Jump to content
Ansem

General US Politics

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

- They weren't Anglo

Certainly on skin colour you wouldn't argue race as a reason, but it's not like that stopped that from occurring and to more than just the Irish, I certainly think it happened for early Italians, I think it might have happened to other groups that would be considered Caucasian, but I would have to check to ensure I'm not saying mere conjecture.

None of that excuses those of Irish descent who have been shit stirring (Needless to say, there's a reason people haven't taken to welcoming people like Hannity as the Blewitts from Ballina are for Biden right now or the outright weird way they acted about Obama at points)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, eclipse said:

But as long as America ignores that part of their history, I don't think we'll be able to address the current elephant in the room.

I'm not sure if acknowledgement will actually change anything. It's something that bears mention, but the rabbit hole is so deep that I am unsure if there would be anything that could be done to undo it. It went on for centuries, those who thought to try and stop it also played right into the conspiracy, and now there are so few indigenous people that anything that we try is a worthless platitude. Everything we can think of is worth doing, but even all of it wouldn't make up for what was done long before now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Hylian Air Force said:

I'm not sure if acknowledgement will actually change anything. It's something that bears mention, but the rabbit hole is so deep that I am unsure if there would be anything that could be done to undo it. It went on for centuries, those who thought to try and stop it also played right into the conspiracy, and now there are so few indigenous people that anything that we try is a worthless platitude. Everything we can think of is worth doing, but even all of it wouldn't make up for what was done long before now.

The goal isn't to undo what is done - I don't think that's possible.  What we can do is own up to our shitty past.  Admit that those actions were horrifically wrong, and WHY it's wrong to discriminate like that.  Resolve to do better on all levels.  Put that resolution into action.  Only then can we draw the parallels to what's happening now, and truly address it.

Edited by eclipse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listened in on a phone conversation between relatives that turned into politics partway through. At least they were able to laugh at their existing in different dimensions. My blood pressure rose, but I found my own humor in the sheer absurdity of a conversation so devoid of the potential of persuasion that I wouldn't bother having it myself. Humans are related to bananas, doesn't mean we should begin talking to them.🍌😛

 

1 hour ago, indigoasis said:

It's definitely good to stay as far away from politics as you can, but it's also good to stay informed.

Just want to add the caveat that sometimes, you can't stay away from politics. The fruit of politics is not relegated solely to the political realm, and it's because of that that people have died on both literal and metaphoric hills. Politics affects socio-economic standing, which in itself is most of what exists in human society. Is the choice you're speaking of then to stay away from politics, or to accept politics as they are?🤔

 

49 minutes ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Well, in the case of the Irish, it wasn't so much about race. It was two other factors which were in play:

- They weren't Anglo

- They were Catholic

It's no wonder you had stuff like "Irish need no apply", or the Saint Patrick Battalion defectors. Race wasn't enough to avoid persecution.

Although, I did read an interesting book in college on whether the Irish constituted "white" or "nonwhite" -as in all right and to bestowed privileged over nonwhites- depended on where the Irish were. WASP is the pinnacle of whiteness, and New York had no shortage of those at the time, with an African-American population that didn't create enough panic among the WASPs to warrant the inclusion of Irish into whiteness.

The then-territory of Arizona on the other hand was different. In the town focused on in the book, a large population of Mexicans-turned-Americans by the sins of bullying and conquest, resided. One day, the Latino families asked an NYC orphanage ran by Catholic nuns to bring Irish babies westward for adoption, some of the Latino couples were unable to have children of their own. The train came to the town and the Latinos picked up their adorable infants and toddlers as they were promised, ready to bring them home soon.

Unfortunately for happy parents, the white women of the town saw the little white babies and how cute they were, but were shocked by the dirty, dark and ugly people who were claiming them. And so, the pasty menfolk kidnapped every last child overnight. Attempts through the courts by the Hispanic community to get their children back ended in failure, white privilege won.

Why did these WASPs want Irish babies? Because the great many Hispanics who resided in the same town posed a great threat in their racist heads, which were relatively few in number. There might've been a few Chinese and or African-Americans in town too, I forget. The WASPs would take anything that looked passable for white to add to their numbers in these circumstances. A few during the court trials claimed they would convert to Catholicism if thats what it took to keep those stolen babies.

