Below is my column in USA Today on the withdrawal of Associate Justice Clarence Thomas from the faculty at George Washington University. The announcement merely said that Justice Thomas was now “unavailable” to teach. While the decision is being celebrated by both GWU and across the Internet, it is only the latest blow to free speech and the struggle to preserve a diversity of viewpoints in higher education. When the university announced earlier that it would not fire Thomas, I wrote a piece expressing doubt about how that victory would play out in the future to protect free speech on campuses. The cessation of teaching the course only magnifies those concerns. Such withdrawals raise the concern over the “unavailability” of a diversity of thought in higher education.
Here is the column:
After 11 years, students at George Washington University Law School will register for courses this fall with one notable difference. They will no longer be able to take a seminar with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
The removal of Justice Thomas from the list of lecturers followed a cancel campaign that demanded that the university ban him from any classrooms. At 74, and looking at an upcoming term of major decisions, Thomas hardly needs the aggravation of such protests. However, his departure (even if temporary) is a great loss to students, the law school and free speech.
In a petition, Justice Thomas (and his wife) were denounced as “actively making life unsafe for thousands of students on our campus.” The impetus for the campaign was clearly the recent decision overturning Roe v. Wade, which critics charged “stripped the right to bodily autonomy of people with wombs” and called on faculty and students to “kick Clarence Thomas out of Foggy Bottom.”
While the university refused to terminate Thomas, the campaign continued and protests were expected in the fall. Now many are celebrating the departure as a triumph, but it is only the latest example of how dissenting viewpoints are being systematically eliminated in higher education.
Indeed, the contrast could not be greater this week as recently retired Justice Stephen Breyer was welcomed on the Harvard Law faculty. No protests. No cancel campaign over his liberal decisions.
Breyer’s return to Harvard, where he graduated and once taught, will be interesting. This liberal icon might now be considered a virtual moderate on a faculty that largely runs from the left to the far left.
A new survey report, conducted by The Harvard Crimson, revealed that 82.46% of faculty surveyed identify as “liberal” or “very liberal.” Only 16.08% identified as “moderate” and a mere 1.46% identified as “conservative.” Not a single faculty member identified as “very conservative,” but the number of faculty identified as “very liberal” increased by another 8% in just one year.
Thomas’ withdrawal fits with a long pattern of cancel campaigns, which often take two tracks. First, they seek the termination of faculty with dissenting views. However, tenured or high-profile figures may be more difficult for a university to fire. Few of us believed that a sitting Supreme Court justice would be banned from teaching at the law school.
However, if termination is not possible, these campaigns try to push targets to resign by making their continuation on campus increasingly intolerable.
Recently, a campaign at Georgetown University successfully prompted a law professor to resign. Center for the Constitution Director Ilya Shapiro was suspended because of a single controversial tweet. And while Shapiro was cleared after a long investigation, the law school’s tepid support showed he couldn’t expect much of a future at Georgetown.
Even tenured professors can have enough. Recently, UCLA anthropology professor Joseph Manson resigned after
After decades of teaching, he declared “U.S. higher education is morally and intellectually corrupt, beyond the possibility of self-repair, and therefore no longer a worthwhile setting in which to spend my time and effort.”
It is not clear that the cancel campaign prompted the decision of Justice Thomas, but the prospect of protests planned for the Fall could not have helped in his decision making. What is clear is that his departure is likely to fuel additional efforts to isolate and stigmatize those with opposing views.
Recently, for example, Rep. Susan Wild, D-Penn., used her address as George Washington’s commencement speaker to accuse me of using law for “wrongful ends” for questioning the constitutional basis for former President Donald Trump’s first impeachment. The basis of her allegation was a demonstrably false accusation that even her Democratic colleagues refuted in the hearing. It simply did not matter that what Rep. Wild told our graduates was factually untrue. The point is to relentlessly attack and ultimately exhaust those with opposing views.
Such attacks are now a common factor of life for many faculty members offering dissenting views on issues ranging from impeachment to diversity programs to police abuse to transgender identification to vaccines to
Indeed, this week, University of Michigan medical professor Dr. Kristin Collier faced the same type of attack at an introduction ceremony. Almost half of the University of Michigan’s incoming medical school class walked out of a “white coat ceremony” to protest that fact that she opposes legalized abortion. She was not planning to discuss abortion, but the mere fact that she doesn’t support it made her speaking at the event unacceptable.
For more than a decade, George Washington University Law School benefited greatly from the teaching of Justice Thomas, who combines a legendary career with one of the most inspiring life stories in the history of the court. Whatever the reason for his cessation in teaching, he deserves our thanks.
He also deserved better. He deserved greater public support from individual faculty members. He deserved greater understanding from students. He deserved an equally vocal counter-campaign in support of free speech and a diversity of viewpoints at the university.
Yet, there is now an overwhelming fear among faculty and students that they could be next to be targeted in a cancel campaign or to be shunned by colleagues. These campaigns threaten everything that brings meaning to an intellectual from access to classes to conferences to publications.
This is why many choose to remain silent as the mob pursues their colleagues. For those tagged as dissenters, the atmosphere is perfectly Robespierrean.
When asked what he had done during the Reign of Terror, he replied: “I stayed alive.”
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley
215 thoughts on “Justice Thomas’ Withdrawal Exposes The Growing “Unavailability” of Diverse Opinions in Higher Education”
A William P Clark, former Justice & former Secretary of Interior, noted his concerns for 21st century generation & beyond before he passed away,”There was a lack of contentiousness between the two political parties that I’m afraid does not exist today,” Clark said. “That’s one of my worries about making government work — there seems to be far less camaraderie now than we’ve known in the past.” So if we cannot make that work in government, how can our current educational system continue within the land of liberty? We will have condemned ourselves to submit to one rule of thought, one rule of speech. US is no longer a state of liberty. Our current government leans hard to transform our land of freedom into a oligarch society ruled with only their ideals, limited speech & travel, a big brother society that will leave us all impoverished save for the ruling faction of government for them.
DISCORDANT INTERMIXTURE HAS INJURIOUS TENDENCY
And the Founding Fathers admonished and legislated:
“Suppose 20 millions of republican Americans thrown all of a sudden into France, what would be the condition of that kingdom?”
“If it would be more turbulent, less happy, less strong, we may believe that the addition of half a million of foreigners to our present numbers would produce a similar effect here.”
– Thomas Jefferson
“The influx of foreigners must, therefore, tend to produce a heterogeneous compound; to change and corrupt the national spirit; to complicate and confound public opinion; to introduce foreign propensities. In
the composition of society, the harmony of the ingredients is all-important, and whatever tends to a discordant intermixture must have an injurious tendency.”
– Alexander Hamilton
Naturalization Acts of 1790, 1795, 1798 and 1802 (four iterations)
United States Congress, “An act to establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization,” March 26, 1790
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That any Alien being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof…
“[We gave you] a [restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin
George your repeated citations of obsolete founding Immigration Law strike me as you being a relic of the past who cannot (or simply refuses to) adapt to long-ago Ratified Constitutional Amendment and modern Immigration Law. We are well past the turning-back-point, rapidly becoming a post-racial meritocracy (something the media is loathe to report, clinging tenaciously as they will to racial conflict theatrics). You still have the same opportunity or more than your forebearers (except throwing up obstacles in front of those Americans of different ethnicity).
Yes, we have some serious problems righting the excesses of new media towards alarmist sensationalism. Your contribution in that dept. is duly noted.
The entire “Reign of Terror” of Lincoln was and remains unconstitutional and illegitimate. Secession was and remains constitutional. Lincoln’s entire basis was and remains erroneous and unconstitutional. America persisted for merely 71 years before Lincoln illegally and unconstitutionally ripped it off the tracks and destroyed it (slavery must have been eliminated by legal and constitutional means). The SCOTUS recently retroactively struck down a phantom, illicit and unconstitutional “right” to abortion retroactively by 50 years. The SCOTUS has sworn an oath to support the Constitution. Therefore, it must act retroactively, in the same vein as the abortion denial, to fully abrogate every last vestige of “Crazy Abe’s” “Reign of Terror” as unconstitutional and reimplement the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights. The effect of Lincoln was to commence the incremental implementation of the principles of communism and replace the Constitution and Bill of Rights. The American Founders and Framers intended the Constitution and Bill of Rights to stand in perpetuity. Fundamental law was comprehensively and egregiously nullified and violated. Karl Marx and “Crazy Abe” Lincoln changed that illegally and unconstitutionally.
Letter of Congratulation and Commendation from Karl Marx to Lincoln:
Scotland is seceding.
East Timor seceded.
West Virginia seceded.
Russia arbitrarily took back Ukraine.
China will arbitrarily take back Taiwan.
America may arbitrarily take back America.
Illegal deportation is as ethical, moral and legal as illegal immigration.
Repulsion is as ethical, moral and legal as invasion.
“Making America Great Again” is as noble as “Build Back Badder.”
How were Justice Thomas and his wife “actively making life unsafe?”
Were they swinging baseball bats at random? Running with scissors? Playing with chainsaws with reckless abandon?
Words like “threat”, “unsafe”, “racist”, and “danger” mean what far Left activists think they do.
These people are so easily triggered, histrionic, and intolerant of opposing ideas I don’t know how they are going to make it as functioning members of society.
Raw meat for the animals.
“…how they are going to make it as functioning members of society.”
They are supposed to function with autonomy by pursing happiness through freedom and self-reliance, not a welfare state of “free stuff.”
You don’t get it. The masses were never intended to vote. Franklin gave Americans a restricted-vote republic, distinctly not a one man, one vote democrazy, the likes of which always end in dictatorship. Turnout in 1788 was 11.6% and vote criteria were generally male, European, 21, 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres.
“the people are nothing but a great beast…
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value.”
– Alexander Hamilton
“The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”
“If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”
– Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775
Good questions Karen S.
Except that they’re really not ‘triggered’ or ‘offended;’ nor do they feel ‘unsafe.’ They’re poorly educated individuals who couldn’t speak knowledgably for five minutes on the historical and political principles that inform the idea of freedom of speech. They’re a herd of mediocre intellects indulging in the sport of forcing those in authority to cave to their illiterate ‘demands.’ More is the pity that the GWU faculty and administration and Board of Trustees are not equipped to tell all matriculating students that GWU stands squarely and unequivocally behind the principle of freedom of thought and expression, and that if they do not share this view, perhaps another university is the place for them. One can only conclude that GWU’s leadership doesn’t really believe in the principles of free speech either. Alas.
“. . . how they are going to make it as functioning members of society.”
They are not.
They expect society to conform to them.
We are looking at an entire generation of perpetual teens, who throw temper tantrums at every turn. They will not be employable as they will bring their activism to work, spending more time promoting wokeism than actually doing what they are paid to do. The only companies that will hire them will be other woke companies (ref: coffee shop in Philly, bar in IIRC Portland both forced closed by their woke employees).
The upside is everyone not woke sees this and are pushing back. Moderate Dems leaving the party. Woke school board members getting voted out. Increased interest in private schools, or homeschooling. The new UATX.
We will see two separate societies emerge. One woke. One non-woke. The two shall never meet.
If you pay a ransom, you encourage more kidnappings.
If you give in to terrorists’ demands, you encourage more terrorism.
If you apologize to the woke mob, they sense your weakness and will never be appeased.
If you withdraw as an invited speaker or teacher, you encourage more harassment and cancel culture.
This is when you dig in your heels.
You asked me to apologize to you, and I did. Does that mean that you “will never be appeased”?
Are you mistaking me of a woke mob trying to cancel someone? False equivalence. I’m not trying to drive you out of gainful employment, unable to be appeased by any groveling apology.
No, Karen, I know you to be a coward. You’ll answer easy questions and consistently run away from hard ones, and consistently run away from correcting your mistakes.
What hard questions has Karen run from ?
If you are going to defame someone – back it up
LOL that you consider that defamation.
I’ve backed it up previously. An example of an exchange where she refused to correct her mistakes and once again refused to answer what her personal beliefs are about when abortion should be legal vs. illegal / what she thinks the law should be in her state:
She consistently runs away from answering that latter question.
It is stupid to waste many words writing about past writing.
When you could just state what you mean.
“I’ve backed it up previously.”
So you say.
” An example of an exchange where she refused to correct her mistakes and once again refused to answer what her personal beliefs are about when abortion should be legal vs. illegal / what she thinks the law should be in her state:
Your link goes to an article – not a comment, and so is useless.
“She consistently runs away from answering that latter question.”
Is it congenitally impossible for you to say plainly what you mean ?
What question is she running away from ?
And why is she obligated to answer some question you can not even identify ?
Can you call a horse a horse, rather than
“the object of the subject of a prior post on something else” ?
Anonymous the Stupid, Karen didn’t run away. You failed to prove your case. The only coward in this discussion is you who posts under anonymous and other names.
You are a scrub to impugn my honor. What poor, childish behavior you exhibit, behind the shield of a computer screen.
I do not have email notifications turned on. I do not return to old conversations to see if you’ve posted. Since you post under Anonymous, you clearly do not want any continuity of conversation traceable to an avatar. I have no idea which of thousands of “anonymous” I’m addressing in any given conversation.
If you are talking about one of the many Anonymous posters’ repeated demands that I declare what I want in an abortion law, I have told you, repeatedly, that I do not yet know what a perfectly balanced law would look like. I have said we need to have tough conversations and decide this issue for ourselves, and that the interests of the unborn and pregnant women need to be represented in that conversation. Abortion law has to be a compromise between Pro Choice and Pro Life, because both are significant parts of the population. It has to reflect that beliefs on abortion are on a range, not binary. In a compromise, neither side gets exactly what they want but they can live with the result.
You are not, actually, entitled to my innermost thoughts. Your calling me a coward is truly despicable, troll. It’s disgusting how rude and vile people behave behind computer screens. It’s the equivalent of screaming and flipping tables in a restaurant. Let us hope that you behave in a more civilized manner than you do under cover of an anonymous avatar.
OK, Karen S: I’ve asked you multiple times before to defend your hero sitting in the WH dining room, watching his fans break into and desecrate the Capitol, beat police officers, erect a gallows shouting “Hang Mike Pence”, and tweeting, while this is going on, that “Pence let us down”. He knew some of them were armed because he was told so, and he demanded that the magnetrometers be shut off so that his fans could carry their weapons. He watched the invasion of the Capitol for over 3 hours, and only called off his minions after it became clear that the invasion failed, that Pence couldn’t be coerced into leaving the Capitol loading dock area, and was going to proceed with certifying Biden’s victory no matter how long it took to finish the job on Jan 6th.
You previously posted that Jan 6th was merely “a few yahoos” whose protest got out of control. That’s clearly not true. What’s your defense for Trump failing and refusing to call of his fans who had invaded the Capitol for over 3 hours? As an accerssory question, what about his failure to condemn his fans when he finally did act, telling them that they were special and “we love you”? What about the outtakes in which he refused to say, the day after, that the election was over? Then, there’s the overarching question about lying about his “landslide victory” having been stolen when he knew it wasn’t true.
I’m not going to bother arguing with you whether anyone other than a pregnant woman should have a voice in terminating an unwanted pregnancy before the age of fetal viability.
