Clinton Brings Attention to the alt.right

[gsdx]

Why do liberals always want to see the country in an exaggerated worst light?

And how can you whitewash an issue which still exists in the United Stated today?

You know very well that i have not done that.

I've highlighted the whitewash. You make slavery (and the Chinese building the railroads were little more than slaves, being paid a pittance for their labour) sound like an insignificant time in your history, and your treatment of blacks today isn't much better.

Remember. We were on the receiving end of the thousands of slaves who managed ride an underground railroad to make it all the way to REAL freedom and safety. They had neither in the United States. It was a horrible time in your history and you accuse us of exaggerating.

Of course, that is the history you wish to deny. Undoubtedly you deny the holocaust as well, and believe that your life will not change under Trump's rule. Unless, of course, you're not really gay. That would explain a lot.

 

[Benvolio]

I've highlighted the whitewash. You make slavery (and the Chinese building the railroads were little more than slaves, being paid a pittance for their labour) sound like an insignificant time in your history, and your treatment of blacks today isn't much better.

Remember. We were on the receiving end of the thousands of slaves who managed ride an underground railroad to make it all the way to REAL freedom and safety. They had neither in the United States. It was a horrible time in your history and you accuse us of exaggerating.

Of course, that is the history you wish to deny. Undoubtedly you deny the holocaust as well, and believe that your life will not change under Trump's rule. Unless, of course, you're not really gay. That would explain a lot.

Your vast exaggeration was in saying that the country was built by brown people with whtes merely giving orders. Slavery was horrible but it does not follow that slaves built America. They did not, nor did the Chinese. Slavery was bad therefore slaves built America is a vast non sequitor. It was not true. Through less fault of their own,their economic contribution to the US has been ,and is,small in proportion to their numbers. That is the effect of the discrimination which largely froze them out of the ecconomy in favor of the i--------s.

 

[gsdx]

Your vast exaggeration was in saying that the country was built by brown people with whtes merely giving orders. Slavery was horrible but it does not follow that slaves built America. They did not, nor did the Chinese. Slavery was bad therefore slaves built America is a vast non sequitor. It was not true.

I'm not going to help you hijack this thread any more than you already have... as you very often do. I will leave it at this: There is your version of history and then there is the truth.

Edit: By the way, I said that America was built on the BACKS of brown people and the Chinese. And slavery DID exist in the north. The south just didn't like it when it was abolished, so they went to war over it.

 

[Benvolio]

I'm not going to help you hijack this thread any more than you already have... as you very often do. I will leave it at this: There is your version of history and then there is the truth.

Edit: By the way, I said that America was built on the BACKS of brown people and the Chinese. And slavery DID exist in the north. The south just didn't like it when it was abolished, so they went to war over it.

No. They--the southern democrats--went to war when Republicans came to power promising to prevent the spread of slavery per the KansasNebraska Act. It was not abolished until after several years of war.

And you derailed the thread not I.

 

[Benvolio]

Notice that when the sole Republican does not participate, the threads soon fizzle; but when I express the contrary opinion I am accused of derailing.

 

[TX-Beau]

No. They--the southern democrats--went to war when Republicans came to power promising to prevent the spread of slavery per the KansasNebraska Act. It was not abolished until after several years of war.

And you derailed the thread not I.

Poor Ben, history is not your friend.

BUT LINCOLN WAS A REPUBLICAN - yeah 150 years ago, these days y'all are just bigots. Congrats.

- - - Updated - - -

Notice that when the sole Republican does not participate, the threads soon fizzle; but when I express the contrary opinion I am accused of derailing.

Sad sad Ben, you aren't the only 'Pub in here, the others just want nothing to do with you.

 

[Kabluey]

You know very well that i have not done that. Time and again i have pointed out the blacks have been held at the economic bottom by our policy--continuing today--of bringing in millions of immigrants willing to work cheap, combined with discrimination in favor of immigrants and against blacks. During most of our history the immigration was white. Now it is not, and discrimination is less a problem but blacks are less willing to work at the level of the immigrants..

