Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
T___A

US Politics Thread: Year 2 of 1000 of the TrumpenReich

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Donward said:

 

I mean, MSNBC, CNN, most of the Democratic Presidential candidates, multiple DNC Senators, Congressmen, Governors, AGs, billionaires, and Hollywood celebrities and corporate CEOs have called Trump a racist, white nationalist, bigot, a Nazi who wants concentration camps.

These aren’t random shitters on the Chans posting anonymously and working as a warehouse associate.

These are the very Establishment power brokers who run the country, engaged in TDS to an irrational level.

 

Yeah, but somehow Trump is the only asshole in the room. The media just hates Trump because unlike the regular Republican politician, he doesn't roll over and beg Nancy and Chuck to forgive him, while whining about not being racist, and selling out his base for some Democrat power-grab. 

 

Trump is an asshole, sure, but he's our asshole, and he's kept most of his promises, his agenda is standard 80s republican, not some radical right wing shift, like the media likes to claim, and he has done a fine job so far.    If you politician being asshole meant his followers were assholes, we would all have killed each other by now. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sturgeon said:

Every conspiracy theory (false or not) starts with a kernel of truth.

In the words of Stephen Crowder, in this case the kernel of truth is PEDOPHILE ISLAND.

Of course people think it's fishy.

Lol

 

Quote

And to prove it.

Well, how do you think how you can "prove" racism? Unless Donald just says "yes I am a racist" there's going to be people who believe that he's not racist. 

 

Quote

Those and other things always get paraded around, but none of them hold up to real scrutiny. Obama birtherism is the most hilarious example, because that's only racist in the eyes of Leftists. You can be white and not born in this country, and basically every African-American alive was born in the US. Birtherism is foolish and I'm glad Trump dropped it. But racist? Not intrinsically. I know of racists who were birthers but the proof they were racists was the racist shit they were doing and saying, not the fact that they wanted to see the President's birth certificate.

Yeah, that's almost my point. You're so close to understanding it. Birtherism is not intrinsically racist. Calling for the death penalty for falsely accused black and hispanic people isn't intrinsically racist. Neither is tighter immigration measures even with stereotyping said immigrants. Calling them "invaders" isn't either. Nor is using the bully pulpit to call out individual black people out as a son of a bitch. I wouldn't say that trying to protect confederate monuments isn't intrinsically racist. Etc. It is a pattern of behavior. This pattern may explain why many people think that Trump is somewhat racist or why many racists just happen to say or believe very similar things

 

Quote

Ahahahahahah I can think of a bunch.
 

You have to understand that I delineate between "serious" and people on the TV screen. Though, I don't recall many people saying that Trump is literally Hitler unless you are just building strawmen. 

 

Quote

So, explain for me how saying this is not just a way to slide "anyone who disagrees with me is juvenile and unnuanced" under the door? I ask honestly. Because to me, it's obvious that the people here don't ignore these things because they're deaf to calls of racism, they're ignoring them because they've determined they are not signs of racism. Wouldn't it be more genuine to tackle that angle?

Well, if you're ignoring lines of evidence because each individual thing isn't intrinsically racist, that's pretty stupid if you ask me. 

 

Quote

Well yes but right this second it seems like you'd call Trump a racist and I wouldn't, so clearly our criteria are massively different.

What is your criteria? 

 

 

1 hour ago, Donward said:

Again. Trump was given awards by Jesse Jackson

Cool? 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Racism: The belief a race is genetically inferior to your own. 

 

Lefty Racism: Any person who disagrees with them on policy, or tries to point out their policies do not work and anyone who calls out criminal activity by a democrat. 

 

:timwhat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

Racism: The belief a race is genetically inferior to your own. 

 

Cool strawman!

 

Though, I want some comments on these critiques of this definition of racism. 

 

  • What if someone believes that a race is inferior, but not genetically (was racism impossible before Mendel?). Rather, for example, "they are just culturally backwards."
  • What if you see your own race as inferior to others in some hierarchy of races
  • Does "race" include ethnicities? Are Arabs and Hispanics a race or are they just Indo-Europeans and thus it is not possible to actually be racist against them? 
  • What if you think a large subset of a race is largely inferior to you in someway, but not the entire race. "There's some good ones."
  • What if someone has policy goals that effectively punish (inadvertently or not) large portions of certain races out of proportion towards others? 