PAY ATTENTION NOW – CHINA CERTAINLY IS
CONFUCIUS INSTITUTES ET AL.
They’re All Spies, Influencers and Instigators
They’re All Allowed by the U.S.
“…adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
“China’s Damaging Influence and Exploitation of U.S. Colleges and Universities”
“Americans are increasingly wary of Chinese Communist Party influence on U.S. universities—and rightly so. Despite the Ivory Tower’s leftward slant, universities remain a wellspring of American scientific, technical, and engineering research and innovation.”
“China’s desire to tap that well is no secret. Its campus-based Confucius Institutes have received much attention of late, but that is just the ice cube on the tip of the iceberg. Several other Chinese programs also have the potential to influence and exploit American colleges and universities. Their activities—like those of the Confucius Institutes—are not fully known. But here is a snapshot of what we do know and why they are a problem.”
– The Heritage Foundation
Jonathan: Finally, you have gotten around to addressing the Thomas case at GWU. I suppose the easy answer to why Breyer is welcome at Harvard and Thomas is not welcome at GWU can be found in the stats you cite. Wow! Only 1.46 % of faculty at Harvard identify as “conservative”. Doesn’t say much for the appeal of “conservative” ideas among faculty and students–not only at Harvard but around the country. Why is that? Chief Justice Roberts is also a “conservative” but we don’t see him been shunned at university speaking gigs. With Thomas the issue goes way beyond labels like “conservative” and “liberal”.
Thomas’ problem can be summed up in a tweet by the actor Samuel L Jackson: “How’s Uncle Clarence feeling about overturning Loving v. Virginia?” That’s the case that upheld inter-racial marriage. In Dobbs, Thomas indicated he would overturn Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell–re other fundamental rights like contraception, gay relationships and marriage. Jackson was simply pointing out Thomas’ hypocrisy in not including Loving. But the reason Thomas is so controversial goes way beyond his hypocrisy.
In Trump v. Thompson, Thomas was the sole dissent in the decision upholding the right of the J.6 Committee to have access to Trump’s WH docs. Thomas refused to recuse himself in that case despite the fact that his wife was involved in the plot to overturn the 2020 election. And Ginni Thomas was so deeply involved her testimony is being sought by the Committee. In any other federal court Thomas would have been compelled to recuse. The Trump case shows Thomas is utterly incapable of setting aside his shared political views with his wife and judge cases solely on their merits. And that’s why over a million Americans have signed a petition calling for Thomas to resign or be impeached. Thomas’ presence on the Court is a disgrace and why the SC has so little support by the public.
Thomas’ decision to withdraw from teaching at GWU was probably prudent. 11,360 GWU students opposed Thomas teaching con law. But in one way it’s too bad you were unable to get Thomas to reconsider and defy the “mob”. Could have provided some very interesting classroom discussions. I can imagine that a gay student raising his hand and asking this Q: “Mr. Justice, you wrote a concurring opinion in Dobbs indicating you would also overturn Griswold, Lawrence and Obergefell. Can you explain why you believe I do not have the right to marry someone I choose?” Definitely an awkward moment. No wonder Thomas bowed out.
What is curious is your claim that “…there is now an overwhelming fear among [conservative] faculty and students that they could be next to be targeted in a cancel campaign or to be shunned by colleagues”. Don’t recall you complaining about being “targeted” or “shunned by colleagues” at GWU. I think it’s just sour grapes that your ideas don’t have more appeal–not by any attempt to “cancel” you. Had I been you I would have told Thomas: “Mr. Justice, our ideas will ultimately prevail. This is not the time to bow out. Show some cajones and defy the mob!” Probably would not have convinced Thomas to reconsider. But, hey, isn’t that what a principled “conservative” should do in the face of opposition? You wouldn’t see Scalia run from a controversy!
Clarence Thomas is a black man who doesn’t carry water for the progressive cause. In the progressive religion, as in most religions, there is a special kind of contempt for apostates.
“That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Do you have anything consequential to say ?
Wow! Law Students at Harvard love Breyer and Hate Thomas.
Wow! the purportedly preminent law school in the country is overrun by left wing idiots.
Wow! Thomas was the loan dissent on something that ultimately matters very little.
SCOTUS can decide that executive priviledge is as broad or narrow as it chooses.
But that decision will impact democrats an republilcans the same.
Personally I do not think the courts should have recognized the J6 committee as legitimate – it is in violation of the houses own rules.
But that does not matter. Whatever the courts decide about priviledge, about contempt of congress, about what constitutes a legitimate congressional comittee – will apply as Republicans control congress.
The FBI and DOIJ have refused to answer inumerable questions by republicans citing a variety of priviedges.
But as you just noted SCOTUS has refused to recognize those priviledges.
What are you going to do when the Republican house holds Wray in contempt or Garland in contempt ?
Those of you on the left do not seem to understrand that – whatever the rules are – they apply the same to all of us – left and right.
They may hold them in contempt, but they don’t have big enough balls to prosecute. DOJ will do nothing. It will be sound and fury signifying nothing per usual for spineless R’s.
I would note that you are talking about law schools.
The law is not determined by the appeal of ideas to students.
Are you really trying to argue that Harvard graduates – as lawyers and judges are free to discard the law and constitution – because it no longer appeals to them ?
Do you really expect any system where lawyers and judges and courts just make up what they want the law to be – as it appeals to them at the moment is going to work ?
It is irrelevant what ideas appeal to law school students.
What is relevant is what actually works.
It has taken more than 2000 years for law to reach where it is today – and it is far from perfect,
But it is 99,99% certain that some new approach that “appeals” to students and faculty is going to fail, while what exists today is known to succeed – even if it is less than perfect.
That is the essence of what conservative means – do not discard what has worked for centuries because it is imperfect to implement something no one knows will work. The results of doing so are easily predictable.
Though we may not share the same goals and objectives we all want change in law and government.
Some of us grasp that most changes FAIL and therefore we MUST proceed slowly and carefully.
While others do not grasp that rapid change ALWAYS means chaos, anarchy and failure – and we do not want that in government.
Samuel J Jackson is a RACIST just like Al Sharpton is. JUST because he is black, it doesn’t excuse his racism.
Speaking of the Supreme Court, did you see the results of this groundbreaking study from the world of lay science?
I can’t believe it
White girl got some a@@, I wanna see it
Black girl got a a@@, it ain’t a secret
Baby, turn around, I wanna see it
Tryin’ to see it, gotta see it
I wanna see that
Bubble yum bum
I Can’t Believe It
From his second album, Perfect Ten
It is often said we can unite the world through music. Now that is something that most of us can get behind!
For those interested in learning more about the science supporting the author’s findings, check out Flo Rida’s official, peer-reviewed video on youtube.
Only the youth of today would protest and then force the resignation of a sitting Supreme Court Justice from teaching their class. What type of “student” of law would not cherish the chance to take a class with a SITTING SUPREME COURT JUSTICE?
I know as a conservative that I would have jumped at the chance to have William Brennan as my professor. This is the difference between a) the youth of today and b) liberals and conservatives. Conservatives never try to ban liberal thought, speech, writings, programs, blogs, networks et al, but liberals always, and I mean always, try to ban conservative ideas.
The left has trapped themselves into the “our opponents must be banned” movement by continuously saying that everything that isn’t liberal is a danger to the planet, a danger to them, a danger to minorities, a danger to gays, a danger to trans, a danger to public health or a danger to women’s rights. Example A of this paradigm is shown in the case at hand, the little girls (and by little girls I mean the entire student body, including the so-called males) are screaming that having Justice Thomas on campus is a “danger to them”. Please just think about the absurdity of this whine. It is just another example of when the NY Times staff freaked out because a sitting senator wrote an op-ed discussing the possibility of calling in the army to protect cities as they burned saying that having the editor that okayed the column needed to go because it put them in danger???? Of course within a year Pelosi, one of theirs would call out the guard to protect a building that wasn’t burned, where not one person who wasn’t a protestor was killed and where the damage was negligible compared to what happened during the entire prior year.
The kids are scared and it is their parents fault.
You are wrong about who gets banned. In the early 1990s, my membership in the ACLU so unnerved my teaching colleagues in the Criminal Justice Department at what is now Texas State University that my contract was not renewed.
The ACLU are a mob of nasty radical communists. Texas State was clearly in the right to dump your Left wing “services”. You are lucky you didn’t get the old Texas “necktie”. It would have been justified. Aren’t you ashamed and embarrassed to be revealing your villainous association with these modern-day Bolsheviks? Come on, man! You know….the “Thing”.
Blog, thanks for making my point, THIS ISN’T THE 90S NOW IS IT? Also, you mention ONE ANECDOTE when we have hundreds of stories about the left. Just admit it and stop making a fool out of yourself.
Nancy Pelosi stands eyeball to eyeball with Xi Jinping.
Nancy Pelosi blinks.
Nancy Pelosi excludes Taiwan from her Asia tour itinerary.
Nancy Pelosi is rightfully perceived by the world as to be not in possession of the cojones requisite for the job.
That is the definition of woman.
I am not a Pelosi fan, but she SHOULD have gone to Tiawan, she SHOULD have been provided a significant US fighter escort, the US SHOULD have announced that any chinese military aircraft getting Close o Pelosi would be shot down, and the US SHOULD have brought carriers in to Cover her trip.
We are likely at a critical point with Tiawan. Xi has a narrow window of advantage for attempting to take Taiwan. This fall and possibly next.
As time moves forward the few relative advantages that China has in weapons is being offset.
Further crossing the Taiwan straight is a massively difficult operation. It is more difficult that D-Day.
And the chinese have absolutey no experience in doing so.
Their army Navy and Airforce are better equiped than Russia. Their Airforce is likely better Trained.
Their Army and Navy are not. Russia has had massive experience in wars over the past 40 years – and still can not handle Ukraine.
China would be undertaking a far more difficult operation, with far less experience. Without aircontrol over the Straights of Taiwan the Chinese would be massacred. The fundimental issues are – Will the US provide airsupport for Taiwan – that means risking US aircraft Carriers,
Presuming that US aircraft carriers can protect themselves from Chinese submaries and long range anti-ship missles – Taiwan can not be invaded.
The rest of the Chinese navy would be sunk quickly if it tried to get involved.
The nomenclature is “REEDUCATION CAMPS.”
The communist (liberal, progressive, socialist, democrat, RINO) mission is propagandization and indoctrination.
“Give me just one generation of youth, and I’ll transform the whole world.”
– Vladimir Lenin
Many continue to claim Justice Thomas has not been denied free speech, and those (frankly petulant) students were merely expressing their own. But It seems to me “speech” is not simply the spoken or written word. In this case (and others; Shapiro comes to mind) people are being denied an opportunity to listen to another point of view, however uncomfortable that might seem. These students and supporting staff members are literally celebrating that they have successfully limited their being exposed to different ideas and hampering their own educational opportunities.
Isn’t the purpose of the university experience to question and debate the positioning of those who came before…this is a process of evolution not eliminating certain points of view before they are presented…
Tolerance and appreciation of others needs to be valued…
Frankly Justice Thomas shouldn’t be lecturing to students in view of his failure to live Up to his disclosure and ethical obligations and his failure to recuse himself in cases in which he has a individual personal interest.
I realize as a Republican people feel he shouldn’t have to live up to or comply with any rules, laws or ethical duties. I also realize that the very same people who work hard to make sure blacks can’t vote will now suggest that criticism of Thomas is racist. In both cases they are wrong but then again we know that Republicans are never wrong.
Justice Holmes : GHW “Poppy” Bush said Clarence was the most qualified man in the country for a seat on SCOTUS.
You are correct for a change. Republicans rarely are wrong. It is not rocket science. Pragmatism, efficiency, logic and good ol’ common sense prevail virtually every time they are tried. OK, Blue Anon, now YOU try it….it will be different and maybe even intellectually rewarding. Grow a pair. Cowboy up, and get on the wagon!
The crazy thing is that the students are limiting their own futures. No one is looking for a lawyer who doesn’t know or believe in the constitution. Clients want a lawyer who has the skills to protect their civil rights. I so resent being forced to cosign the student loans on these diploma mills
Colleges and Universities no longer educate they indoctrinate.
“ In a petition, Justice Thomas (and his wife) were denounced as “actively making life unsafe for thousands of students on our campus.”
That is a flat out lie!!! justice Thomas showing up to teach is not making life unsafe for even one student in that extreme idiotic college that is loaded with kids they are spoiled brat!! Kids!! if anybody’s life would be in danger it would be justice Thomas!! What I don’t understand is why so many colleges, from the President on down don’t stand up to these brats!!! (You betcha I’m mad!!!! Every time I read stuff like this I get mad!! Because it shows me more and more just how weak people have become in my country!!!!!)
And, I’d let them know that you’re not there to run anything whatsoever you’re there to get an education and if you don’t like it you can leave right now. And if you want to cause any trouble???? I will simply call the police and the governor for the National Guard. Because I wouldn’t put up for 1 minute!! because I know mean it would be our way, or the highway. And I wouldn’t put up with even one parent or parents.
Up until about 1980, Leftist academics understood and promoted the distinction between their role as an advocate and their responsibilities as a teacher. They actually understood and taught opposing ideas. And they vigorously defended having on campus, faculty who held those opposing ideas.
Gradually, those types of Leftist academics were replaced by academics with a fascist mindset, who blurred the distinction between advocacy and teaching, and who proclaimed openly: My job is to propagandize students.
As I heard one such type (at a prominent liberal arts college) express it: “My job is to rid students of their admiration for American independence.”
fascists don’t want diverse opinion…they want power and money!
When the GOP controls both houses and presidency….they should REMOVE colleges non-profit status(they pay millions to staff and sports programs…which is a PROFIT) and remove ALL federal backing of higher education. If the education is WORTHWHILE….then people will fund it of their own will! Any non-profit benefiting anyone more than $100k…should have their non-profit status REMOVED! Too many tax shams!
Also cut 50% of federal government and then move the remaining 75% in DC to the heartland!
We have a worse Aristocracy than France in 1788.
Interesting that you draw a comparison with the French Revolution and Robespierre. A classical example of a revolution that runs amuck and then eats it’s own. Also a great contrast to the American Revolution.
The French Empire was the classical example of what happens to an out of touch monarchy when it loses the “Big War”. Germany, Russia and Austria-Hungary of 1914 should have taken note.
Of course, what comes after the reign of terror but Napoleon, who though he fell, remade Europe. The heroes of the French Revolution sort of disappeared from the scene as they died or fled or lost their heads.
Will the democrats eat there own, especially those that are not pure enough? I think the Republicans should continue to do everything to block the democrats from power and let them get more outrageous and eat there own. Take the victories that you can get in Washington, hold to your message, and take it to the states. Thats where you preserve, protect and defend until Washington and it’s minions get over their madness. Take it to the state legislatures who control the purse strings of the major Universities, demand diversity of speech and idea, take the power away form the faculty senates, have the board of governors wield their power. Make school board transparency a must for federal dollars. Disassemble the Dept of Education. It’s just a clearing house for indoctrination. Make those minions there get real jobs.
Ketanji Brown Jackson will rule on one affirmative action case despite recusal pledge
(The N.C. case)
It’s “par for the course” under the Biden Administration. Say one thing, Make it another.
