I said it was deflecting, I wasn't saying there isn't a sizable streak of racism in the Democratic Party. I was trying to say the Republicans are try to deflect from their own racist streak. That what is so difficult about the conversation about race in America, mostly for whites but really for all of us: we all have to accept the blame, share the guilt, before we can solve the problem. Easy to say, damn difficult to carry out.

Quote:
I posted the Republican side in the OP simply because I get to see the Democratic side in almost every other thread so there is no shortage of seeing the constant caterwauling of "Racist!" and the like in these forums.


It's the Internet. Or as I like to call it, mental dysentery with a side of porn. Fuck the whiners on the right and the left who aren't in on the joke.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
You guys should really "get a hobby or three" as it 'assuaged' your otherwise 'mundane' SONG with humming along too: "wasted time"! whistle
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Wesley
Nepal
Aberdeen
Washington
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mb
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Hi, a friend dropped this in my email today. This may turn into a serious discussion on how best to help the poorest blacks in America.
Let's SEE, Jimmy Carter went on too "built homes", and "moi' RELATED due with doing such in Spring 1974 down in Charleston, S.C., so an actual President "emulating" 'moi' is BEST any would attain! whistle
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Greg Michealson
United States
Maple Grove
Minnesota
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Kaitlyn_Res wrote:
Hi, a friend dropped this in my email today.

I'll be upfront, I know that there is bias. I've already been through how the parties "switched places" about racism and I'm not going to argue that I know that it's not true because I don't know that.

However, there are many points in this article that show that today's Democrats still are not for blacks except when it comes time to grab their votes. Everything in this article makes sense. Of course, if you are firmly convinced that the parties did indeed "switch places" then you're going to say that the historical stuff is garbage. However, how do you debunk the current stuff?

This may turn into a serious discussion on how best to help the poorest blacks in America. The best way to start is to identify how much of the following is true, and how much is made up propaganda.

Tom Trinko wrote:
The MSM Is Right: There Is a Racist Party in America

By Tom Trinko

The mainstream media (MSM) are right. There is a political party today that has racism as a core value and is working incessantly to keep blacks down. It's the Democratic Party. Of course, since Democrat politicians never say what they really believe, most Democrat voters aren't aware they're supporting racism.


Time to drag this out again.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Also, here's a quote you might like.

“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2 , 3 , 4  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.