US Politics-2021

Status
Not open for further replies.
I really wanted to find a clip of Tucker Carlson expousing on the meat ban but for some reason Fox News has already walked it back.

The Daily Show did put together a nice montage of Fox News meat ban comments.


You know, the weird thing is - the conservatives are actually right on this. To affect a reduction of carbon emissions we do need to reduce our consumption of animal products.
 
This isn't just ignorance, it's idiocracy @ignoredmember
 
And why is that?
I'll tell you why. Bitchute is a known far-right video hosting site. They have a wiki page that basically sums up why it isn't tolerated on this forum. Please don't post their links on this site again. Any other site like this won't be tolerated either. Take your conspiracies somewhere else!


*
 
I'll tell you why. Bitchute is a known far-right video hosting site. They have a wiki page that basically sums up why it isn't tolerated on this forum. Please don't post their links on this site again. Any other site like this won't be tolerated either. Take your conspiracies somewhere else!


*
You don't seem to have a problem with left leaning sources.
 
Show me evidence that Bitchute promotes hate in any way! allowing it is not the as promoting it.
I did. Wikipedia may not be perfect, but the information on Bitchute is there in black and white. So take it any way you like. People don't just make this stuff up, despite what you may think. Furthermore, this is a moderated forum. If you don't like how we moderate, please feel free to take your rhetoric somewhere else. No more explanations will be given. I will simply ban you if you persist. Take those apples and enjoy!

From Wiki:
BitChute is a video hosting service known for accommodating far-right individuals and conspiracy theorists, and for hosting hateful content.[a]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BitChute#cite_note-hateful-material-15 The platform was created in 2017 to allow video uploaders to avoid content rules enforcement on YouTube,[14] and some creators who have been banned from YouTube or had their channels barred from receiving advertising revenue ("demonetised") have migrated to BitChute.[1]
 
  • Agree
Reactions: silva
And why is that?
I scrolled through that video. It would have been laughable if it weren't so disturbingly serious. To hear a white woman complain about being marginalized because others were getting attention and she wasn't getting the full Monty of adoration was deplorable and sickening.
I really don't know whether you're 15, confused and going down the rabbit hole that makes you feel more accepted, or just a troll, but I'm leaning towards you trolling. All the specialty picked videos of racicsm, anti science, and white folks not wanting to accept the truth in a forum where people are about exposing truths and accepting differences is pretty much what trolling is about.
It's very much like a child brought up having everyone praise them, and giving them everything they wanted or needed, then going to public school for the first time and having to wait for others and share, and being angry they're no longer the center of attention, so everyone else must be wrong
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Calliegirl and Lou
A few weeks ago I brought up the issue of police violence: Was the perceived increase real or an artifact of the news media (or my own NewsReader).

After looking at today's headlines, it does seem to be getting worse. I hope to find some stats on this soon.

In my mind I sort of picture a room full of cops getting ready to go out on patrol and getting updates from their sergeant like what I remember from the TV show Hill Street Blues. And just before he tells them to be "careful out there", he says that everyone is concerned about Black Lives Matter and wouldn't it be great if no one got shot today. So just for a little while can we all just leave our guns in our holsters?
 
I scrolled through that video. It would have been laughable if it weren't so disturbingly serious. To hear a white woman complain about being marginalized because others were getting attention and she wasn't getting the full Monty of adoration was deplorable and sickening.
If white people aren't discriminated against, then why is is racist to say white pride, but it's anti-racist to say black pride?
I really don't know whether you're 15, confused and going down the rabbit hole that makes you feel more accepted, or just a troll, but I'm leaning towards you trolling. All the specialty picked videos of racicsm, anti science, and white folks not wanting to accept the truth in a forum where people are about exposing truths and accepting differences is pretty much what trolling is about.
What truth do you speak of that white people do not want to accept? BTW I'm not racist in anyway, I oppose racism strongly I think judging someone you don't even know by the colour of their skin is absolutely disgusting. In fact I don't even recognize I race, because as far as I care there are no black people and white people, there are only people, and all people are equal, and all people matter.
It's very much like a child brought up having everyone praise them, and giving them everything they wanted or needed, then going to public school for the first time and having to wait for others and share, and being angry they're no longer the center of attention, so everyone else must be wrong
Nah, People have always disagreed with me, (including my family) I still argue with my parents on these subjects.
 
If white people aren't discriminated against, then why is is racist to say white pride, but it's anti-racist to say black pride?
I'm not convinced it's strictly speaking racist to talk of white pride (although in practice people that speak of white pride often are racist), but I think I can still answer your question.

The argument here is that white people on average have a disproportionate amount of power, influence, money, land etc and some of that is due to past and present injustices carried out by white people alive today or their parents or grandparents or ancestors.