-I felt like sharing this, though I concede I've mentioned it in the past here and apologize if anyone remembers it and didn't want me to regurgitate it again. And it makes me ponder for a moment if the South, with its great African-American population, was to any extent less discriminatory to the Irish than New York City as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Clear World said:

I would be of remiss if I didn't want to tackle this question in full.

We have to understand, a lot of these conversate are acting rational but with a completely different set of information and core beliefs. So first, we need the groundworks on why they became the way they are (ignoring those that are outright racist, bigots, nazi-lovers, and white supremacist *cough* i mean white nationalist as they only make the core of the movement but not the masses who choose to support them.) Also to note: They aren't a monolith, so everything here are common patterns I see and hear, but not all share all these traits or to the same degree. Also some may sound like they contradict each other, but might not actually be due to priorities.

  • Capitalisms and the free market are the golden gooses. This is how America became the dominate power it is today and no matter the cost or the reason, it must always stay this way. It is America. Any form of diverting from this path is usually viewed as dangerous as its heading towards a very slippery slope.
  • Race and other minority group issues aren't that important topics (except when they believe it's anti-white). This is not outright hate. It's more like, it doesn't make it to their list of concerns and many times leading to ignorance of it. 
  • Big tech, mass media, billionaires, leftist, and the establishment are the problem. They will use their massive influence to lie and silence anyone who can threaten their narrative and their pockets. Also, big tech and mass media either works with or controls democrats. Not really much with Republicans. They seem aware that the rich does abuse almost everyone below them, including them. I'm not positive if they on average lean for or against going after the the rich though. Also, the establishment sort of encompass most, if not all of this.(It's unclear and varies based on the degree of the conspiracy theory)

It's just funny to me how they both claim to love capitalism and criticise big tech, corporations, etc. Them deciding to ban Trump and post what they like - that's capitalism. Unless they have a plan to regulate capitalism, but that's a horrible leftist thing that flies in the face of "the free market".

It's more that the nationalists in my country tend to think Trump is a joke as well (well, they are mostly opposed to American nationalism because it doesn't do them any favours)

If it's true that they actually dislike Republicans, then they believe that the Republicans have sold out Trump at the critical hour. Will be interesting to see what happens to the party after that.

And I dunno, I would say that most of them still care about social issues. Those folks are still talking about abortion and trans people, and they seem to talk about race a lot despite what they say.

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Conservative Americans care a lot about social issues like gay rights, abortion rights and trans rights, and by and large racial rights. In that they want to ban and supress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Interdimensional Observer said:

And it makes me ponder for a moment if the South, with its great African-American population, was to any extent less discriminatory to the Irish than New York City as well.

It's interesting to note there was a fair bit of tension between the black populace in NY and the Irish when larger influxes of Irish came in partly because of their undercutting labour prices, which doesn't surprise me because this was the 1850s, right after the Famine and the people that were coming would take what work they could get. Hell, one of the groups that would fold into the Republican Party later on that decade was a group that was against Catholic migrants (which I know, not entirely Irish, but the migration of Irish to America shot up for the reasons I've mentioned)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh the Republican party is a white identitarian party right now

anything that threatens whiteness or heteronormativity is bad

EDIT: 

Pleeeeeease don't fall for this bs omg

Edited by Crysta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tryhard said:

It's just funny to me how they both claim to love capitalism and criticise big tech, corporations, etc. Them deciding to ban Trump and post what they like - that's capitalism. Unless they have a plan to regulate capitalism, but that's a horrible leftist thing that flies in the face of "the free market".

It's more that the nationalists in my country tend to think Trump is a joke as well (well, they are mostly opposed to American nationalism because it doesn't do them any favours)

If it's true that they actually dislike Republicans, then they believe that the Republicans have sold out Trump at the critical hour. Will be interesting to see what happens to the party after that.

And I dunno, I would say that most of them still care about social issues. Those folks are still talking about abortion and trans people, and they seem to talk about race a lot despite what they say.