I’m sure KBJ will be anointed just like baby Jesus obama.
The only way this will change is by way of the students themselves. Much like the students in J.K. Rowling’s Harry Potter, the Hogwarts students organized themselves and formed their own “Defense Against the Dark Arts” curriculum when the school administration ruined the official class.
Students who are fed up with being pushed around have much more power than they realize. They can stem the tide of the current trend of collective madness. The psychological term is “mass formation psychosis.”
Students must push back.
This isn’t a denial of free speech, it’s exactly how free speech is supposed to work. Thomas wasn’t denied the opportunity to speak, he chose not to. The students used their freedom of speech to express their feelings. Justices already can almost be fired, they don’t age out, now nobody’s supposed to complain?
Not quite the point here, but thanks for playing. Pick up your participation trophy at the door.
The point as I see it, is not that the students were not able to exercise free speech and assembly, but that they actively tried to deny those rights to others with whom they did not agree. In other words, free speech for me, but not for thee. Universities used to teach people how to think, often times critically. It appears now that many are just teaching group think. And that;’s not a good thing for a free society
Whig, I know I asked this question before, but I don’t know you read all the postings so I am asking again. You posted gun statistics from Sowell. I tried to find it so I could better utilize numbers that make sense. I couldn’t find them. If you have an address or even more information that would lead me to the answer, I would appreciate it. If you no longer have anything additional, can you respond so I know you got this note.
Responded in another thread. May have been a Sowell group on FB. I’ll see if I can find it
Thomas Sowell Foundation. Here is one link https://nygunforum.com/threads/thomas-sowell-on-guns.29514/
Thanks, Whig. I went there and tried to go to the 2016 link but it no longer goes anywhere. I had gotten to the same place earlier but all avenues seem to be closed.
If you have any other ideas let me know. Those numbers jive with some of the things I saw before, but I would like to hear it in Thomas Sowell’s words because I have never seen him publish data that wasn’t of high quality.
Clarence wasn’t forced out; he quit.
Many of your comments rightfully remark about black citizens forced to do or not do things in times past. The KKK was part of that. Most of the time such “forcing” had no violence attached. I guess your history only includes those ideologically synched to yours. Thomas was “forced out”. The KKK exists in your world of cancel culture. Thomas is black and conservative, so your sense of fair play is eliminated.
Thomas wasn’t forced out, the university didn’t fire him nor forbid him to speak. Thomas appears to have decided it wasn’t worth the effort, his choice. Nobody forced him to do anything.
I’m unclear as to what you are saying my views are? You claim I don’t like him because he’s “Black and conservative.” I presume (always dangerous) that you don’t imagine I dislike him because he’s Black? Maybe because he’s conservative? You presume I dislike him at all which wasn’t a part of anything in my comment. I do dislike him but that wasn’t any part of my argument.
Did the number of classes change? That is what he was there for.
You understand the black plight but cannot extend that same understanding to other situations. Your ideology interferes with you proper understanding of the rule of law.
Did they change? Or are you just making up hypotheticals? The number of classes would be tied to enrollment and popularity. If they did change, wouldn’t that be just another expression of free speech? Not as many people wanted to hear him.
You are making up stories again. You can do your own research. When we debated on Trump authorizing troops I provided substantial links from the IG and the summary of events from the Capitol Police. You supplied virtually nothing except insult and then ran away. I will not waste time proving things to you until you learn to behave in an appropriate fashion.
I was responding to your suggestion the number of classes changed. What are you talking about?
Among there things, that is my understanding.
Sadly the Democrats, the Left, and Progressives are massive racists, sexists, and xenophobes. The Democrats fought the appointments of ACB, Thomas, Estrada proving their racism, sexism, and xenophobia! They especially despise blacks who are educated and would dare to marry whites (like Thomas did). And those Democrats are teaching the youth to continue the racist, sexist, and xenophobic tropes of the Left. The Dems have raised these students to be afraid of an educated black man like Justice Thomas. Democrats are the party of racism it’s clear!
I don’t particularly mind that you describe Democrats, the Left, and Progressives, as “massive racists” which is true to some degree. That you omit the current standard bearers who openly appeal to skinheads, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups shows a stunning failure to accept reality.
“That you omit the current standard bearers who openly appeal to skinheads, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups shows a stunning failure to accept reality.”
Many of these crazies cannot be placed in an ideological camp. Take Richard Spencer, perhaps one of the best known White Nationalists. He has been all over the map. Last I heard he was voting for Biden, wanted socialized medicine and all sorts of things one might see on the left.
You confuse the issues and hurt your arguments if you attempt to classify such a person on the right or the left. He is a bigot, a White Nationalist and an anti-Semite. I don’t think the rest matters that much to him or many others like him.
If you want to know where they stand, look at their representation at the Jan 6th insurrection. Their support of DeSantis, Charlottesville, and Trump’s failure to denounce any of those, “very fine people.”
I’m not saying every Republican is one of those people, just that most of them with a preference back Republicans, who welcome them gladly.
Again, Enigma, you create rhetoric that is not in line with the truth. You are not credible to begin with and this doesn’t help. You can quote from the many periodicals that have been wrong on almost every major issue involving Trump. What does that prove? You don’t learn from experience.
Take DeSantis. His actions in Florida didn’t destroy Florida’s economy. You prefer those ideological brethren that caused a lot of pain along with a bad state economy.
Please explain why you keep referring to the “very fine people” remark as some sort of proof of racism, and keep repeating the blatant falsehood that Trump didn’t condemn Neo Nazis. It’s blatantly untrue. I’ve provided you with the full transcript, and even videos, of Trump’s real remarks showing your allegations are untrue.
Why do you keep repeating what you must know by now to be false? Here is the relevant quote, as well as a few other excerpts disproving your allegations AGAIN. I have also linked the entire transcript below AGAIN. I enjoin you to have the integrity to please stop promoting false accusations, as well as casting aspersions based on those untruths on Republican voters.
Trump said, “And you had people — and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists — because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.
“Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people. But you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets, and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group.””
He said this after spending quite a bit of time explaining that there were people who just objected to the removal of Robert E Lee’s statue, just as there are people who object to all of the Left’s destruction of art, statues, and their culling of great literary works because the creators wouldn’t pass muster in the 2020s.
You keep repeating the falsehood that Trump did not denounce Neo Nazis. For shame, Enigma. Trump had denounced white supremacy, Neo Nazis, and racism more than any other president in history. Yet Leftist reporters pretended he’d never done so, and kept asking the same questions. It was shamefully deceitful. In addition, Trump denounced the violence of Antifa when Democrat politicians refused to denounce them and their violence and racism.
“we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry, and violence. It has no place in America. And then it went on from there.”
“I think the driver of the car is a disgrace to himself, his family, and this country. And that is — you can call it terrorism. You can call it murder. You can call it whatever you want. I would just call it as the fastest one to come up with a good verdict. That’s what I’d call it. Because there is a question: Is it murder? Is it terrorism? And then you get into legal semantics. The driver of the car is a murderer. And what he did was a horrible, horrible, inexcusable thing.”
“what about the alt-left that came charging at — excuse me, what about the alt-left that came charging at the, as you say, the alt-right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?
“Let me ask you this: What about the fact that they came charging with clubs in their hands, swinging clubs? Do they have any problem? I think they do. As far as I’m concerned, that was a horrible, horrible day.”
“And you have — you had a group on one side that was bad, and you had a group on the other side that was also very violent. And nobody wants to say that, but I’ll say it right now. You had a group — you had a group on the other side that came charging in, without a permit, and they were very, very violent.””
“but many of those people were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.
“So this week it’s Robert E. Lee. I noticed that Stonewall Jackson is coming down. I wonder, is it George Washington next week? And is it Thomas Jefferson the week after? You know, you really do have to ask yourself, where does it stop?
“But they were there to protest — excuse me, if you take a look, the night before they were there to protest the taking down of the statue of Robert E. Lee.”
“You had a group on one side and you had a group on the other, and they came at each other with clubs — and it was vicious and it was horrible”
Can you please cite examples where mainstream Republicans “openly appeal to skinheads, neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and other hate groups”? Or are you just repeating vicious slander?
Recently, Neo Nazis demonstrated outside a Turning Point USA event. They were not invited, affiliated with, or in any way condoned by TP. They wanted them to leave, but were told they could not because they were on public property.
The View slandered them by claiming that the Neo Nazis were part of TP USA. After receiving a letter from Charlie Kirk’s lawyers, they were forced to apologize, on air, repeatedly. But the damage by savage untruths is done so easily.
Are you referring to Trump talking about people who didn’t want statues destroyed, but he wasn’t talking about the “neo Nazis and white supremacists who should be condemned totally”?
You keep claiming that conservatives support white supremacy and Neo Nazis based on nothing else but propaganda. It’s not true. Hear what I’m telling you. Candace Owens, Condoleeza Rice, Thomas Sowell, and Ben Carson do not affiliate with or support white supremacists.
A white conservative would rather their children marry a black conservative than a white far Left activist. This is because it is about values, not skin color.
It’s the Democrat Party which has returned to its racist roots. They proclaim that all whites are racist. That it’s OK to racially discriminate against Asians in hiring and college admissions because they’re too successful. They normalized racist slurs against black conservatives, and try to terrorize them for not voicing opinions as they’re told. If you don’t vote for Biden, “you ain’t black.”
A belief in limited government and robust individual freedoms is not racist. Since Democrats have no answer to the failure of their policies, they fall back on ad hominem and, frankly, making stuff up to assassinate the character of their opponents.
Come on, Enigma. Do you think I support skinheads, Neo Nazis, and white supremacists?
“Stajnd back and stand by!”
As far as your support of all these organizations, I don’t suspect you contribute to them or attend meetings. I do think you look they other way, ignore their actions, deny their existence and participation in the Republican Party. I do think you do all of those.
Trump told his followers to peacefully let their voices be heard. He was never referring to violence. Never asked them to do violence.
Compare and contrast with Kamala Harris, who said the violent riots can and should continue.
Compare and contrast with Maxine Waters, who told a mob to “make a crowd. Make sure they know they aren’t welcome anywhere anymore.”
Nancy Pelosi, “I don’t know why there aren’t uprisings. Perhaps there will be.”
Chuck Schumer, “You have unleashed the whirlwind, Kavanaugh!”
I have never once condoned rioting, looting, arson, or any other law breaking. I have remarked that most of the January 6th participants were charged with trespassing and illegally parading. Yet they were thrown into solitary confinement for 9 months. Meanwhile, BLM and Antifa protestors rioted, looted, committed arson, burned down a police precinct, assaulted cops, killed cops, assaulted whites, Asians, and Jews based on race and religion, barged into restaurants and threatened diners unless they gave a loyalty oath, demanded white people kneel before black people, and they even seized entire city blocks in Seattle, held it at gunpoint, and refused to allow police, fire, and EMTs to enter, even to respond to rapes and gunshot victims. Yet, most participants either were not charged, or were diverted to rehabilitation programs. It was all OK, because they were mad. I truthfully commented that justice was not equally applied. You seem to have a problem with this. You keep complaining that I’m not taking Jan 6th seriously. You expect me to believe that a group that included some guy in blue paint and bison horns was somehow going to take over the entire US government.
That’s ludicrous, Enigma. Taking it seriously does not equate to believing a disproven conspiracy theory explicitly designed to distract from the utter lawlessness and violence perpetrated by Democrats on major cities across the country for a year.
Most of those in the Capitol were smiling and taking selfies. Many were allowed in by the Capitol police, on camera, and told not to break anything. Of those, a few did property damage, and interrupted a Congressional proceeding. They were charged as such. It was not a coup. They were protesting the election, which apparently is only allowed if you’re a Democrat.
Now let’s talk about Bannon. A couple of sentences were lifted without any context.
As many of us have explained to you, Leftists routinely make false allegations of racism. It’s character assassination when they cannot debate the merits of policies. Overfaced? Call them a racist, homophobe, transphobe, xenophobic bigot. Then we waste all this time trying to defend ourselves by people who just giggle and keep repeating the false accusations.
You know you’ve scored points in a debate when a Democrat begins sputtering that you’re a racist with either no evidence, or heavily edited quotes taken out of context.
Bannon was addressing the French. France has been struggling with a crush of asylum seekers from regions of the world infamous for crimes against women, gays, and Jews. Upon arrival, crimes against women, gays, and Jews skyrocketed to the point that there are parts of France that Jews dare not tread any longer. The Leftist activists in government resisted addressing these problems. They called those who objected racist, xenophobic…you know the routine. There were also the Yellow Jacket protests. The French were getting tired of polices that directly harmed them.
Bannon gave a speech criticizing globalists. If you don’t support globalism, if you believe that individual countries should govern themselves, rather than be dictated to by the EU, forced to take in more refugees and asylum seekers than the infrastructure can support, then you’re called racist xenophobe. If you support nuclear energy over expensive and unreliable wind and solar, you don’t care about the Earth. It’s always ad hominem.
The leaders of Hungary have given many speeches and interviews on this very topic. They are Hungarian. They wish to preserve their Hungarian culture, in part, by deciding for themselves how many immigrants they can absorb, and turning away illegal immigration.
The US has learned to its detriment what unfettered immigration and open borders does. The very Democrats who claimed that building a wall was xenophobic and racist are now forced to work on expanding Trump’s wall that they brought to a standstill. Across our border, violent drug cartel human smugglers rape women and children, and hang their underwear in rape trophy trees to taunt Border Patrol. Sex trafficking is a booming industry right now. The rhetoric that if you object to illegal immigration you must be a racist xenophobe is quietly losing steam. Immigration should be responsibly controlled, not a free for all.
Now, I don’t agree with Steve Bannon on many things. I do not in any way condone with his choice of wording or rhetoric. The quote was tailor made fodder to be taken out of context for the very trouble he’s found himself. However, if you can find unedited video or transcripts, you can see that he was not actually telling people to BE racist. It was along the lines of, you know you’re getting to them when they resort to calling you those names. Just give a Gallic shrug and figure you’ve gotten under their skin.
You are an enabler, an appeaser, you deny racism which allows it to flourish. You can tell yourself it isn’t occurring, you’re wasting your efforts on me.
More Steve Bannon quotes, who was senior advisor to the President”
“Look, are there some people that are white nationalists that are attracted to some of the philosophies of the alt-right? Maybe. Are there some people that are anti-Semitic that are attracted? Maybe. Right? Maybe some people are attracted to the alt-right that are homophobes, right? But that’s just like, there are certain elements of the progressive left and the hard left that attract certain elements.”
“When two-thirds or three-quarters of the CEOs in Silicon Valley are from South Asia or from Asia, I think… A country is more than an economy. We’re a civic society.”
“We’re the platform for the alt-right,” (While head of Breitbart
” What if the people getting shot by the cops did things to deserve it? There are, after all, in this world, some people who are naturally aggressive and violent.”
He is actually defending racists and telling them it’s alright to be racist. You say you don’t in any way condone his words but in the same paragraph do exactly that.
You printed alot of Bannon quotes – what is it that you think are wrong with them ?