These injustices have occurred at a national level (e.g. it is very likely true that black people in the US are poorer than white people today partly or fully because of slavery and racism in the past) and at an international level (e.g. failed African states in the 20th century may or may not have happened because of arbitrarily drawn colonial borders and whites taking some of the best land and taking valuable resources out of the ground and out of the continent).

Therefore white pride, in practice, may act to maintain or increase the existing inequality, whereas efforts to promote black pride may close that gap and create a more equal world.

Therefore (in an overly simplistic analysis)

white pride = maintain structural injustice
black pride = equality for all races

Like any group, some black people are just tribal, and others are enlightened but either way we hope the result will be the same: black pride in practice can lead to less racism and more equality.

Once racial equality has been achieved, black pride may become redundant.

White pride already seems redundant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lou and silva
If white people aren't discriminated against, then why is is racist to say white pride, but it's anti-racist to say black pride?

What truth do you speak of that white people do not want to accept? BTW I'm not racist in anyway, I oppose racism strongly I think judging someone you don't even know by the colour of their skin is absolutely disgusting. In fact I don't even recognize I race, because as far as I care there are no black people and white people, there are only people, and all people are equal, and all people matter.

Nah, People have always disagreed with me, (including my family) I still argue with my parents on these subjects.
Right there is a very conflicting statement. Saying you don't "recognize" race, you don't "see" color, is actually denying the reality that entire bloodlines have been adversely affected, generationally, by the color of their skin. Without recognizing that, and the privilege you have had your entire life, without even being conscience of it happening, is ... kinda racist. It's like denying racisms affects and existence. White peoples lives have always been in the forefront-rich or poor. They have always been represented.
When I used an entitled child suddenly faced with being in a public school I was using that as an example for the white girl in the video.
This is a pretty clear cut response to " why is is racist to say white pride, but it's anti-racist to say black pride?", I think you should understand-

...and here's a history lesson you probably didn't get--
 
  • Like
Reactions: PTree15 and Lou
Right there is a very conflicting statement. Saying you don't "recognize" race, you don't "see" color, is actually denying the reality that entire bloodlines have been adversely affected, generationally, by the color of their skin. Without recognizing that, and the privilege you have had your entire life, without even being conscience of it happening, is ... kinda racist. It's like denying racisms affects and existence. White peoples lives have always been in the forefront-rich or poor. They have always been represented.
It most certainly is not racist, "I don't see colour" simply means that I don't really pay attention a person's race, it doesn't really matter to me, You're not the first person I've heard arguing that not seeing colour is denying racist acts, but I honestly never understood what their talking about, I simply don't get the logic behind it.
When I used an entitled child suddenly faced with being in a public school I was using that as an example for the white girl in the video.
I disagree, she's been told her whole life that all the non-white races are great, so shouldn't the white race be great too?
This is a pretty clear cut response to " why is is racist to say white pride, but it's anti-racist to say black pride?", I think you should understand-

...and here's a history lesson you probably didn't get--
Not quite sure how that's relevant, I never said black people where not oppressed.
 
Right there is a very conflicting statement. Saying you don't "recognize" race, you don't "see" color, is actually denying the reality that entire bloodlines have been adversely affected, generationally, by the color of their skin. Without recognizing that, and the privilege you have had your entire life, without even being conscience of it happening, is ... kinda racist. It's like denying racisms affects and existence.


I don´t agree with this.
I think not seeing race is a defensible position.
It just means that in everyday life when someone is chatting you up, or trying to be friends with you, or in a job interview, the race is not considered. This may be a OK way to be, at least for most people in every day life most of the time. (It may not be a good way to think if you are a politician in the US or someone else with power and influence.)
Black people don´t all want you to see them as a victim of oppression all the time. Perhaps when you are making policies relating to housing yes, but not when you are just having a beer at a party.

It´s not racist to not see colour. It´s not racist to be ignorant of white privilege.

Racist used to be about discriminating, insulting, or treating people differently based on race.

And now racist has been expanded (at least by those on the left) to the point where not being anti-racist is itself supposedly a bit racist. I don´t buy it. And, at least for now, almost all dictionary writers are in agreement with me.

If you´re bigoted to not actively educate yourself and race issues, does it not logically follow that you are also a bigot if you´ve not actually educated yourself about sex/gender, transgender issues, native Americans, LGBT people?

If your answer is that you must be anti-racist but not anti a whole host of other positions (which is I think the implicit position of the US liberal left), then this is an arbitrary distinction. You might say that race is the no 1 issue and greatest injustice because firstly (and this part of the argument may be specific to the US) the amount of injustice in history (slavery, lynching, segregation etc) is greater than for other issues and secondly that discrimination based on race is particularly absurd way to differentiate. However, these arguments to me do seem to carry enough weight to put race at the top of the social justice agenda, but not enough to put in a totally different class to other injustices. But I suppose that could be my subjective judgement.