And here's me thinking it's a lack of a livable minimum wage, low levels of social security, underfunded schools, disproportionate punishment and conviction rates for identical crimes based on race, worker discrimination, payday loans, education debt and property values that encourage wealth, privilege and poverty to persist across multiple generations.

If your grandparents were poor in the sixties, there's a high likelihood you're poor now. The Republican party of today is all about preserving people's positions in society.
Lowered income taxes for high earners, low estate taxes for inheritances, low capital gains taxes for the sale of shares, companies and property, protections for monopolies, defunded enforcement agencies for white collar crimes. All protecting the wealthy.

 

[offthewall14420]

Well I consider Irish and Italian immigrants black. Nobody wanted them back then, nobody wants them now.

 

[TX-Beau]

Spent my Junior year in Italy, I'll take all those Italians.

Also have a thing for the Irish...

 

[Benvolio]

And here's me thinking it's a lack of a livable minimum wage, low levels of social security, underfunded schools, disproportionate punishment and conviction rates for identical crimes based on race, worker discrimination, payday loans, education debt and property values that encourage wealth, privilege and poverty to persist across multiple generations.

If your grandparents were poor in the sixties, there's a high likelihood you're poor now. The Republican party of today is all about preserving people's positions in society.
Lowered income taxes for high earners, low estate taxes for inheritances, low capital gains taxes for the sale of shares, companies and property, protections for monopolies, defunded enforcement agencies for white collar crimes. All protecting the wealthy.

Yours is known as the zero sum theory of economics. I.e. you believe that there is only so much wealth so if some are poor, the rich must have taken if from them and if some are rich, they must have taken if from the poor. It is just not true and is less true in the US than in any country in the history of the world. That is because we have by far the largest market in the history of the world. So, if you find a way to charge a tiny amount to lot of people, can become very wealthy. Oprah did not become a billionaire by stealing from the poor.
More freebies and give aways just invite more invaders and hasten the destruction of our freedoms. Europe is paying the price for its give away economics as the third world invades.

 

[rareboy]

Speaking of alt.right.

 

[Kabluey]

Yours is known as the zero sum theory of economics. I.e. you believe that there is only so much wealth so if some are poor, the rich must have taken if from them and if some are rich, they must have taken if from the poor. It is just not true and is less true in the US than in any country in the history of the world. That is because we have by far the largest market in the history of the world. So, if you find a way to charge a tiny amount to lot of people, can become very wealthy. Oprah did not become a billionaire by stealing from the poor.
More freebies and give aways just invite more invaders and hasten the destruction of our freedoms. Europe is paying the price for its give away economics as the third world invades.

If it's not a zero sum game, why are you so worried about immigrants?

 

[Stardreamer]

Trying to move back to the topic of the thread,

I been studying what the alt.right is for the last few days and what I'm finding so far scares the hell out of me. It is entirely an internet phenomenon. It encompasses white supremacists groups, anti-immigrant groups, and a few even scarier groups like the neo-reactionaries. If I understand the last group's position correctly they believe democracy is a failure and we should go to a totalitarian type rule.

One of the connecting themes is that political correctness is stifling and destroying our society. They enjoy trolling and being politically incorrect on the net to stir things up.

That scary to me since I actually agree with that idea though probably not as much as they do. They see it as threat to their cultural identity where as I see it as an attack on freedom. As an advocate for free speech, I've always felt that one of the measures of freedom in a society is the degree to which politically incorrect speech is or is not suppressed.

But this sounds like another example of the right taking a good idea and turning it into a fetish to be worshiped even when it is harmful, similar to what they have done with tax cuts. This of course puts the Trump campaign's themes about political correctness in a new light.

 

[Benvolio]

If it's not a zero sum game, why are you so worried about immigrants?

The point is that handing the invaders all the goodies you favor does not solve poverty. It just invites an ever larger invasion. You are trying to bail out the boat without closing the hole in the bottom.