There are violent nutcases attracted to the left in far greater numbers than the right – and the left does nothing about it – if anything they actively encourage it.
Do you know how many unarmed black men are shot by the police each year ? The number is tiny. It is less than the innocent black kids killed in chicago in a week of violence.
Pointing out that the police shoot people who are violent is not racist.
I am not a huge Bannon fan – but your attempt to paint him as a racist failed horribly.
Did you actually read the quotes you cited ?
You seem to think that facts are racist ?
I realize my error in giving some of you more credit than you deserve. We have no common ground, you are either blind to racism or defend it. You aren’t a huge Bannon fan but. . . You perhaps missed the part where he knowingly, purposefully was the host site for the alt-right.
The Bannon quotes (along with one from Trump) were in response to provide examples of mainstream Republicans who encouraged racists. Bannon does that, and you have no problem. What does that make you?
“I realize my error in giving some of you more credit than you deserve. We have no common ground, you are either blind to racism or defend it.”
My Chinese daughter experiences racism all the time – frequently from blacks. I am very well aware of actual racism. Not the fake nonsense you spread arround. My Daughter is targets by Real people who make it REAL clear that they are doing so because she is Chinese.
There is no nonsense about “systemic racism” i.e. pretend racism driven by bad understanding of statistics.
What she experiences is REAL, and In her face racism.
“You aren’t a huge Bannon fan but. . . You perhaps missed the part where he knowingly, purposefully was the host site for the alt-right.”
Nope, do not care.
YOU are the one pretending that “alt-right” means racist. Is Enrique Tarrio – a black hispanic “alt-right” figure who leads the proud boys a “racist” ?
Is Milo Yiannopoulos also an “alt-right” figure a homophobe ?
I can disagree with people like Bannon, Tarrio, or Yiannopoulos, without resorting to stupid and false insults.
But you can not.
“The Bannon quotes (along with one from Trump) were in response to provide examples of mainstream Republicans who encouraged racists. Bannon does that, and you have no problem. What does that make you?”
And your quotes not merely failed to prove your point – they refuted it.
I constantly have accused you of a lack of critical thinking skill. Increasingly the word “critical” seems unnecescary.
Something is not racist – because you do not like it.
Read your own posts, by the classical definition of racist – you are blatantly racist.
You are constantly blaming whites for every bad thing that has ever happened.
You blame those who have acted badly,.
You blame those who did not.
You blame those who were arround when bad acts occured,
You blame those generations later merely for failing to share your perception of what happened in the past or your perception of its scale.
And the prime criteria for YOUR judgement of others is RACE.
That is racism by the classical definition.
The FACT that I have to say “clasical defintion of racism” rather than just racism is proof of your own racism.
And your attack on Bannon for his efforts to do EXACTLY what you have done – and coopt the defintion of racism for his own ends,
is further proof of your racism.
As I said – I am not in agreement with Bannon on many things.
But he gets my Kudos for brilliantly coopting your tactics.
If you can redefine Racism – so can he.
“He is actually defending racists and telling them it’s alright to be racist.”
Only if you can;’t read.
Similar to what Bannon said, there are xenophobes and racists who are attracted to nationalism, yet both Ghandi and Nelson Mandela were nationalists.
Likewise, love can be the motivation for both good and evil. Ask any incarcerated felon who killed his ex. That doesn’t make love itself evil.
The millions of illegal immigrants who have flooded our borders since Biden took office, the rape trees, the sex trafficking of women and kids, and all the abandoned and dead kids left by cartels in the desert attest to the fallacy of unfettered illegal immigration through open borders. Responsible immigration policy only allows legal immigration, and at numbers and configurations that coincide with the jobs market, and support infrastructure. Opposing illegal immigration is not racist, which is why black, Asian, Pacific Islander, and Latino conservatives hold this position. This is because most legal immigration is non white, as well as the obvious catastrophic consequences of illegal immigration for everyone involved. And yet…white supremacists oppose illegal immigration for very different reasons.
Good people support prison reform so that the punishment fits the crime. Gangs also support prison reform because they might do less time. Does that make prison reform a criminal endeavor?
As for his early comments about the alt-right, it originally stood for “alternative right.” I remember when it first came about. It was anti-establishment. It was against Republicans who were ineffectual and kept caving. It wasn’t until later that enough bad elements were attracted to a right movement disenfranchised with establishment Republicanism that the entire movement because infamous. That was helped along by the media who kept portraying it as racist, xenophobe, homophobe, etc. The racist, xenophobes, homophobes etc said, really? We have a movement? Great! Let’s join!
Do you know another way to put “what if those shot by the cops did something to deserve it”? It’s called “justified use of force.” If a man gets shot by a cop while grappling for his gun, he did something to deserve it. People who try to assault or murder cops, and get shot in the process, include people who are “naturally aggressive or violent.” Otherwise known as psychopaths or antisocial, although I would argue that only some are born that way. Others are ruined by their environment. Nonetheless, violent psychopaths prey upon their community and law enforcement.
Do you disagree with the statement that if you did something that justified getting shot by the cops, you are probably aggressive or violent? If someone was peaceful and law abiding, then they wouldn’t have done something that justified getting shot by cops, now would they?
The leap you made that was too far was assuming that an entire race would be tainted by that brush. Is every black person doing something that would legally justify getting shot by cops? Why, no. In fact, violent and aggressive sociopaths, such as gang members, are preying upon black people in their communities. They’re selling drugs to kids, threatening them unless they join a gang, getting kids on the wrong path, having shootouts in the street, shooting people who “disrespect them” while they idle at a drive thru with their little kids, and shooting pregnant women walking their babies in strollers.
The people who prey upon communities need to be taken OFF THE STREET so as to protect the white, black, Asian, Latino, Pacific Islander, and Native Americans who are law abiding, innocent people, living in this country.
Sorry, Enigma, but skin color is not a pass to break the law, or be violent. Condemning violent people is not condemning an entire race. Obviously.
You just compared Bannon to Ghandi? That’s gotta be a record.
“You just compared Bannon to Ghandi? ”
I would note that Post Aparteid South Africa is a complete basket case.
Today SA’s GDP/capita is 1/2 that of China.
Another basket case is Haiti. Not only were their natural resources and labor exploited before they got their freedom. They were forced to pay France reparations for their financial losses and boycotted by western nations including and especially the United States for daring to be free.
South Africa is the same because way too many of their resources are still outside of the control of the rightful owners.
More of this blame everyone else nonsense.
Haitti and South Africa exist RIGHT NOW, in the real world.
Whatever the past, they have the ability to make their own future.
In South Africa you say that “too many of their resources are in outside the control of their rightful owners”.
There are so many things wrong with that. But ignoring myriads of stupid myths about south africa and its past.
Those resources you are ranting about have in many instance been confiscated by those you consider “rightful owners”.
And the econjomic conseuqnces have been disasterous.
Africa as a whole is one of the most resource rich regions in the planet – so Why did modern civilization start in the eastern mediterainian and slowly move north and west ?
You can not pretend that colonialisation is the cause – when Africa was backwards and undeveloped BEFORE colonization.
Your idiotic explotation thesis completely fails as you go back in time – because you do not have to go back very far to jump from a global world to a continental world to a regional world to a local world.
The reason that racial slavery was rare 2000 years ago is that people had virtually no knowledge or interaction with peoples a few hundred miles away much less another continent. We did not have racial slavery and racial hatred – because we had tribal slavery and tribal hatred and people just did not interact with other races. Regardless, they still conquered, enslaved and exploited their neighbors.
Back to the main point – so Why didn’t africa develop written languages ? mathematics ? Why has Africa been in the stone age through to the present ?
I am not offering answers. But I am saying that until you can explain that – you have no valid grounds to claim that but for colonialization or whites or whatever Africa would be better off.
The FACT is whatever you think about the colonial period – the native peoples in most colonies improved their standard of living more during colonial periods than since.
Until fairly recently – when India noticed the success fo China and started to incorporate more free markets, the standard of living in india did no rise after the british left. Africa – despite over a Trillion in foreign aide over 40 years has not increased its standard of living since the colonial period.
Japan is one of the most resource poor nations in the world. They must buy nearly all the resources they consume from elsewhere.
Yet, they have risen from feudalism and poverty to one of the wealthiest nations in the world.
There are requisites for success, Owning – even having natural resources is not one of those.
England Scotland, Ireland are not particularly resource rich countries – yet in your world view through magic they somehow colonized the world.
Your angry with Bannon because he is smart enough to figure out how to neuter one of your most powerful weapons.
Labeling someone a racist only has power if it is a stigma.
As you abuse and overuse the term you destroy that power, Bannon has just recognized fairly early that the power of that label, the stigma is almost gone – because you have made the term meaningless.
Don;t blame Bannon for what you have done to yourself.
Enigma, you should ask yourself what made Singapore a success when there were three major groups that didn’t get along?
What did India look like before the British? What happened after the British left and then what happened when India changed its focus to the marketplace?
I find left wing nuts discussing he so-called “alt-right” – stupid and Boring.
If the proud boys and oath keepers are the fringe of the right – the right is pretty tame.
Certainly there are some cretins allegedly on the right.
I find Rick Santorum personally offensive – but he is not considered alt-right.
Regardless, the number of actually dangerous members of the right nationally – are dwarfed by the members of Antifa in Portland.
We have large numbers of dangerous groups in the US – you have to go way-way-way down on the list to find any from the “right”
Bannon’s statement is like all those conservatives who gleefully bought t-shirts that said “deplorable”, or Democrats who wore genitalia hats.
Biden ALSO said at the exact same French speech, “Trump’s economic nationalism does not care about your race, your religion, your ethnicity…It cares about one thing: Are you a citizen of the Untied States of America?”
Are black Americans citizens? yes
Are Asian Americans citizens? yes
Are Middle Easter Americans citizens? yes
Are Easter European Americans citizens? yes
Are Latino Americans citizens? yes
There is no American race. Anyone of any race can be a citizen. Opposing illegal immigration and supporting legal immigration, which is mostly non-white, is by definition not racist. Prioritizing the needs of American citizens over any other country is what elected leaders and politicians are elected to do. Citizens are composed of all races, therefor this is not racist. Since he supports legal immigration, he’s not xenophobic, either.
Wanting to preserve the culture of America is not xenophobic, either, any more than wanting to keep France French and London British would be. It’s about CULTURE, not skin color. Note all the French and British citizens of color who are fully French and British in culture. Wanting to keep France safe for French Jews is also not xenophobic.
“Wanting to preserve the culture of America is not xenophobic,”
Making America great again is about preserving a specific culture, at the expense of all the others. That is the American way though, why wouldn’t you defend it.
“Making America great again is about preserving a specific culture, at the expense of all the others.”
The only group trying to destroy a culture is the left – which is actively seeking to eradicate the culture that not only brought about this country as it is – including our diversity, but brought us the entire modern world.
Where did the concept of self government come from ? Where did the concept of individual rights come from ? Where did modern economics come from ? Modern Physics ? Modern Math ? Where did the scottish enlightenment come from ? Where did the industrial revolution come from ?
You rant about slavery – where did the idea that slavery is not moral come from ?
Some of these very important ideas have thousands of years of development – going back through Germany, Rome, Greece, the Mideast, India, even China. But the pinnacle – the latest stage in development all comes from ONE culture.
And you are seeking to eradicate that culture.
Even the concept of cultural diversity – comes from the very culture you seek to destroy.
I have no problem with you spending a appropriate portion of school history lessons teachin the flaws of that culture – and the good things of other cultures. But that appropriate portion is a small part of the time that must be spent on the successes.
Those successes are critical and MUST be taught. They must be taught – even if they are the successes of China or India or Africa.
Because those successes are also reflections of important truths we have learned over thousands of years.
Some of the foundations of those successes come from other parts of the world.
On Netflix you can find the history of Maths – and it will provide you with the contributions to mathematics of many past cultures throughout the world.
But nearly every development in Math and Physics and science and economics, and government in the past 500 years came from the same western culture.
Again – teach the acheivements of other cultures. No one minds. teach the failures of western cultures – that is important to.
But quit trying to destroy the most successful culture of the past 500 years. One that the entire modern world is dependent on.
I pointed out to EB that the most succesful culture in modern history is the anglo subset of western culture.
It is likely that EB will claim that is racist.
For a significant portion of the past 500 years that anglo culture has been exclusively white.
But that is less so today. The success is of the culture of specific ideas, not of a specific race.
Today the advancement of math, physics, economics, …. are all still driven by the west – and primarily by the anglosphere.
But a portion of the contributors are chinese, or hispanic, or black. or ….
Thomas Sowell is possibly one of the greatest living economists today.
a portion of the great modern entrepeneurs in this country are chinese or indian or pakistani or ….
American culture is contageous and incredibly successful.
We can debate how many immigrants we should allow into the US from central america, south america, asia, ….
But there is absolutely no doubt that regardless of where they come from some portion of todays immigrants will change the world.
Further about 1/3 of a billion people world wide would come to the US if they could.
The nation with the largest number of immigrants in the world is the US – By far.
almost half of all the immigrants in the world are in the US.
Thank you Enigma: Karen S. is a highly opinionated Fox disciple who believes everything they tell her, every spin on the facts, who falls for every culture war bs they put out and no facts can dissuade her. You are 100% correct in pointing out that Trump said there were “very fine people” on “both sides” in Charlottesville, which at Kellyanne’s urging after it was clear that this was praise for murderers who killed a peaceful protester, tried to walk back. We all heard it. That he supported White Supremacists was not a one-off.
Enigma, preserving culture is not racist. Culture is not about skin color.
Western culture differs from others, in its approach to women’s rights, equality under the law, and other crucial aspects of human life. People who live in America generally believe that a Western country is the best place to live. For instance, a gay or lesbian person would rather live in a Western nation than Saudi Arabia, where it’s a capital offense. Countries generally express the views of those who live there, so people who live in one part of the world will have different values than in other parts of the world, and those who want to live there will think their way is best.
Having a preference is not xenophobic. The Japanese people are not xenophobic or racist for wishing to preserve their culture.
What does “making America great again” mean?
– negotiating alliances, trade deals, and getting into agreements that benefit America, which is the job a president and Congress are elected to do. The president’s job is not to strengthen China or Russia at the expense of the US.
– strengthening America’s position in no way impacts charitable giving
-improving the standard of living for as many Americans as possible by brining down the cost of living, and creating an environment where businesses thrive so people will have more opportunities
-reversing the course on anti-americanism, which has been promoted by Russian and Chinese active measures. The purpose of anti-American rhetoric is to destroy the US from within. It’s been well-documented how China has promoted propaganda such as that the US is irredeemably racist, ironic given the systemic racism in China.
-improving our military strength in order to reduce the risk of foreign wars. No one is afraid to anger Joe Biden, but they think twice before poking a sleeping bear.
It is absolutely ludicrous to pretend that prioritizing American interests in public policy is racist or xenophobic.
The PM of the UK is elected to do what’s best for the UK.
The President of France is elected to do what’s best for France.
This is the modus operandi of the Left. Pretend that a benign statement is evil, and then use that assertion as evidence that it’s true.