Did the Hutus massacred the Tutsis because they felt they were genetically superior? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Cool strawman!

 

Though, I want some comments on these critiques of this definition of racism. 

 

  • What if someone believes that a race is inferior, but not genetically (was racism impossible before Mendel?). Rather, for example, "they are just culturally backwards."
  • What if you see your own race as inferior to others in some hierarchy of races
  • Does "race" include ethnicities? Are Arabs and Hispanics a race or are they just Indo-Europeans and thus it is not possible to actually be racist against them? 
  • What if you think a large subset of a race is largely inferior to you in someway, but not the entire race. "There's some good ones."
  • What if someone has policy goals that effectively punish (inadvertently or not) large portions of certain races out of proportion towards others? 

Did the Hutus massacred the Tutsis because they felt they were genetically superior? 

 

 

 

 

How is that a straw-man?

 

Or do you really need it broken even more simply, where you surely come up with a bunch more weird questions that seem to assume the only reason a group of people might be oppressed would be their race.   Anyway, how about Racism: Feeling another race is inferior for various, easily debunked reasons?  

 

You would have thought the Tim Pool Crazy face would have clued you in on the post mostly being a joke, but yeah, suck all the fun out the room.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

How is that a straw-man?

 

Or do you really need it broken even more simply, where you surely come up with a bunch more weird questions that seem to assume the only reason a group of people might be oppressed would be their race.   Anyway, how about Racism: Feeling another race is inferior for various, easily debunked reasons?  

 

You would have thought the Tim Pool Crazy face would have clued you in on the post mostly being a joke, but yeah, suck all the fun out the room.  

 

 

It is a strawman to suppose that anyone on the left is just using "racism" as a scapegoat for their policy failures. 

 

Defining racism as a feeling and as a clear-cut inferiority thing basically states that "separate, but equal" policies were not racist. Either that is true, or your criteria for racism is flawed in someway. 

 

I just don't know who Tim Pool is, so I don't understand the inside joke. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

It is a strawman to suppose that anyone on the left is just using "racism" as a scapegoat for their policy failures. 

 

Defining racism as a feeling and as a clear-cut inferiority thing basically states that "separate, but equal" policies were not racist. Either that is true, or your criteria for racism is flawed in someway. 

 

I just don't know who Tim Pool is, so I don't understand the inside joke. 

 

 

Dude, that's not what you quoted, and was the most jokey part of the post. 

 

You deciding a pretty close to the definition of racism from the dictionary somehow stated "Separate but equal" was not racists, is pretty fucking lame dude. How about you don't pull a bunch of bullshit assumptions out of your ass and decided that's what someone meant... And from a joke, 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
Quote

 

Well, how do you think how you can "prove" racism? Unless Donald just says "yes I am a racist" there's going to be people who believe that he's not racist. 

 

 

Shouldn't you be the one exploring that, not me? After all, you're the one accusing people of being racist.

Now, I'd say here's something that hypothetically would make me go "holy shit Donald Trump is really racist", just as an example: If Bruno-style someone was able to catch him on video throwing a little hissy fit because someone was black. Here's an example IRL:

 

 

Yeah... Not ol' Ron's finest moment. Poor guy. But definitely a bit of a homophobe. In fact, I'm not usually a fan of the ending -phobe in that word because usually it's applied to people who obviously don't fear gay people. But in this case? He ran screaming like a child from the room, it pretty much works. I've been in the same situation (not set up as part of a comedy film, I mean being hit on by a gay man), and I didn't react that way. But I guess homos are normalized for me.

If there was a video like this of Trump having some kind of similar irrational fit over a person of a different race? Yeah, I'd have to say he was racist.

But no such video exists. Nor any other proof.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sturgeon said:

 

Dude are you for fucking real?

Quote

Lefty Racism: Any person who disagrees with them on policy, or tries to point out their policies do not work and anyone who calls out criminal activity by a democrat. 