If your answer is no you need to actively educated about all the issues as well - where does that end? Who decides whether we should feel obliged or not to be aware of our cis privilege, and whether or not failing to do so counts as bigoted. What about our privilege of not being asexual or intersex, and therefore fitting more neatly into society as a result? Where does it end? The answer is it doesn´t. It will always be forever arbitrary.

It seems reasonable to suggest to white people (or everyone) that they learn more about the issues and consider being an ally to black people. But it seems going too far to insist on it or to call someone racist.
 
I don´t agree with this.
About a year ago I felt exactly like the way you do.
(Remember I was the guy who stood up for the vegan who got roasted for tweeting Animal Lives Matter.)

But over the past year my feelings and thoughts have moved more in line with the sentiments you are rebutting.
I'm not saying you are being a racist if you are not being an anti-racist.

I think the slogan that sort of started moving me to support the anti-racist movement is one that I grew up with (during the Vietnam War): If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.

The Thing is that systemic racism is every where and effects everything. (if you don't accept that premise - we have some work to do). But we probably should put THAT discussion in the BLM thread.

Oh! Here, I have just thought of a good analogy. (granted, its not perfect - but analogies never are.)

So there is a big fire next door. And you want to put it out. Just NOT pouring gasoline on it is not good enough. (although that is exactly what one of your neighbors is doing). Step one is to stop people from pouring gas on it. But if that is too uncomfortable for you (or maybe you are not equipped to do that ) at least you have to be pumping water to put on it. Standing by and watching is not good enough. Just not getting in the way of the bucket brigade is not good enough. Rooting for the fire brigade or praying it will go out is not good enough.

Ok, sorry. I got carried away there.

To get back on point. IF you accept that systemic racism exists AND that it is a problem. Well, it's not going away by itself. Recognizing it is a problem is the first step. And being color blind is not part of the solution.

So.... individually there is not much we can do beside not pouring gas on the fire. But I'm assuming that we already do that. Hey, this is sort of like veganism. Individually the most important thing we can do is stop eating meat. But we need big changes. which is going to require a lot of different things. None of which is going to happen if most everyone else is just standing by and watching.

Since this is a politics thread - we need the law makers to be anti racists. Which means ( in theory for a democracy) we need to be anti-racist first.

Many of us just watched the Not the State of the Union. I was very heartened by what Biden has said. But those proposals still need to be enacted. And that is going to be a lot harder than what most of the people I know realize.

To effectively defeat systemic racism — racism embedded as normal practice in institutions like education and law enforcement — you've got to be continually working towards equality for all races, striving to undo racism in your mind, your personal environment and the wider world.​
In other words, you've got to be anti-racist.​

'Not Racist' Is Not Enough: Putting In The Work To Be Anti-Racist

 
If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem.
Don´t agree with this, and you could say that about anything. By that logic, anyone is part of the problem on many of the world´s or your country´s numerous issues.

People feel obliged to put out a house on fire or help out in some way if it´s their neighbour or they happen to be walking by, but not if they just see a fire on TV or hear about one happening 100 miles away.

Similarly the argument you should be anti-racist if you see something happening in front of your eyes (like you see an instance of racism in your workplace) is the stronger part of the argument. However, the argument from the US liberal left, tends (again, often implicitly) towards saying you should be proactively anti-racist even if you never see racism in your workplace or street or within your friends group. It´s sort of expected that you be anti-racist on social media, or attend a march, or proactively speak out without a specific reason, any of those things, or something else, as long as you don´t do NOTHING. To your fire analogy, that is like saying if there are no fires in your neighbourhood you are obliged to drive around seeking them out miles away and then helping.

The way I look at it, if you are actively causing harm to others it makes sense to address that first. And most rich white liberals actively cause harm to black people both in the US and abroad through the effects of climate change disproportionately affecting black people. That´s something to consider as well.

I think if the tone of it is "it´s a good idea to be anti-racist, this is something to strongly consider" (rather than obliging or calling people racist) I´d be inclined to agree and would actually be more of an ally with that position.

The other question is what works strategically in actually achieving a more just world.
 
It´s not racist to not see colour.

It's also not possible. When someone says "I don't see color" they're telling you they don't understand how cognitive biases work and absolving themselves of any need for self-reflection. It may not be racist, but it's still ignorant.
 
  • Like
  • Agree
Reactions: PTree15 and silva
"There's a plot in this country to enslave ever man, woman, and child. Before I leave this high and noble office I intend to expose this plot" -President John F Kennedy 7 days before his assassination.
 
"There's a plot in this country to enslave ever man, woman, and child. Before I leave this high and noble office I intend to expose this plot" -President John F Kennedy 7 days before his assassination.

That is part of the blurb on the book, What's Killing America... The book has never been reviewed. It doesn't even have any Amazon reviews which is crazy. I couldn't find out anything else about the author. Someone with his name died last year and also a Richard Blanco wrote a mystery.

If you read or have a copy of the book I would like to know how they know that. I googled that quote and I found it on a page for The Illuminati.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.