I never compared Bannon to Ghandi. Do not misunderstand or misrepresent me. Read it again. Ghandi and Nelson Mandela were both nationalists. So was Hitler. Does that make Ghandi and Nelson Mandela evil fascists because Hitler was also a nationalist? Of course not. Nationalism is not bad in and of itself. It’s the actions taken based on a motivation that are good or bad.
Tax evaders like when taxes are reduced. So do single mothers struggling to make ends meet on one paycheck. Does that make it a character flaw to support lower taxes?
Why is there so little reasoning, and such a rush to ad hominem in politics today? Why do you keep wasting my time with spurious accusations?
Another example. . . https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/steve-bannon-call-racist-wear-badge-honor/story?id=53656814
Aparently logic eludes you.
YOU made being called racist into a badge of honor – but changing its meaning from someone who hates others on the basis of races, to the people YOU hate on the basis of ideology, and label those whose ideology you reject as racist.
You changes the meaning of Racist – you changed it from a perjorative about race o a perjorative about ideology.
Bannon’s comment is no different from the myriads of people when bought “deplorables” T-Shirts after Hillary’s attack on trump Supporters as deplorable.
If you want words to keep their stigma – you should not change their meaning. This is on you not Bannon.
You mean Bannon and you are no different.
Bannon and I are quite different.
But you are not capable of meaningful debate with either of us.
Bannon took advantage of YOUR idiotic redefining or racism to embrace and destigmatize YOUR ideological version of the term.
Frankly that was brilliant.
I would note that Blacks have done much the same with the N word.
Turnabout is fair play.
Again this is no different from the flurry of “deplorables” T-Shirts that appeared after Hillary’s idiotic remarks.
Regardless, I have warned you over and over that messing witht he meaning of words is stupid and dangerous.
Bannon is just shown YOU that you do not own the word “racist” – that if you can define it, so can he.
And your over use and misuse has empowered him.
I do not think that millions of people are going to rush out and nuy T-Shirts labeling themselves as “racist” …. yet.
The word still has too much stigma.
But Bannon;’s remark should make it clear to you that, YOUR overuse and misuse of the word are eroding its impact.
And maybe not today – but soon enough if you keep it up – there will be people proudly wearing “Racist” T-Shirts – because YOU have made “racist” mean something different.
Just like you, to blame the actions of the racists on those they hate. I gave you too much credit but I won’t make that error again.
“Just like you, to blame the actions of the racists on those they hate.”
Very bizzare argument.
Bannon said absolutely nothing about hating anyone.
He took ownership of a hateful epitaph YOU used on him – and was able to do so, because YOU had diminished its sting.
The only person spewing hate is You. The only one talking about hate is you.
Bannon is not talking about hate. You are.
“I gave you too much credit”
Nope, you underestimate everyone all the time.
The entire point of this thread is that you underestimated Bannon.
“but I won’t make that error again.”
Of course you will. Again you underestimate others all the time.
And you will do it again and again.
Your problems are easy to solve. Think before you post, write more clearly and while you are writing actually think about what you write actually means, what the implications are, and how easily it will be to turn what you have written arround on you.
If you tried that – you would realize how weak and usually eroneous your arguments were. You would arrive closer to the truth – without the assistance of others.
You can do as you please – but do not blame others – true or more likely false – it will not fix anything.
“Bannon said absolutely nothing about hating anyone.
He took ownership of a hateful epitaph YOU used on him – and was able to do so, because YOU had diminished its sting.
The only person spewing hate is You. The only one talking about hate is you. Bannon is not talking about hate. You are.”
John, I have seen this type of prejudice and hate from people before. Enigma makes it clear that he has something up his butt, and is hiding it in clear sight.
It is a good possibility that Enigma, being successful, is racist against his own black community that hasn’t made it. Everything he talks about is from the past and is frequently untrue. He has no interest in the black community, today living in ghetto-like communities destroyed by government policy and the lack of education from parents and schools.
I think he is directing his racism through other people. We have an example of similar behavior in the early 20th century. In that case the community worked to better the lives of the rest for both charitable and selfish reasons.
“John, I have seen this type of prejudice and hate from people before. Enigma makes it clear that he has something up his butt, and is hiding it in clear sight.”
Likely, I am not reaching up his butt to check. There is plenty that is noxious in plain site.
“It is a good possibility that Enigma”
I am not looking to engage is trying to understand what is going on in EB’s mind.
What comes out in his posts is bad enough.
Regardless, he is a classical racist. He demonstrates that constantly. He has bought into sterotypes of white people rooted in incredibly poor and horribly over generalized bastardizations of history.
Enigma, without a doubt, John is not a racist. Between the three of you, Bannon, John, and yourself, you are, by far, the one who sounds most racist and doesn’t even recognize it.
Frankly, you calling me names means nothing, neither does your exoneration of others.
Enigma, I don’t expect it means anything to you. After all 20 years before he was born you claim an incident proved Trump a racist. You believe hearsay. You give no credibility to the IG report or the Capitol police summary.
Everybody who is white protects racists unless they announce their privilege. That is a mindset no one can deal with.
Repeating the same lie, no matter how many times, will never make it true.
I don’t have prove myself. You did it for me. You even changed your blog backdating it to hide your tracks.
You can keep denying the truth and you can even deny the truth to yourself, but that won’t change the truth.
I am not calling you names. It is self evident by your own remarks that your remarks meet the classic definition of racism.
Racism: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities
You have repeatedly inaccurately broad brushed american history claiming that one race was and still is immutably defined by specific traits and capacities.
You hopefully recognize I wasn’t talking to you.
Do not care.
I addressed your arguments.
That’s just silly, you can’t address me being called names by someone else by saying you didn’t call me names. Just admit you made a mkstake.
I can not verify the threading on JT.org, but I responded to a reply of yours to me.
Further please read what I actually wrote.
paraphrasing I said that calling you racist was not calling you names – because your conduct meets the definition of racist.
I was responding to Someone/Allan/S.Meyer/Anonymous and any other fake names he goes by. I suppose it’s a plus you think you can identify any racists at all, just not any that look like you.
I have no idea what you think you were doing.
But your response showed up in my inbox as a reply to my comment.
And even if it had not. SM is correct – you are a a racist.
Identifying racists is easy. “a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities”
That certainly fits you. You generalize falsely about whites and blacks based on their race. That is racism.
You want to see a racist statement?
“Back to the main point – so Why didn’t africa develop written languages ? mathematics ? Why has Africa been in the stone age through to the present ?”
First – I over generalized. I am not interested in the efforts to try to re-frame the history of north African countries. If you really want to debate whether Cleopatra or Tutankhamen were black – we can go at that.
But this debate is about sub-Saharan, …. black Africa. This debate – as YOU have framed it is about race.
Lets pretend for a moment that your claims are correct – What the h311 happened ? There is zero doubt that Africa is the most resource rich continent on the planet. There is no place on earth with the wealth of natural resources of Africa.
Why isn’t a Africa a global superpower ? Why is it that at no time in recorded history was Africa a global superpower ?
Different places on earth have been the center of civilization at one period or another. But none of those have slid backwards into tribalism. Almost no place on earth, has been the font of culture and the forefront of the advance of knowledge and drifted backwards after some other region took the lead.
If you wish to believe in some fictional past Wakanda – be my guest, though there is little evidence of consequential sub Saharan greatness.
But ultimately we are left with two choices – sub-Saharan Africa is the worlds greatest example of catastrophic decline from civilization.
Or Sub-Saharan Africa never was much of anything.
Long before Europeans colonized Africa it was far behind much of the world.
The distance from liberia to Brazil is abotu 1/3 that from Portugal to Hispaniola.
Winds and currents run from Gambia to the mew world – as well as from south africa to brazil.
Why did the europeans colonize the western hemisphere as well as Africa itself ?
The chinese had a blue water navy before the 15th century. As did the greeks 2000 years ago.
When was the African age of global exploration and trade ?
You say there is an ancient written history – what works of consequence can I read ?
We can read greek plays. We can read all kinds of literature from india and china for 2000 years.
You say that there was african mathematics – where did it go ?
What peoples EVER have fallen dramatically backward ?
You “Over generalized.” what you did and are continuing to do is to infer that a whole race of people is less accomplished, less intelligent, and less capable. You now change the conversation and limit it to sub saharan Africa with the suggestion that Northern Africa was the result of white influence. Before that influence came that area was mostly Black as well. You somehow skipped the development of written language and math in sub saharan Africa provided. I don’t doubt you believe everything you write, that’s part of the problem, what you teach each other. Yiour insistence that Africa is in the stone age shows your ignorance. I won’t try to teach you because you are on auto-pilot to reject anything I say. It’s development had been retarded because it has been raped and pillaged by what you might call Western Civilization. I’m going to laugh at this one for a while, you aren’t racist, you over generalize, and even then you meant it to say you spoke of too broad an area as opposed to acknowledging it spoke to your prejudice.
This is an episode from a series you might watch if you truly want to learn something. There is a preface from a lawyer friend of m,one that posted it on Facebook. It looks like it was meant just for you.
“I was taught Black Africa didn’t have a written history or civilization of note. Of course, that was false. Here’s an episode on Egypt from the documentary series by the UN & BBC on the history of Africa. It clarifies that ancient Egypt was Black African prior to invasion. There are several episodes in the series discussing several African civilizations, including Kush, Aksum, Ghana, Zimbabwe & so on. Quite lovely to see African history taught by Africans.”
“You “Over generalized.” what you did and are continuing to do is to infer that a whole race of people is less accomplished, less intelligent, and less capable.”
I am not inferring anything. It is a fact that sub Saharan africa does not match the historical accomplishments of any other region on earth despite more resources than anywhere else on earth.
You are free to offer whatever explanations you wish as to why.
You owe all of us an explaination why this region is the least accomplished in all of history,
And why the anglosphere which you constantly piss on is the most accomplished.
You have offered slavery as an explanation for all kinds of things.
But that explanation fails for 99.99% of human history.
“You now change the conversation and limit it to sub saharan Africa”
Yes, North africa may not rise to the level of Europe in accomplishments. But it has some.
“the suggestion that Northern Africa was the result of white influence.”
I eliminated north africa specifically to avoid any debate over “white influence”
There is no reasonable debate over white influence in sub Saharan africa prior to the colonial period.
“Before that influence came that area was mostly Black as well.”
That is a poorly supported claim. The only genetic testing done on Tutankhamen indicates that he is of European decent.
You can challenge that – but even if you succeed – you merely get us back to “unknown”.
“You somehow skipped the development of written language and math in sub saharan Africa provided.”
Because the evidence is poor and the extent inconsequential, and the best that can possibly said is that if those things occured – the region either lost those accomplishments or MAYBE just never advanced them.
If there was a written language – where is its literature ? I can read greek plays. I can read multi millenea old litterature from India and China. Even the Norse who were tribal until the last two millenea – have Beowulf from the 6th century.
“I don’t doubt you believe everything you write”
If you want me to write something different provide FACTS.
“that’s part of the problem, what you teach each other.”
If you want something different taught – provide evidence.
“Your insistence that Africa is in the stone age shows your ignorance.”
I believe prior to colonization some parts of it managed to get to early iron age.
South and Central america were more advanced when Columbus arrived in the new world.
So called native “north americans” appear to fall behind central and south americans but ahead of sub saharan africa.
Again provide evidence otherwise and I will be happy to revise my views.
“I won’t try to teach you because you are on auto-pilot to reject anything I say.”
Because all you do is spew a steady diet of racial hatred.
What I am doing is reversing the narative on you. With one difference. It is pretty inarguable that for the past 500 years Europe and European descent have lead the world, and for the past 300 years The anglosphere has lead the world.
You rant about racism. The entire concept that cultural, racial and religious diversity might be a good thing, come from the people you HATE. Your entire moral attack on the west one whites is rooted in values that come from the west.
Even today I am hard pressed to think of anywhere outside of Europe and the anglosphere where consequential diversity exists.
You are arguing that the only culture and people in the world to try to get beyond racism are the most racist.
So why would I want to be taught by you ?
“It’s development had been retarded because it has been raped and pillaged by what you might call Western Civilization.”
The Boers arrived in South africa in 1652. Substantial portions were unpeopled at the time.
Regardless, what is your explaination for the retarded development for the prior 1500 years ? or 7000 years ? or 150,000 years ?
“I’m going to laugh at this one for a while, you aren’t racist, you over generalize, and even then you meant it to say you spoke of too broad an area as opposed to acknowledging it spoke to your prejudice.”
More nonsense. The entire history of the world is not about black persecution.
“I was taught Black Africa didn’t have a written history or civilization of note. Of course, that was false. Here’s an episode on Egypt from the documentary series by the UN & BBC on the history of Africa. It clarifies that ancient Egypt was Black African prior to invasion. There are several episodes in the series discussing several African civilizations, including Kush, Aksum, Ghana, Zimbabwe & so on. Quite lovely to see African history taught by Africans.”
I excluded north africa to avoid this debate. But you seem prepared to jump in with both feet.
New kingdom Egyptions – that is from the Time of Tutankhamun or the 18th dynasty or about 1300BC appear to be of western european origen. Haplogroup, called R1b1a2.
We are only starting DNA analysis of humans 3000+ years ago. So maybe that will change. but as of this time it is highly unlikely that Egypts rulers were black during the past 3500 years. We have no good reason to make any assumptions at all prior to that – yet.
With respect to prior African civilizations – Again – what happened to them ? China did not descend back to tribalism. Nor did India.
Nor south or central america. For all the problems in the mideast – it still did not descended into tribalism.
The development of math went from Sumeria. to egypt to china to india to europe, with stops along the way.
But nowhere did it go backward. Many parts of the world have been the center of culture at one period or another.
And later some other place leap frogged them. Given enough time that will likely happen to the west.
But in no place did faster advance elsewhere cause them to go backwards.
I am doing the same thing to african culture that you are doing to western culture.
With a few obvious and important distinctions.
First I am using Actual facts,
Next the contrast is self evident.
You rant that europens F’d up Africa. If Africa was so advanced why were africans unable to thwart that ?
For nearly all of human civilization advanced cultures killed and enslaved less advanced ones.
You rant about the evil racist white men who F’d over africa.
Are you saying that at the time Michelangelo was building St. Peters – that Africa had its equivalents of Michelangelo, Leonardo, Donatello ? Or are you going to claim that Brunelleshi’s the Duomo was constructed by african slaves
Grow up, you are using a stupid and obviously false narrative to try to rewrite the history of the world, and especially the west.
The Renaissance was almost over before the first African slave arrived in the new world.
And since you think that North Africa was principle black, modern research indicates that north african muslims enslaved 1-1.25 white christians from Europe from 1500-1800 – about the same time frame as africans were being enslaved in the new world.
The key point I am trying to make with you is that if you try to rewrite world history wrapped arround this stupid narrative that everything is about the enslavement of africans – YOU WILL FAIL.
Because it is not.
I do not personally give much of a crap about whether Tutankhamen was black or not.
But YOU do.
You keep trying to rewrite all of history.
You require ancient egypt to be black
You require all of european history to rest on a foundation of african slaves – even though Europe was thriving before the advent of african slavery.
If you want to insist that north africa was black – fine whatever race they were they enslaved 1M-1.25M white christians.