Is that not a strawman argument? 

 

1 minute ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

 

Dude, that's not what you quoted, and was the most jokey part of the post. 

Sorry, I thought you were able to understand which part I was dismissing out of hand as a strawman and what part I wanted to engage with. 

 

3 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

You deciding a pretty close to the definition of racism from the dictionary somehow stated "Separate but equal" was not racists, is pretty fucking lame dude. How about you don't pull a bunch of bullshit assumption out of your ass and decided that's what someone meant... And from a joke, 

Yeah, it is almost like dictionary definitions of terms in social sciences are often pretty useless! 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
10 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

Sorry, I thought you were able to understand which part I was dismissing out of hand as a strawman and what part I wanted to engage with. 

 

Translated from Smug Lefty: I communicated poorly on purpose, and will claim the side benefit of feeling smarter than you instead of acknowledging the shitty arguments I've made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Yeah, that's almost my point. You're so close to understanding it. Birtherism is not intrinsically racist. Calling for the death penalty for falsely accused black and hispanic people isn't intrinsically racist. Neither is tighter immigration measures even with stereotyping said immigrants. Calling them "invaders" isn't either. Nor is using the bully pulpit to call out individual black people out as a son of a bitch. I wouldn't say that trying to protect confederate monuments isn't intrinsically racist. Etc. It is a pattern of behavior. This pattern may explain why many people think that Trump is somewhat racist or why many racists just happen to say or believe very similar things

 

"None of these things are racist, so he's a racist."


Perfect logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
Quote

 

You have to understand that I delineate between "serious" and people on the TV screen. Though, I don't recall many people saying that Trump is literally Hitler unless you are just building strawmen. 

 

"The high profile bad actors on my side don't count specifically because of their profile. I am only counting people who are convenient to my argument at the time that I am making it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Well, if you're ignoring lines of evidence because each individual thing isn't intrinsically racist, that's pretty stupid if you ask me. 

 

Things that aren't racist are evidence of racism?

Wrong, they're evidence that the DNC has used cries of racism as a shield for their malfeasance for so long that your side can't tell the fucking difference anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sturgeon said:

 

"None of these things are racist, so he's a racist."


Perfect logic.

More like: "All of these things can be racist. Taken in mass, it is a pretty safe bet to say: yep, probably racist" 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Priory_of_Sion said:

More like: "All of these things can be racist. Taken in mass, it is a pretty safe bet to say: yep, probably racist" 

 

Nope. That's called being an average conservative voter and sick of both the DNC's shit and the RNC's weakness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

Is that not a strawman argument? 

 

Sorry, I thought you were able to understand which part I was dismissing out of hand as a strawman and what part I wanted to engage with. 

 

Yeah, it is almost like dictionary definitions of terms in social sciences are often pretty useless! 

 

 

 

 

You fuck up your quotes and assume other people are going to understand your shit, check, that's pretty fucking entitled and dumb, but I suppose you apologized. 

 

No, they are fine if you don't buy into a bunch of bullshit about racism being about power.  

 

Kids these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
33 minutes ago, Jeeps_Guns_Tanks said:

 

It is a strawman to suppose that anyone on the left is just using "racism" as a scapegoat for their policy failures. 

 

What? No that's literally reality. I'm FROM DC YOU KNOB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

 

Though, I want some comments on these critiques of this definition of racism. 

 

  • What if someone believes that a race is inferior, but not genetically (was racism impossible before Mendel?). Rather, for example, "they are just culturally backwards."

 

Depends on the culture. Do you consider cannibals culturally backward? Why or why not? For that matter, do you consider evangelical conservatives culturally backward? My guess is yes. Because both those cultures are as tightly tied to genetics as, say, Islam or gangsta rap (that is not at all).

 

46 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
  • What if you see your own race as inferior to others in some hierarchy of races

 

I believe the term for that is "internalized racism".

 

47 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
  • Does "race" include ethnicities? Are Arabs and Hispanics a race or are they just Indo-Europeans and thus it is not possible to actually be racist against them? 