It's not hard to unjumbo that mess actually, at least in simplistic concept. A basic explanation could be: Those big tech & corporation that does thing they don't like will suffer the ramification of the free market, losing a lot of income as they protest/abandon those companies and new companies that do support their view will raise and take it's place. No government needed, just let capitalisms and the free market take care of the issue.

Frick. reading what you wrote about social issues made me realize what I wrote doesn't get across what I actually mean. It was supposed to say something like: What minority groups considers as issues, aren't significant or important to them. Ignoring those who want to outright ban or suppress (due to old, religious, or horrible ideology), you get these people who say they love our neighbor, treat everyone fairly, and claim they would stand up against oppressions, but then don't lift a finger or even an ear when these minority groups like the LTBQ or muslin community say they are facing unjust treatment and laws that unfairly target them and denied their right.

And lastly, yeah. A decent majority who support Trump don't really like the established republican party. It's a large reason why a lot of the republican who went against Trump during republican primary lost to those who supported Trump, and why so many of these established politician play along with Trump and his nonsense. It's also a reason why Trump had a record turn out compare to any other republican candidate in history. It turns out, the amount of people who actually support the republican party is 'questionable' at best. How this unfolds? I have no idea.

EDIT: Screw these republicans congress asking for healing! For all I care, the entire republican party can jump into a pool and never come back. I may be said for a bit for pointless death, but I feel like the net gain will outweigh it.

Edited by Clear World

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Republican Congress can have their healing when they admit that they're the ones that their bad behavior put us in this mess in the first place.  Then, they should be the ones to draft laws that benefit the unfortunate, at the expense of their corporate donors.  Only then will I look to the sky to see if a flock of pigs will fly by my window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently twitter is life and being banned for not following a ToS is like complete erasure! There are no other ways you can communicate.

Also banning him is just stoking the fire more, I cry, as I try to hide my can of gasoline.

This was one of the more promising 2016 presidential hopefuls and not so long ago considered a rising star in the republican party. Completely unserious people.

Edited by Crysta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I mean

These people do realize that they agreed to a Terms of Service when they signed up onto Twitter, right?

... Right???

Share this post


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

I mean

These people do realize that they agreed to a Terms of Service when they signed up onto Twitter, right?

... Right???

Lol he would have been banned a long time ago if he wasn't the President and given the world's largest bully pulpit for four years.

We've finally reached the top of a steep uphill climb. It's definitely not the scary slippery slope right wing media working themselves rabid trying to pretend it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If any conservatives are struggling with the idea of Trump being banned from social media:

Just think of twitter as a bakery and Donald Trump as a gay wedding cake 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Shoblongoo said:

If any conservatives are struggling with the idea of Trump being banned from social media:

Just think of twitter as a bakery and Donald Trump as a gay wedding cake 

No.

I will not stand by and watch as you slander a gay wedding cake like that!

Trump is a TV personality, and Twitter hit the mute button on him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Clear World said:

It's not hard to unjumbo that mess actually, at least in simplistic concept. A basic explanation could be: Those big tech & corporation that does thing they don't like will suffer the ramification of the free market, losing a lot of income as they protest/abandon those companies and new companies that do support their view will raise and take it's place. No government needed, just let capitalisms and the free market take care of the issue.

If it was just that, I would say okay, but a lot of these folks seem to think that Twitter has done something legally wrong or violated the first ammendment or something like that.

I'm not actually opposed to a nationalisation solution, personally. I do think such corporations have too much influence over our lives and that isn't ideal. But that's an issue with free-market capitalism that these folks seem to fall just short of proposing the left-wing solution for. Welcome aboard, comrades.

Edited by Tryhard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah being against big tech monopolies is a pretty standard leftist policy plank. The difference is that these guys only care when it personally affects them and have the ideological consistency of oatmeal.

They're really going with this take. We're engaging in equally irresponsible behavior by having the audacity to call for accountability. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He could always start his own website, like Alex Jones did.

 

But then again, there's a difference between being an (entertaining) conspiracy theorist that everyone believes and being a failed politician.