Regardless, I am not going to have difficulty shredding your narrative, because few every anecdote you have I will have hundreds of facts.
And yes, much of modern history has been written by people of European descent – because they could write.
Because they invented the printing press.
Because they were making guns and cannon when most of the world was making spears and arrows.
Because they were painting the Sistine chapel when Africa was paining pots.
Because they were building cathedrals when Africa was building huts.
Because they were inventing clocks, and telescopes, and microscopes, and steam engines, when the rest of he world was doing what ?
Because they were inventing calculus, and physics,
Because they circumnavigated the earth when Africa was not managing to cross lakes.
And all of this without an African slave in site.
You’ve revealed your true self, and some of the lies you’ve convinced yourself of. Hopeless.
“You’ve revealed your true self”
Of course I have.
I do not have hidden agenda’s in my comments.
I am enjoying myself shredding ignorant arguments such as yours.
I have the entire history of humanity as weaponry to deflate your narratives.
“and some of the lies you’ve convinced yourself of.”
The correct name is FACTS.
There is no hope that you will persuade me
Because you do not use facts, logic reason.
I am not interested in narratives. Anyone can create one of those.
Enigma, whatever questions I might have had on this subject, John completely cleared them up while I took time to verify some of the information John presented. I am interested in a fair discussion and have no interest in proving one race inferior. That should not be anyone’s objective and certainly, it isn’t John’s or mine.
The offending party, in this case, is you. You want to prove others racist to elevate a group. You want to prove slavery was the cause of everything that happened to one group even though slavery existed throughout the world. You are unable to make clear objective statements on the subject, and it pains me that your attitude enhances the racism seen in a few.
There you go clearing everyone else of racism. John is literally saying white people are better than Black people and you are good with that. Says something about you.
Enigma, your sole answer to your personal problems is that the world outside is racist.
John sited legitimate facts without claiming that one race was better than the other. You are the one bringing in racism. You can’t stop. John is not a racist and never will be one. You sound like a racist and act like the Stupid racists who based on ignorance stained America.
It is taboo to say that there are differences between the races.
Frankly the left makes it taboo to say there are differences between individuals – except approved differences, like homosxuality.
But the fact is we are all different. As a rule the differences between two randomly selected people are likely larger than differences between races.
But there are differences between races – and these are usually – like many things most pronounced at the margins.
An abnormally large percent of world class athletes are black.
Blacks have made a disproportionately large contribution to modern music.
Conversely rates of violence vary greatly by race, with asians being the least violent and blacks being the most.
It is taboo to mention these and many other differences – except when they favor blacks.
And it is very taboo to try to figure out whether these differences are the result of culture, learning, or imutable.
Just as it is Taboo to try to figure out if homosexuatity is driven by biology or it is a choice.
massive amounts of inquiry are foreclosed because we are no allowed to know the underlying basis for certain differences.
Posit that the Blacks in any atribute are on the whole inferior to any other rice – despite the fact that they are better at other things and you will be run out of town on a rail – by EB
“John is literally saying white people are better than Black people”
Nope. I am neither literally – and clearly you have no idea what literally means, not surreptitiously saying that.
I have said that the epicenter of human development follows IDEAS.
My use of race – such as white or black, has specifically been to address of refute YOUR racism.
I explicitly reject YOUR thesis that white people are worse than black people.
And YOUR mangled version of history that YOU use to attempt to prove that.
You can only attempt to rewrite your “over generalizations” or saying white people are smarter than Black ones. Yiou said it too many times and too many ways to claim differently now. Have faith though, S. Meyer believes in you, but then he believes in everyone. Be more honest like George.
You are right Enigma, I believe in everyone, even you though sometimes it is difficult. John is not a racist. Quoting facts is not racism. Correcting your errors is not racism. Leftism uses racism to get where they don’t belong. You don’t recognize that. I always assume you are smarter than many of your replies indicate so maybe you should reflect on where your errors are.
John believes and tries his best to document that white people are not only better than Black people but all non-whites. When he is wrong with his facts (like saying white people invented the printing press instead of the Chinese) he says what the Chinese did was not “consequential.” When he learned that sub saharan Black people had written language and mathematics which he previously claimed they did not, that too was not “consequential.” You may refuse to believe John or anyone else is not racist. Can you hold racist beliefs and not be racist? His beliefs inform his actions do they not? You believe racism exist because you’ve called me racist on numerous occasions. When you are able to see the same trait in white people, including your friends and family. That will be progress.
“John believes and tries his best to document that white people are not only better than Black people but all non-whites.”
That is not true. John is looking at what you have to say and correcting it because many of your sites and you provide erroneous information. It is your errors that make you feel the way you do.
By the way, John’s children are “non-whute”. They are Asian.
“You believe racism exist because you’ve called me racist on numerous occasions.”
The attitude and ideas you purvey make what you say, sound racist. You make many factual mistakes, so some of these attitudes might be due to more lack of knowledge than racism. Your attitude IMO promotes racism.
“When you are able to see the same trait in white people, including your friends and family. That will be progress.”
What traits are you talking about? Do you let ideas go from your head to your computer keys without thought?
EB fighting over details like the printing press where they do not matter exemplifies you.
There is a fundamental difference between Gutenberg’s press and anything prior.
Ignoring technical details – the key fundamental difference was that it was massively successful.
James Watt did not invent the steam engine – the Greeks had steam engines.
Watt created something useful and successful.
The point is not to detract from the chinese – though YOUR point is to rewrite history such that white people never accomplished anything that was not evil. That is why you are racist.
I would note that I only talk about race – and specifically about whites and their sins and accomplishments when I am echoing or refuting YOU.
I do not give a crap whether Europe was populated by green people. MY points are not about race. They are about Ideas.
The big deal about the Gutenberg Press was that it exponentially increased the spread of ideas.
Regardless, the point which you missed was about IDEAS.
The fact that you missed that and want to focus on RACE – is why YOU are a racist.
The Chinese (and Korean) invention of moveably type presses did not result in the massive rapid change in the world and the rapid spread of ideas.
That is why it was not consequential.
As a technical accomplishment it was significant.
But when such accomplishments do not have much effect, it is fair to say they are inconsequential.
You made a number of claims regarding Africa. You did not back them up. Give the massive efforts to rewrite history to find some magical past Wakanda, I am inherently skeptical of such claims.
But even if they did occur. They did not change the world. In fact they appear to have died.
That is pretty much the definiton of an inconsequential development.
The greek engineer Hero is probably the first inventor of a steam engine. But nothing happened. It did nothing to improve peoples lives.
It was barely even remembered.
That is inconsequential.
“Can you hold racist beliefs and not be racist?”
You define anything you do not like as racist.
In YOUR world Nature is racist.
In your world crediting those who took and idea and changed the world rather than someone else who did little or nothing with it is racist – if there is a difference in race involved.
BTW I did not learn that sub-saharan africans had written languages and mathematics.
You have claimed that, but you have not provided credible proof.
Regardless, whether they did or did not – they did nothing consequential with it.
Therefore it is inconsequential.
Further you keep making everything I say (or anyone else) that you do not like – into racist beleifs – that is RACIST.
What I am debating over with you, is your RACIST beleifs that ignores the fact that until western europeans ended it, Slavery existed throughout the world. You want to rant about the evil white men. Yet African’s were selling blacks into slavery before Jamestown. and north africa had millions of white christian slaves.
The american founders should have moved faster, they knew better. And THAT distinguishes them from nearly all the rest of the world.
The entire Idea that slavery is wrong – if it does not originate with western europeans, it never caught on until western europeans made it important.
And Why would that be ? Why would Western Europe, the UK and the US be the places were slavery ultimately became a moral crusade ? Why is it that the US fought a bloody civil war to end slavery – a century before blacks stopped selling other blacks to peoples throughout the world ?
That would be because the idea that individuals have rights if it does not originate in the western tradition – became consequential in that tradition.
And that is a massively important idea. That brought us free markets, that brought us self government, That brought us diversity.
That brought us prosperity – not just the US and UK but ultimately the entire world as it adopted those principles.
If Thomas Jefferson never did anything else in his life except write the words of the declaration of independence – and beat black slaves.
He would still have changed the world in a way that Mother Theresa never managed. So yes, that means he was great.
Everything is not about slavery. Everything is not about blacks. Everything is not about you.
Everything is not about race – and if you think it is YOU are the racist.
“His beliefs inform his actions do they not?”
Yes, and that should end this discussion – what is your evidence, that my or anyone else’s actions are racist.
“You believe racism exist because you’ve called me racist on numerous occasions.”
No one is denying that racism exists, or that it was bad in the past, and even still pretty bad outside the anglosphere.
But it is not the central theme of world history. It is not even close to the central theme to western history.
Past racism shoudl be taught. It should be given the attention that it merits in comparison to the other great and evil things that fill the past. And that level of attention is not all that much.
“When you are able to see the same trait in white people, including your friends and family. That will be progress.”
Your off in lala land. What are you even talking about ?
Regardles, I am not especially interested in discussion the relatively inconsequential problem of racism today – because we live in the least racist moment in time in the least racist country in the world and if you are some minority that is effected by racism – that effect is not in the top ten most important things effecting your life today.
You want to make all of education, all of politics, all of everything into not just a discussion about racism, but into a maoist style self criticism.
And that is EVIL and racist.
Racism is getting far more attention that it deserves.
Inflation at near 10% will make every single aspect of your life worse.
That is important right now.
Blacks in this country today are getting the most expensive education money can by.
The cost of education in DC or NYC is only exceeded by a tiny portion of elite private schools.
And yet that expensive education sucks.
And that is ruining the prospects of anyone having to suffer with that abysmal expensive education.
The cities that blacks live in are violent and dangerous – despite being run mostly by blacks, and paying more for police and services than most anywhere else.
You have been given the power to fix your own problems, you have been given the money to do so – other peoples money.
And you have failed.
Telling you to quit blaming everything on others and go back and fix your own lives – is not racism.
It is the same advice I give my own children.
“You can only attempt to rewrite your “over generalizations””
Whatever that means.
“saying white people are smarter than Black ones.”
I hjave deliberately avoided the issue of intelligence.
There is data out there if you wish to examine it.
Regardless, for nearly all traits that do have differences that are effected by race, the statistical difference is small – it is less than ordinary differences between random individuals.
But it does show up at the margins – the extremes. As an example Blacks are over represented dramatically in professional athletes.
“You said it too many times and too many ways to claim differently now.”
What is “it” that I have said.
And do not – tell me what I have said Quote it – accurately and in context.
“Have faith though, S. Meyer believes in you”
Because the FACTS support what I have said.
You are the one who makes everything about race.
You are also the one stoking racial tensions.
You are the one that thinks races is this huge deal and huge problem.
You are the one using false race naratives to undermine some of the most important ideas humans have had.
Even the idea that race does not matter – is a product of the ideology and culture you seek to destroy.
“but then he believes in everyone.”
Self evidently not true. He does not beleive you.
Do you think about what you wrote before you hit post.
You neither know what racism means, nor what literally means.
As I noted in a prior post – this is about ideas.
There are Two things wrong with CRT – besides that it is logically incoherent and can’t get actual history right.
The first is that it dramatically overstates the extent of racism – both now and the past and its importance.
The second is that it is a deliberate attempt to destroy an entire philosophy – by pretending that it must be correct because it was the product of racist while men.
I do not give a crap if classical liberalism was the product of little green men from mars.
I would be perfectly happy to pretend that it was first conceived in the most primative parts of africa if that would end the efforts to destroy it rooted in false claims that it is racist.
My criticism’s of you and your ideas have very little to do with race.
I did not assume that you were any race prior to your linking to your bio.
I did conclude you are not very good at critical thinking, because you make poor shallow arguments that either misstate facts, or misrepresent their meaning and importance – or both.
There are some incredibly intelligent blacks, you are not one of those.
Nor for all their critical accolades are any of those selling this idiotic everything is racist nonsense.
I attack you on history – because you are wrong.
I attack you on the broader conclusions you draw from history – or thin air – because you are wrong.
When I say you are wrong – that is not an opinion, it is demonstrable by facts.
Fundamentally I care that you are wrong – not because the errors themselves are important.
If you wish to beleive the deck is stacked against blacks – I can not, and mostly do not need to change your mind, because the consequences of that wrongthink fall on you.
UNTIL you seek to use FORCE – directly or through government to remedy non-existant of inconsequential problems.
But mostly i care that you are trying to destroy the philosphy that made the modern world possible. That made the idea of diversity meaningful.
That made all of us more prosperous by far than we have ever been.
But last I would ask you – “Is Reality Racist” ?
Statistically for the vast majority of attributes differences between races are far less than differences between individuals within a race.
But there are small differences between races which show themselves especially at the extremes.
Only the Celts have contributed as much to music as blacks.
the top 0.0001% of us in atletic ability – the true athletes are more likely to be black.
It the fact that nature has to a small extent – which shows up strongly at the extremities blessed blacks with more of certain abilities that whites – is that racist ?
Is it racist that asians are half as violent as whites and 1/4 as violent as blacks ?
If nature has rewarded blacks with a smalkl amount more of certain skills, is it inherently racist that it has rewarded other races with marginally greater skill in another area ?
I would posit that nature is by definition NOT racist.
And you are not capable of having a discussion if there is any hint that blacs do more poorly in any area.
That is racist.
Aparently the egyptians were martians
More ancient egyptians.
I guess that eqyptions were like the children in Browm
They hated themselves so when they painter themselves they did so as the white people they loved.
Everything you contribute is to convince yourself of the greatness of white people and the ignorance of Blacks. That’s racism, and untrue. You do what white people have done wherever they went, especially in America, changed history to please themselves. You completely ignored the written languages and mathematics in sub saharan Africa because your first claim was that they didn’t exist. You claim invention like the printing press (Chinese) and clocks (time measurements came first from Sumeria and Egypt). Now you present pictures of brown people to say what? They certainly aren’t white.
Your mask has been removed. What you espouse is exactly white supremacy. Glad you stopped pretending otherwise. George is more honest than you.
“Everything you contribute is to convince yourself of the greatness of white people and the ignorance of Blacks. ”
What I a doing is debunking YOUR false narratives.
The center of the advancement of civilization has moved through various regions and races through history.
What I am proving is that it is NOT racial. In fact it is driven by the ideas and principles of each region at the time.
“That’s racism, and untrue.”
Your narratives are racist – that is correct. They are also false.
It is not true that the history of the world is the history of white success on the backs of other races primarily blacks.
That is YOUR racist narrative not mine.
I have pointed out lots of historical evidence that falsifies that idiotic racist narative.
“You do what white people have done wherever they went, especially in America, changed history to please themselves.”
I am not the one trying to change history. Nor am I the one trying turn history into some white/black thing.
“You completely ignored the written languages and mathematics in sub saharan Africa because your first claim was that they didn’t exist.”
Yes, I am skeptical that they exist or atleast that they did consequentially. Regardless if they did exist consequentially, they subsequently disappeared or diminished.
“You claim invention like the printing press (Chinese) peoples before the chinese uses carved blocks and ink to create impressions on paper”
The printing press is consequentially european because that is where it was consequentially developed.