 

I would say "unchangeable inherited qualities". So we're talking genetics here (inherited diseases too but not under the "racism" umbrella). Remember, "race" is really an outdated word. And human populations are a lot more complex genetically than we previously thought.


I would also say Hispanics are a race made up by the DNC as a voting block, because it doesn't really exist outside the US.

 

47 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
  • What if you think a large subset of a race is largely inferior to you in someway, but not the entire race. "There's some good ones."

 

Context matters. I know what kind of statement you're referencing and it would be a red flag for me, but I can also think of other statements that roughly conform that I would say are not racist (though which have bad optics).

 

47 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:
  • What if someone has policy goals that effectively punish (inadvertently or not) large portions of certain races out of proportion towards others? 

 

You mean like affirmative action?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

 

Defining racism as a feeling and as a clear-cut inferiority thing basically states that "separate, but equal" policies were not racist. Either that is true, or your criteria for racism is flawed in someway. 

 

On a fundamental theoretical level? They're not. They're segregationist. That was the point of the "separate, but equal" ruling.
 

In practice, it was concluded that in the United States there would be no way to ensure things were done evenly in such a way that segregated communities would not feel like second-class citizens, so they were basically proven de-facto racist. Didn't help the "not racist" case that the guidelines were virtually always pro-white and anti-black (e.g., "no coloreds allowed", black units led by white commanders, "whites only"; never "blacks only" or white units led by black commanders). So in execution they were explicitly racist, yes. Because they were, you see, racist.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Sturgeon said:

 

On a fundamental theoretical level? They're not They're segregationist. That was the point of the "separate, but equal" ruling.
 

In practice, it was concluded that in the United States there would be no way to ensure things were done evenly in such a way that segregated communities would not feel like second-class citizens, so they were basically proven de-facto racist. Didn't help the "not racist" case that the guidelines were virtually always pro-white and anti-black (e.g., "no coloreds allowed", black units led by white commanders, "whites only"; never "blacks only" or white units led by black commanders). So in execution they were explicitly racist, yes. Because they were, you see, racist.

 

 

 

 I guess he hasn't heard about how lefties on college campuses are segregating again, this time of free choice lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Priory_of_Sion said:

More like: "All of these things can be racist. Taken in mass, it is a pretty safe bet to say: yep, probably racist" 

 

Don't think about whether they were acts of racism, just feel the emotion.

 

You know what else this sounds like? Mueller indicted dozens of people over the course of his Russian collusion investigation, it is a pretty safe bet to say: yep, Trump colluded with Russia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By Belesarius
      https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28613/everything-we-know-about-irans-claim-that-it-shot-down-a-u-s-rq-4-global-hawk-drone
       
      Might as well start a thred for this shit.  Looks like there is gonna be enough stuff to keep a solo thred going.
       
    • By Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect
      After seeing the rampant crack down on speech in the UK, I decided that more should be done than just Thoughts and Prayers. 
       
      I know that it's a scary time for our UK members. Knowing that what you say on the internet can put you on the wrong side of a Bobby's nightstick, well, I find that despicable. 
       
      So I've created this place for all your impure or degenerate thoughts. Here's how it works. 
       
      Perhaps you want to say something "offensive". Instead of saying it yourself, you can message any US member of this forum and have them act as your avatar of avarice. 
       
      For example, say you had a particularly heinous fish and chips at the local pub. You may want to say, "Oi, that cheeky fucker Barnaby William can't do a proper chip if he had a fryer for hands!"
       
      This on it's own could send you straight to jail for defamation. Moreso, if instead of chips that sent you reeling it happened to be a kebab from Omar down the street. 
       
      Now your crime has gone from offensive to racially insensitive!
       
      Anytime such an urge comes along, call on your ex colonial friends. We will translate and post your complaint for all the world to revel in, free of charge!
       
      I personally think Omar should learn to pull the fucking kebab off heat before it's crisper than his wife's crotch and blacker than his beard. That tosser!
       
      See? Don't you feel better? And now, no one will be knocking on your door, serving you with a summons for being a racist git. 
       
    • By T___A
      Might as well make a new thread now that the election is over.
×
×
  • Create New...