Share this post


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

If any conservatives are struggling with the idea of Trump being banned from social media:

Just think of twitter as a bakery and Donald Trump as a gay wedding cake 

I have seen a ton of reposting that quote. It's a pretty solid, if tangential point (I say this by it being about physical object vs. words in an online website. Course, thanks to the laws that were written it applies the same on both.). It's something I don't feel positively about because of how it can take away from people in terms of their access to service (say, if all the bakeries in a feasible area suddenly told you they wouldn't make that cake and used an applicable justification).

All these social media sites removing Trump alongside other people promoting similar discourse and his supporters being told their safest space is getting removed from app distributors, it surprised me how fast that's going on in all fairness. I do feel similarly to Tryhard on the influence of a set of sites (beyond the largest social media sites) needing to be discussed and the preferred direction being different from "break up the sites" when you're not dealing with the points why these sites were able to congregate such a scale of traffic, information and influence.

In other news, a congressman's pushing a proposal for removing the electoral college. Considering the threshold for getting it passed is as high as it is, doubtless it won't work, but does anyone else here think the next two years needs as much reminding of much of the GOP's failure to confront various issues and that these are causing real problems they're trying to avoid dealing with as it needs policies to be taken seriously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Armchair General said:

He could always start his own website, like Alex Jones did.

 

But then again, there's a difference between being an (entertaining) conspiracy theorist that everyone believes and being a failed politician.

Betting on a podcast where he just rambles incoherently for three hours, personally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, XRay said:

Ah, okay, I see what you mean. I know that a lot of other minorities other than blacks also got treated like crap, but blacks experiencing injustice just popped into my head the most because it seems like they got the worst of it.

6 hours ago, eclipse said:

Not.  Even.  Close.  I'm voting the Native American population, since the goal of the Americans at the time was their complete and utter eradication.  They were stripped of their lands, identity, and lives - all under government approval.

But as long as America ignores that part of their history, I don't think we'll be able to address the current elephant in the room.

That could partly be because, if you went to U.S. public schools anyway, a lot of this was swept under the rug, with us really only focusing on the (watered down white washed version of) the Civil Rights movement in the 60s and slavery, and that’s it. The trail of tears and Hawaii got a passing mention in my 7th grade history class, but I think a Hawaii question might have been on the test!

But I haven’t heard of it really being possible for Hawaiians back then to escape their fate. What happened, eclipse? 🤔

Edited by Sooks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd highly recommend, if you guys haven't already, picking up a copy of "Lies My Teacher Told Me", by James Loewen. It discusses how U.S. history textbooks are often written to "comfort" the descendants of colonizers and ... well, basically how history is not taught objectively with only the facts like how most other subjects are taught.

It talks about how we the students using the textbooks are often lied to about how white America interacted with Native Americans and black people, how many textbooks try to downplay some of the shit that happened or portray white people as the victims or at least not-aggressors. It talks about social inequalities and how it seems to often be ignored in textbooks. It talks about how we avoid so many things in recent history, like a lot of things post-WWII. Of course, there are some things it doesn't talk about, it doesn't really have a lot, if anything, talking about Asian American history, but it's certainly good if you just want something to start you off on how fucked up how most people in the U.S. learn history.

Or you could watch this. I'd recommend this too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Crysta said:

They're really going with this take. We're engaging in equally irresponsible behavior by having the audacity to call for accountability. 

That guy's face incites violence.  Never mind the nonsense that passes for his thoughts!

33 minutes ago, Sooks said:

But I haven’t heard of it really being possible for Hawaiians back then to escape their fate. What happened, eclipse? 🤔

For the REALLY short version, Wikipedia has you covered.  There's a good bit of nuance missing, but it covers the major events.

What isn't covered is the discrepancy in firepower.  It would've been the equivalent of those idiots who stormed the White House going against a few fully-armed Marine divisions who were ordered to shoot to kill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Outside filling the spacious gaps in our U.S. history courses, a loooooot more people need to take sociology and political science courses in college

Or earlier than that, really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Acacia Sgt said:

Well, in the case of the Irish, it wasn't so much about race. It was two other factors which were in play:

- They weren't Anglo

- They were Catholic

It's no wonder you had stuff like "Irish need no apply", or the Saint Patrick Battalion defectors. Race wasn't enough to avoid persecution.

You do realize that's a race, right?

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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...