“clocks (time measurements came first from Sumeria and Egypt) I did not say time measurement, I said clocks”
The ability to accurately and portable keep time underpins an incredible number of other acheivements.
Navigation requires accurate time keeping.
“Now you present pictures of brown people to say what? They certainly aren’t white.”
Whites are not white, Some of the people pictured are green, none of them are black.
The only point I am making is that you are blinded in everything you do and write by race.
My world will not be shaken by proving the Egyptians were black, but you are being driven to apoplexy by even the possibility that they are not.
Further “brown people” are not “black” – indians are not black. The south american races are not black.
Ultimately all of us are related to some chimpanzee ancestor. Fundimentally this race nonsense does not matter that much to me.
The CURRENT apogee of human development runs through Europe and into the anglosphere.
Is that because Europeans are white ? I doubt that. Is it because they oppressed blacks or other races – that is just absolutely stupid.
Throughout history groups have oppressed their neighbors – especially if they were of a different race – including as I noted north africans who you wish to insist are blacks enslaving over a million white christians at the same time as you think that white oppression of blacks caused all that western success. If that is the case – why didn’t north africans starting int he 1500’s advance explosively ?
Your naratives are garbage – they are trivially disproven by history.
All I have done recently is shifted from trying to use US and british history – because you will keep up the pretence that it is all about the opressions of blacks by whites.
Almost the entire renaissance took place before the African slave trade started. Further as noted – North africans were enslaving over a million white europeans starting before the african slave trade and lasting throughout it. And yet whoever enslaved european christians did not lead the world.
They were not even especially significant in their own time.
You thesis for history DOES NOT WORK.
You say I am racist – when just about my entire argument with you is efforts to DISPROVE your racist claim that history is all about Racial oppression.
Racial oppression does exist – throughout history. But it has nothing to do with the success (or failure) or any nations or peoples.
“Your mask has been removed. What you espouse is exactly white supremacy. Glad you stopped pretending otherwise. George is more honest than you.”
The mask that has been removed is yours.
What I have attacked is YOUR racist and FALSE view of history.
In the ACTUAL history of the world, the advance of the human condition – demonstrated by the development of math, language, writing, literature, science, engineering. has moved across the world, At various times the current pinnacle of human development has been in India, and china often for centuries. The success of those peoples at those times did not come through oppressing blacks.
The history of the world is not about whites (or other races) oppressing blacks.
That racist and false history is YOURS not mine.
Central and south america were isolated from the rest of the world for atleast 30,000 years. During that time they did not rise to the same level as western europeans. But they certainly advanced much further than sub-saharan africa. And they did so without oppressing african slaves.
You use so many words to say so little. Now the inventions of others weren’t “consequential.” and only those of white people count.
The false narrative of American history is the one taught in Texas school books and relived on the Internet. You need the founders to be heroes when they were anything but. You have gone on and on about the superiority of white peoples, you, defend others that do the same. You, sir, are the problem.
“You use so many words to say so little. Now the inventions of others weren’t “consequential.” and only those of white people count.”
One of the problems with trying to read other peoples minds as opposed to reading their words is that you are certain to be deluded.
You are constantly making claims that have no relationship to the evidence – in this case because of YOUR afters to know what I think rather than what I said.
Again the epicenter of human development has moved all over the world through recorded history – China, India, …
All advances rest on what came before – including the printing press. The chinese invented paper – but that does not mean there were no predecessors. With respect to the printing press – the debate over precisely where what was invented is not that important.
The printing press reshaped the entire world because of how it was used – in Europe. I would be just as happy if that development took place in Europe, or india, or even africa – but it did not.
The difference between you and I is that you see all of history as the history – not merely of racism, but of European whites – particularly in north america oppressing and profiting from African blacks.
That narrative fails abysmally. It falls in th specific times and places you focus on. It fails across the arc of history.
I have provided dozens of examples the demostrate why – that refute on aspect of your narative or another.
The death rate of the crews of slave ships is not all that consequential as a part of history. But it is very consequential in proving elements of your narative as false.
Human history – human progress, rising standards of living are entirely the history of IDEAS. The epicenter of the development of ideas has at various times been with nearly every race and region of the world. In the modern era it was first in Europe, then the UK and then in the US.
That does not mean nothing happened anywhere else. Nor does it mean that only whites where responsible.
Even today the epicenter of advance appears to remain in the US, but the contributors to hat advance are chinese, and black and indian, and pakistani and …..
But the center of advance is still in the US – regardless of the race of those making the advance. Because the pinacle of the individual liberty necescary for the most significant advances remains in the US.
But you and yours, an your ideas are about the destruction of individual liberty. Your ideas are about vengence for some perceived and real past slights. As I have noted before, you would if you could correct all injustices of history back to cain and able.
You ideas fixate on victimization – which is an absolutely toxic fixation – even where the victimization is real.
we are not equal. That is just how it is. Humans are not ants or bees or fish, We are the most diverse an unequal creatures nature has ever created.
As deparately as I would want – I can not play any musical instrument with even modest skill. My son learns instruments in days without lessons and can play McCartney songs lust by hearing them a few times.
We are not equal. None of us. That is at the core of human success – not a fault.
The only equality we can and should strive for – though we will never acheive – is equal treatment by the law.
All other efforts to acheive equality come at the expense of our individuality.
Fixating on victimization – is actually evil. It robs us of our lives.
If you have actually been the victim of something heinous – if you have been raped, assaulted, robbed, …..
I can tell you from my own very serious personal experience – as well as from that of everyone else who has ever been a victim.
You can not an will not get your life back from whoever did you evil. Only you can retake your life.
That is true of real victims, of real injustice and indignity, and it is true of those whose lives are just not going as they wish.
Whether you are climbing out of a hell that someone else inflicted on you – such as rape victims, or assault victims, or holocaust survivors or you were just born into a poor family with a single mother with little education. You future is entirely up to you. no one else can save you.
500,000 almost entirely whites died to set african american slaves free in the US. The vast majority of those had no connection at all to slavery – they came from Ireland or other countries where they were closer to slaves that free. They did not profit from slavery – but they died to end it.
They were not paying for past sins, The were whites with no reason to be the slightest guilty who died for the freedom of your ancestors.
And the core of your argument is that their scarifice was a waste.
I will agree with you that little changed for blacks – especially in the south after the civil war.
But one very very very important thing did change. They were free. They were free to stay and sharecrop. They were free to leave for the north or the west – and many did.
You seek to wrap yourself in a mantle of victimization – to blame failure on others – whether it is individual failure or broader failure.
We are not equal. Nature gave you certain degrees of skill – intelligence, creativity, physical ability. It does not give those equally to each of us.
It does not even dole them out equally within races.
I have a white tenant for whom success would be defined as not ending up homeless. He is a diswasher at a resturaunt. It took him forever to learn that job. He had the oportunity to get a better job as a grocery bagger – he did not take that. He could not take it. He would have been fired befre he was able to learn how to do ajob that you or I can learn in minutes or a few hours.
We are not equal. God, nature, made us unequal. that is just how it is.
We can only reach actual equality by hamstringing the physically able, and lobotomizing the intellectually able.
You can accept reality as it is, and figure out how YOU can create the best possible life for yourself, while not being jealous of those who have done better.
Or you can do as you are doing and wallow in self pity and victimization.
Or worse still you can TEACH people that they are entitled to wallow in self pity and victimization.
Those of you on the left claimed that Trump’s use of motivational speakers as teachers at Trump U were proof that he was a crook.
Yet what separated students at Trump U and the better life they wanted was the willingness to go out and take it, and the willingness to do the work necescary to do so.
That is also what separates you, and all the other victims you fixate on from a better life.
You are the opposite of a motivational speaker – you are a demotivational speaker. Telling people that their status as victims is what separates them from what they want is EVIL.
We can not all get what we want. Very few of us will be Bill Gates or Elon Musk.
But we can all do better that we have if we want. All that is necescary is the will to do so, and the hard work to go after what we want.
My poor white dishwasher will never be Elon Musk. Just getting that slightly better job as a grocery bagger is risky and hard work for him.
But it was within his reach if he wanted.
You are the racist, and worse, you are stealing from those you claim to want to help.
You are stealing their futures. Because they can not improve their futures so long as they are wallowing in victimization.
Even if your version of history was true – which it is most definitely not.
You are still missing the answer.
You are the only one of us fixated on race.
You are the one pushing this idiotic notion that history is the story of black oppression by whites.
What I have done is point out myriads of different ways that is obviously false.
I do not know why sub-saharan africa shows no evidence of ever being the pinnacle of human development – or in the event that it ever was why it significantly declined from that point.
But claiming that anyone is racist for observing something is true is actually racist,
What I do know is that Racism and white oppression is obviously NOT the reason.
Not in Africa – and not anywhere else.
You are trying to convince me and the world of the superiority of white people. What other point are you trying to make?
“You are trying to convince me and the world of the superiority of white people.”
Quite oibviously a false statement.
“What other point are you trying to make?”
I guess you can not read.
Learn to read what others actually write.
Rather than pretend to know what they are thinking and read into their remarks your though on your guesses as to their thoughts.
I am pretty clear. Most of the time I want to be read pretty close to literally.
I have made it clear – I am at war with your racist efforts to destroy the core western ideas. Such as individual liberty. Self government.
Do you understand that even the value of a pluralistic society comes from the very people you think are evil racists who are wrong about everything ?
Again – Why has Africa been in the stone age through to the present ?”
You do not seem to understand that when you lob false accusations – such as racism at everyone you disagree with,
you make a racist of yourself.
If you want to go after Bannon – address actual issues, Bannon’s positions. We might even find some common ground.
But your claims that Bannon and others are racist have failed badly and left you as the racist.
I have warned those of you on the left repeatedly, that lobbing false accusations, playing games with words, all this massive efforts to avoid real discussion on issues, comes at the cost of your credibility and your integrity.
Franklin said something interesting to the British privy council in 1760’s
There is no revolution in america, But send 1000 troops to america to put the people down, and you will create one.
And about 10 years later that is exactly what happened.
There is no consequential racism in the US today. There are alteast a dozen factors inside of YOUR personal control that have far greater impact on your future than your race. That is about as close as you can get to no racism.
But if you continue to accuse everyone you disagree with of being racist – you will destroy the meaning of the word (you have already done that) and you will eventually create the racism you are accusing people of.
I did not call you names.
I pointed out what your own posts say about you.
You control your words.
I am not trying to exonerate anyone.
If you claim that Hitler hated dogs – I will point out your error.
That does not exonerate Hitler. But it does point out your lack of understanding of facts.
If you want what you write to be trusted and taken seriously – you can not make stupid errors.
Still wasn’t talking to you, though you might ask yourself if the shoe fits.
My argument is valid.
It is a specific refutation of YOUR arguments.
It is also a specific demonstration that your conduct is racist, as racism has been defined for the past several centuries.
You can put your hands over your ears.
But it changes nothing.
I would note that your post was a rely to me.
SM the point Bannon was making was
If Racist means someone who opposed the agenda of the left – then embrace the racist label.
It was much the same as embracing deplorable after Clinton’s remarks.
EB has demonstrated repeatedly that his defintion of racism devolves to what he thinks about someone.
Therefore if EB says I am a racist – I must be – because that is what he thinks.
But there is a cost to the destruction of language.
If Racist is just someone EB disagrees with – then there is no stigma.
Again the point Bannon was making.
The left attempts to weaponize language – but by doing so they end up destroying the stigma of the words they weaponize.
This also addresses what I have said before about meaning, and defintions.
Dictionaries can only contribute to communication if their defintions FOLLOW supermajority use.
If they lead – we are in 1984 and destroying language and communications.
And again that is Bannon’s point.
“Thomas wasn’t forced out . . .”
For days, a woman walks by a construction site on her way to work. She’s subjected to vicious wolf calls. She decides to take a different route.
And your response is: “She wasn’t forced off that sidewalk.”
In other words, let’s just ignore the barbarian behavior.
But if you have to mention those wolf calls, they’re her own fault. Her skirt’s too short.
Definitely apples and oranges. Thomas was being protested (by eleven thousand people signing a petition expressing their opinion) because of his actions and disregard for their beliefs, rights in the case of the women and potential harm that could come to them or others like them. Because of that ruling, more women will die. They aren’t hounding him for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, but for being (in their opinion) the bringer of a great wrong.
Superme Court Justices face the least repercussions one can face being employed in America. They are appointed for a lifetime, they have no ethics code they are bound to follow, they operate in secret, don’t have to explain their actions or answer questions, even their oral arguments aren’t televised because that’s what they decided. Protest is the only way a sitting Justice has to even acknowledge the public.
As usual, you Leftists make big, vulgar a$$es of yourselves. A, ignorant, pathetic lot!
It’s the 1930s. A Democrat Klansman cannot stand that an uppity black man was giving speeches about equality, and how to better your life. He had a standing seminar at a local school. One day, the Klansman and a bunch of his buddies paid that black man a visit. They leaned in close and told him he’d better get out if he knew what was good for him. The next day, the man withdrew as an invited teacher of the seminar.
The Klansmen shrugged and said they didn’t force him out. He quit.
That was my assessment of why SC Justice Thomas was forced to quit.
The FBI reported the alleged assassin of SC Kavanaugh, planned on “shooting for 3” justices.
With that information coming to light, knowing how some of the leftist are borderline cult like zealots in their ideology, concerned for his safety as he would have to wonder if a zealot was in the lecture hall, wanting to do him harm.
He forced to quit out of concern for his safety.
Seeing how they are protesting outside of their homes, their forcing Kavanaugh to have to leave from a restaurant by way of the back door, of some group offering money for the location of a justice in public, yes, he and the others are concerned for their safety.
You, Pancho, are part of the problem……about as deep and introspective as a soap dish And a censor. Stay in your lane! You are neither needed nor appreciated here.
That sounds very similar to what the students told Thomas, I get that I’m not appreciated by most here, but needed far more than you believe. Have you told George he isn’t needed or appreciated?
“You can’t handle the truth!”
– Colonel Jessup
Enigman, can’t handle the truth and appreciates neither freedom (the first step of which is always discrimination), free speech, nor truth.
What I present is the truth, for example, Obama will never be eligible for the office of president and will never be a “natural born citizen,” secession, in 1860, was not prohibited by the Constitution and was irrefutably, fully undeniable and constitutional, and freed black slaves must have been compassionately repatriated upon their unconstitutional confiscation and release by Lincoln in 1863, as the Naturalization Act of 1802 was in full force and effect.
Oh, and the fact that ramming through, not one (one being extremely difficult to pass), but three near-impossible-to-ratify amendments in three years, under the duress of brutal post-war military occupation, and after the killing of one million Americans, was not only improper but totally corrupt and absolutely not presented as part of the amendment process prescribed in the U.S. Constitution.
These are all matters of law and of record.
The American Founders created a Constitution and a nation with comprehensive specificity.
Enigman hates that America, American federal law, the American Founders and Framers, and the American Constitution.
Funfact: The Israelites had a truly great leader who “Had A Dream” on Mount Sinai, and who had the Israelites out of Egypt before the ink was dry on their release papers, for their own benefit, for their own sense of nationhood, for their own self-esteem, and for their own good.
Enigman prefers the status of illegal alien dependent and parasite ad infinitum, to the truth.