 

[rareboy]

The point is that handing the invaders all the goodies you favor does not solve poverty. It just invites an ever larger invasion. You are trying to bail out the boat without closing the hole in the bottom.

Off Topic. Again.

I seems to be intellectually impossible for you to address the actual topic of any thread in this forum.

 

[Stardreamer]

Now today I'm looking at stuff related to alt.right on various YouTube channels and that raised this interesting idea. Is the alt.right and a similar movement on the left that is being labeled regressive liberalism mirror images of each other? Discus.

 

[LittleDove]

Your vast exaggeration was in saying that the country was built by brown people with whtes merely giving orders. Slavery was horrible but it does not follow that slaves built America. Slavery was bad therefore slaves built America is a vast non sequitor. It was not true. Through less fault of their own,their economic contribution to the US has been ,and is,small in proportion to their numbers.

And yet another steaming load of horse-shit, shovelled up by Ben.

In 1860, by dollar value, raw cotton accounted for 60% of all exports from the US. Put another way, of every 5 dollars the US as a whole earned from selling abroad, 3 dollars came from cotton. That cotton came from the labour of slaves. Where do you think the money earned from their labour went? That money built America.

In that same year, industrial production of cotton products in the US (alone) consumed 400+ million pounds of cotton. Almost all of the industrial production of finished cotton products took place in the North, the majority -- 67% -- in the New England states. Where do you think they got their raw cotton to turn into finished products? Clue: there's not a whole lot of cotton grown between Maine and Massachusetts.

To whom do you think those industrialists in the North were selling their finished products, except to their fellow citizens, and their fellow citizens who owned non-citizens? Another clue for you: they largely weren't exporting them. The majority of the export dollars earned by the US came from agricultural products, followed by other products of the land (such as timber), and raw materials. That did not change until finished goods and industrial products overtook them, and that did not happen until 1937.

 

[Vitamin]

Now today I'm looking at stuff related to alt.right on various YouTube channels and that raised this interesting idea. Is the alt.right and a similar movement on the left that is being labeled regressive liberalism mirror images of each other? Discus.

I'm curious to know in what way so-called "regressive liberalism", as I've always heard the term used, is similar to the alt-right.

Regressive liberalism is the term conservatives use against liberals whenever they squawk about Muslims "invading" the US or when advocating laws banning Sharia courts. Basically, the argument goes that while liberals advocate for the rights of women and gays, they refuse to fight for them when threatened by Muslims. It's an argument that has virtually zero basis in reality. Oh, and those "Sharia courts" are no real different then Roman Catholic Canon Law courts that annul marriages which decides nothing more then whether you can be married in a Catholic Church again. Conservatives swear though, that somehow these Sharia courts are "mandatory" for Muslim women while presenting no proof for that of course.

So in what way did the video make the comparison?

 

[rareboy]

And yet another steaming load of horse-shit, shovelled up by Ben.

In 1860, by dollar value, raw cotton accounted for 60% of all exports from the US. Put another way, of every 5 dollars the US as a whole earned from selling abroad, 3 dollars came from cotton. That cotton came from the labour of slaves. Where do you think the money earned from their labour went? That money built America.

In that same year, industrial production of cotton products in the US (alone) consumed 400+ million pounds of cotton. Almost all of the industrial production of finished cotton products took place in the North, the majority -- 67% -- in the New England states. Where do you think they got their raw cotton to turn into finished products? Clue: there's not a whole lot of cotton grown between Maine and Massachusetts.

To whom do you think those industrialists in the North were selling their finished products, except to their fellow citizens, and their fellow citizens who owned non-citizens? Another clue for you: they largely weren't exporting them. The majority of the export dollars earned by the US came from agricultural products, followed by other products of the land (such as timber), and raw materials. That did not change until finished goods and industrial products overtook them, and that did not happen until 1937.

Thank you.

 

[Kabluey]

Thank you.

Just as they do now, the ones carrying the whips liked to claim credit for the labour of their workforce.