God Bless the confused and, apparently, necessitous and impecunious Enigman.
George, admit it, you have all this stuff ready to paste and look for an excuse to post the same gibberish.
Which is to, once again and as usual, deflect.
My, what an affirmative action intellect.
When does the doctor prognosticate your crutch(es) to be nonessential, or have you an everlasting need?
Please, do address the matter; expose the errors and fallacies.
I will admit that the following is canned; the reason for that is ya’all, not only are never embarrassed by it, but never contradict or counter it with any degree if efficacy, apparently being substantially needful and unconstitutionally receiving:
wholly unconstitutional matriculation affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, HHS, HUD, EPA, Agriculture, Commerce, Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.
I know you’re in there somewhere, and how ’bout that Moses, no hanging out and begging “alms for the poor” centuries on for him, no sir? Am I right? I’m right aren’t I?
Oh, and tell your girlfriends that “breaking the glass ceiling” is breaking and entering, and criminal trespass.
Wait. I forgot. You and Abe just hate a society of laws, huh?
I let you miss me with most of what you write because you won’t accept any argument. I do give you credit for being more open about your beliefs than most here; many of whom share them but can’t admit it. I’m happy you have found a place where you are so welcome. Excuse me for a bit while I finish up a story about Aaron Burr’s secret wife. The one that was his wife’s slave from India that he got pregnant at the same time as his wife. His wife died of cancer and Mary Emmons continued the marital duties. There is an unconfirmed story of a marriage certificate but I can’t say either way. Burr;s children went on to marry free Black people which created a whole wing of Black Burr’s in the family tree. The Burr family recognized them in 2018 after DNA testing. History is so exciting when you get past the same rote stuff you use as a reply to every situation.
Enigma, history is exciting when it is true such as what you post above regarding DNA testing, though I take your word for it. Most of the history you provide is false so one has to be circumspect reading anything you write.
You consider hearsay better than reports from the IG and Capitol Police.
The same IG that somehow failed to report missing secret service text messages? I still prefer sworn testimony.
Let us look at what Enigma considers proof.
1) Missing secret service messages reported by the same news media wrong on virtually every major story involving Trump. How do we know they are missing? It is conjecture. What is not conjecture is that the entire Mueller investigative group, one way or another, had their phone history deleted. It is amazing that you suddenly believe missing messages are meaningful when one doesn’t even know if any are missing.
2) Donald Trump is a racist because something might have happened 20 years before Trump was born. That statement made by you is something that cannot be dismissed. It demonstrates anything true or false is evidence if it suits your purposes. You are not a nut job, but you have done your best to look like one.
3) Hutchinson swore under oath even though her most recent testimony contradicted her prior testimony or said things that didn’t exist before. To Enigma, she cannot be lying because she is accusing Trump of something ludicrous and disproven.
4) The IG report doesn’t count according to Enigma because IG’s make mistakes, but Enigma trusts unverified news sources.
5) The Capitol Police summary of events doesn’t count either according to Enigma even though it adds strength to the IG report.
Enigma is lost. He doesn’t know what evidence or the truth is. To him, everyone is a racist if they don’t line up and do what they are told.
Enigma, you are more intelligent than your arguments demonstrate. It’s better to put your hate in a box and look at reality and the truth.
Aparently you do not grasp that IG reports require the IG to verify their accuracy under penalties similar to perjury.
Regardless, Hearsay is unreliable even where it is allowed. Sworn Hearsay – is just whisper down the lane with an oath
And who is going to prosecute someone for Telling the J6 committee what they want to hear – even if that is a heavily spun lie ?
“I let you miss me with most of what you write because you won’t accept any argument. I do give you credit for being more open about your beliefs than most here; many of whom share them but can’t admit it.”
What in the name of god does any of this mean ?
“I let you ” ? Who made you god ? You have no control over others here.
“I do give you credit for being more open about your beliefs than most here; many of whom share them but can’t admit it.”
Back to mind reading others.
I find some of George’s posts interesting – I share some of his views, but not others.
Regardless, he makes arguments with facts, logic, and reason – something you do not do – almost ever.
Nor does most anyone on the left.
I and many others here no on the left – do an excellent job of “sharing our views” – again with facts, logic, reason.
We do not agree with each other on every point. We all think for ourselves.
Only idiots would try to pigeon hole us all as secretly sharing the same views.
“Excuse me for a bit while I finish up a story about Aaron Burr’s secret wife. The one that was his wife’s slave from India that he got pregnant at the same time as his wife. His wife died of cancer and Mary Emmons continued the marital duties. There is an unconfirmed story of a marriage certificate but I can’t say either way. Burr;s children went on to marry free Black people which created a whole wing of Black Burr’s in the family tree. The Burr family recognized them in 2018 after DNA testing. History is so exciting when you get past the same rote stuff you use as a reply to every situation.”
There are few black people in this country who are genetically majority black.
Henry Louis Gates does a geneology series on PBS, it is interesting that he often finds blacks whose family trees include slave owners. Sometimes even blacks who owned other blacks.
You rant because some white people here rail about the “destruction of white culture” – somehow in your world that is acceptable, even commendable. Yet centuries ago White slave owners tried to destroy black culture – and that is not OK with you ?
Nor do I understand how you ignore the fact that your ancestry includes those slave owning whites.
You want us all to take personal responsibility for the actions of often people we are not related to at all – 5 or more generations ago,
My geneology and genetics are mostly Irish with a little bit of Jewish – in the past we WERE the equivalent of slaves. We never owned slaves.
But somehow I and the millions of other americans like me are responsible for the problems of YOUR ancestors from people I am not related to,
yet, you take no responsibility even though you likely ARE related to the very people you claim I am somehow responsibkle for ?
There is a reason that we do not try to sort out various slights running back generations.
We are not going to give the descendants of able reparations for the crime’s committed by Cain.
We do not hold accountable children for the sins of their fathers – much less their great great great great great grandfathers.
If we did – you too would be accountable.
Enigma: George still doesn’t understand that the film “A Few Good Men” is fiction. The line he repeatedly posts from a fictional character came from the screenwriter. There is NO Col. Nathan Jessup.
Wrong – It’s mob rule and censorship, and that is not free speech. You have no understanding of free speech. The mob doesn’t get to shut down speech they don’t like. They act like the spoiled children they are. Their actions are the opposite of free speech. These ‘law students’ are doing exactly what the Nazi Brown Shirts did in Germany in the early 1930s.
If you don’t like what is being said or written, then don’t read or listen to it. That is what an adult does. But they have no right to such down speech they disagree with.
They protested against what theybdidn’t like, they didn’t shut him down they let him know. Thomas quit of his own accord. Maybe there is a penalty for going against the wishes of the majority of the people? They let you know they don’t like it.
Years ago the black population in the deep south faced a similar problem. I suppose you didn’t support those black people either.
You don’t have to go back in history to find people trying to limit Black speech. It’s more prevalent than ever, it’s called voter suppression. Is this still S.Meyer/Allan? I like to have an idea who I’m talking to.
Today conservative speech is what is being limited. You haven’t learned from the 50’s racism. You promote it today.
You talk about voter suppression, but can’t seem to detail it so that one can have an understanding of what it is. I think your implications except in rare instances is figment of your imagination.
Show me where blacks in large numbers have been denied the right to vote.
I’ve produced for you numerous articles in the past outlining how voter ID requirements are associated with an INCREASE in black voter turnout.
This is because black people can get ID, just like Asians, Latinos, Indians, Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans.
Why do you keep pretending that requiring voters to prove who they are suppresses black votes? If requiring an ID is racist, then every transaction that requires ID is racist – buying cough medicine, buying alcohol, opening a bank account, cashing a check, attending a Democrat primary, picking up Will Call tickets, being asked for ID when pulled over for a traffic violation, or getting into Disneyland.
Since these voter ID laws are not, in fact, associated with minority vote suppression, why do you keep claiming that it is? Did you not read the data? Do you need me to send it to you again, or are you so committed to the narrative that you don’t want to know it’s wrong?
It’s really a terrible thing to do to make unfounded accusations of racism. It can ruin someone’s life.
Democrats keep telling black communities that the world is out to get them. They claim that Republicans are racist, and that blacks cannot be expected to get ID like every other racial group in the blatant racism of low expectations. They tell black people that they can’t make it without Democrat governments taking care of everything for them. They even claim that the proven steps to financial success – waiting to have children until marriage, refraining from drugs and crime, studying hard, punctuality, and being responsible – are all aspects of white supremacy. This is the proven path to failure. They claim black people need a savior in the form of a Democrat politician. Yet Democrat strongholds with supermajorities tend to have very low quality of life. CA and NY have been run by the Democrat machine for years. It’s so dangerous now, homelessness is rampant, crime is skyrocketing, cost of living is out of control, gas is more expensive. With a supermajority for decades, this is the absolute best that Democrats can offer. CA is Democrat Nirvana.
At what point do black people realize the Democrat Party has been manipulating them, keeping them down, and undermining their potential, while gaslighting black conservatives?
If you ever have your Red Pill moment, Enigma, I am going to have the biggest virtual celebration on this blog.
If you ever looked at all the voter suppression laws not related to voter ID, I’d have a celebration.
To you voter suppression means one doesn’t get coffee and donuts after they vote.
I don’t understand you sometimes. As a black man, you should be proud of the achievements of notable people like Clarance Thomas, even if you don’t agree with his politics. I just cannot understand why you would excuse a mob of mostly white students harassing the first black Supreme Court justice, making threats, until he withdrew his offer to teach a seminar, thus depriving students of the benefit of his knowledge and experience. Why in the world would a law student give up the opportunity to learn the Constitutional interpretation approach from Justices they agree with, as well as Justices they do not? There is such an immeasurable benefit.
The students shamefully slandered Justice Thomas, declaring the black man who wouldn’t decide cases as he was told was too dangerous to have on campus. The majority opinion decided that the Constitution quite obviously does not include abortion rights. That’s up to the legislative process, rather than having unelected justices arbitrarily decided when one can, and cannot, have an abortion, without any feedback or recourse from the governed.
Repealing Roe v Wade was neither a triumph for pro life nor a blow to pro choice. States like NY and CA can permit abortion all the way up until the poor babe breathes air. More conservative states will have more restrictions. Most Americans support abortion only up to a certain point, after which they require restrictions. The legislative process allows them the opportunity to arrive at this, likely with some see sawing along the way.
To so misrepresent Justice Clarence Thomas’ roll in abortion, and to harry him right out of a university seminar program, is abhorrent. It has always struck me as racist how the radical Left feels entitled to attack blacks who refuse to express Leftist views. They have even normalized racist slurs as long as the recipient is a black conservative.
It’s wrong, and I cannot understand why you don’t agree.
“I just cannot understand why you would excuse a mob of mostly white students harassing the first black Supreme Court justice, making threats, until he withdrew his offer to teach a seminar, thus depriving students of the benefit of his knowledge and experience. ”
All is see from Turley’s article and other research is that over ten thousand students signed a petition. No mob, no violence.
Enigma, I think of you as See No Evil, Hear No Evil, Speak No Evil.
You refuse to see what you don’t want to see.
All you had to do was look it up. This is a black man in one of the most highly respected positions in the country. Are you OK with this? Terrorizing a black man, going after his wife even, to try to force to legislate a certain way or punish him if he doesn’t? I do not understand why you don’t find this repugnant on principle.
You have said I deny racism exists, thus enabling it to continue. Of course I don’t. I call out racism when I see it. Like here. When black people excuse racism of black conservatives, they are enablers.
“Individuals have been calling on social media for the assassination of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas after he issued a separate concurring opinion on Friday in a ruling that struck down Roe v. Wade. Abortion activists have also published his home address, and others have called to burn down the Supreme Court.”
“The Black conservative jurist was excoriated by pro-choice advocates over his concurring opinion last week in Dobbs v. Jackson with a wave of vitriol that included death threats and repugnant racist epithets on social media.
The slurs included the n-word, “house n——r,” “coon,” “slave” and “Uncle Tom.” Over the weekend, “Uncle Clarence,” a spin on the derogatory term “Uncle Tom,” trended on Twitter after it was used by actor Samuel L. Jackson…Users of other accounts threatened to “kill” or “assassinate” Justice Thomas”
“… harassing the first black Supreme Court justice”
Clarence Thomas was not the first Black Supreme Court Justice. Learn Thurgood Marshall’s name and role in history.
KS doesn’t know that the communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs) commenced desegregation busing, aka “forced busing” by Americans, and the forced imposition of wholly unconstitutional affirmative action employment in 1965.
Dang, Karen! It’s called c-o-m-m-u-n-i-s-u-m, and the introduction of political emulsifiers to force the physically impossible mixing of oil and water.
Thurgood Marshall was the first beneficiary of employment affirmative action, not to mention taxpayer dollars.
Such an “accomplished” and proud “affirmative action” man.
Bigot George spews his garbage again. You don’t hold a candle to Thurgood Marshall.
The students did not confine themselves to publishing an essay outlining a reasoned argument why they disagree with Justice Thomas. Instead, they proclaimed him dangerous, and tried to get him canceled, just like they work to get faculty fired unless they voice far Left opinions.
They only want to hear their own opinions.
It’s reached the point where there was an assassination plot against Kavanaugh. One day, Leftist domestic terrorists will simply kill Justices they dislike when the President of their party is in power, and can appoint a Left wing ideologue. There will be fanatics willing to sacrifice themselves to the cause to produce the desired result. After all, Marx and Lenin posited that what is good for the cause is moral, and what is bad for the cause is immoral.
“This isn’t a denial of free speech, it’s exactly how free speech is supposed to work. Thomas wasn’t denied the opportunity to speak, he chose not to. The students used their freedom of speech to express their feelings. Justices already can almost be fired, they don’t age out, now nobody’s supposed to complain.”
You’re exactly right. The fault isn’t the jackarses on the Left who hate everything about their opposition and want to destroy them and their speech. They’re just evil. It’s the fault of the cowardly pussy cats in the GW administration and the Justice himself who abhor anything approaching a confrontation with the cretin Left. Sometimes you gotta see who wins and both sides have to try. Let ’em protest and let’ em suffer the consequences. That’s what a masculine society does. A feminized one avoids any and all conflict — for a time — until it just explodes everywhere. And then the tears and guilt begins for these pathetic chestless “men” and hiding women “in charge.”
I think we agreed on something, kinda. I hope you’re enjoying your day!
You, too. Just off the water yesterday and burnt up. Lots of fish, though.
“…actively making life unsafe…”
Thinking people would be embarrassed to use a phrase like that, but lefties are mostly propagandists, and they have no shame.
Thinking Americans will vote in November; that will be a referendum between rationality and hysteria.
Monu The nation now has too many voters who just vote for those who promise free stuff. promise any and all things.. There is nothing in the US Constitution that implicates I and all other Fed Taxpayers are to pay for your contraceptives, you student loans, your abortions, your rent, buy your food, etc. Under said Constitution you have the right “To the pursuit of happiness, but you should pay for those trips personally or don’t travel. For the last 58 years America has been reducing standards, and adding tokens, and now have reached the dystopian state That’s it. The big purging will begin in next two months.