Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: August 9, 2022, 12:42 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
#31
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 6, 2021 at 11:02 pm)Fireball Wrote:
(December 6, 2021 at 3:31 pm)BrokenQuill92 Wrote: America won’t even admit that it did anything wrong

Given talk of reparations for the slavery issue, I'd say that this is not quite true.

Let's see Turkey admit to its past genocides.
And without delay Peter went quickly out of the synagogue (assembly) and went unto the house of Marcellus, where Simon lodged: and much people followed him...And Peter turned unto the people that followed him and said: Ye shall now see a great and marvellous wonder. And Peter seeing a great dog bound with a strong chain, went to him and loosed him, and when he was loosed the dog received a man's voice and said unto Peter: What dost thou bid me to do, thou servant of the unspeakable and living God? Peter said unto him: Go in and say unto Simon in the midst of his company: Peter saith unto thee, Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And immediately the dog ran and entered in, and rushed into the midst of them that were with Simon, and lifted up his forefeet and in a loud voice said: Thou Simon, Peter the servant of Christ who standeth at the door saith unto thee: Come forth abroad, for thy sake am I come to Rome, thou most wicked one and deceiver of simple souls. And when Simon heard it, and beheld the incredible sight, he lost the words wherewith he was deceiving them that stood by, and all of them were amazed. (The Acts of Peter, 9)
Reply
#32
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 6, 2021 at 11:02 pm)Fireball Wrote:
(December 6, 2021 at 3:31 pm)BrokenQuill92 Wrote: America won’t even admit that it did anything wrong

Given talk of reparations for the slavery issue, I'd say that this is not quite true.
They’ll never actually give us our due. Hell ask my family slavery didn’t end in the 1800s they stole my family’s land and under threat of loitering forced them to work it for no pay.
Reply
#33
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 6, 2021 at 11:27 pm)Jehanne Wrote:
(December 6, 2021 at 11:02 pm)Fireball Wrote: Given talk of reparations for the slavery issue, I'd say that this is not quite true.

Let's see Turkey admit to its past genocides.

I think very few If any nations attained world power without committing genocide along the path, and once they have attained it, most of them will commit a few more in the process of falling from global power just for good measure.
Reply
#34
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 4, 2021 at 7:42 pm)T.J. Wrote: When I mention sins I'm talking about the fact that hundreds of years ago the people who came to this country slaughtered the people who were here first and took their land. Later they enslaved the blacks, treated women like property and wouldn't even allow them to vote until as soon as 1920. Sending the Japanese people into camps after the attack at Pearl Harbor. And I'm sure the list just gets bigger and bigger.

Is there anyway for America to truly confront its past and change for the better or is it just too great a wound to heal?

Discuss.

Okay, first, way too much attention is paid to America's historical failures. Nobody's hands were clean in the past, in fact all countries in 1776 were arguably worse as they never even had the pretense of individual liberty. Anywhere else you went the commoner was kept down by a class of power-hungry, despotic elite, in fact, I can't think of a single exception where people in power were not complete monsters if you judge them by modern standards of human rights. Maybe places without a central government? Not to say that I advocate for no government as that has its own problems.

All these media influencers that like to focus on America's evil past should be looked at with suspicion because there are obvious signs they're pushing an agenda and they're not acting in good faith. Ask yourself, why are they focusing on this issue with such ferocity? Do they really want to improve the country or just stir up unnecessary conflict and make Americans hate their own country? What is their track record? Has their "activism" made the country better or worse? I'm not even an American citizen so I have no patriotic stake here, but there is a difference between specific, constructive criticism of one's country and demonization. The talking points these people use are the same I would use... if I was a psychopath and my intention was to destabilize a country and get people to hate each other. If you have a friend with a very unhealthy lifestyle do you slowly try to talk him out of it or do you mock him with things like "haha you're fat, you're ugly, you're dumb, you'll never be anything and you'll die of OD by 35"?


Second, I don't agree with the implication that Native Americans had a valid claim to the entire land that is now the USA. Some of it, sure, but most of it was empty land with no government, no infrastructure, no clearly marked border. Why shouldn't it be up for grabs on a first come first served basis? Does it make any sense for a population to have ownership of millions of square miles simply because it is close to it? If I somehow build the first house on let's say Olympus Mons, Mars, do I get to claim ownership of the entire planet? How about half? How about just Olympus Mons? Or is it just the house itself, maybe the immediate surrounding but no more?

Third, everyone involved is dead, there's no wound to heal. The perpetrators are dead, the victims are dead, their direct descendants are likely dead (if we're talking about slavery, all of their direct descendants i.e. sons and daughters are dead, no exception). The people in the US government today are not the people of 1800 or 1900 or even 1950. The descendants of the perpetrators don't owe the descendants of the victims anything, one cannot even accurately determine which people alive today are affected by the injustices of the past and to what extent. Maybe in some hypothetical alternate reality where the US never had slavery or Jim Crow, a poor black dude is a millionaire with an amazing career. But you don't know this, he could still end up exactly the same because wealth, status and knowledge isn't always passed down the line. Sure, you can in theory sue a dead guy's family for damages, but there are limits on that so you don't end up with more injustices. For one thing, if you sue for a 1M$ but the estate is only worth 10k$, you can't get more than 10k out of the family. Are you able to prove precisely which people living alive today directly benefit from slavery? Strong doubt. Many descendants of slaveholders never inherited anything, wealth is actually easily lost over multiple generations.


There is a reason civilized countries have a statute of limitations because it's simply not productive or practical to hold grudgers for extremely long periods especially over multiple generations where people barely even know members of their own family beyond grandparents. Maybe it's time a statute of limitations was put on injustices done multiple lifetimes ago.

Fourth, it's pretty obvious that the US has changed, a lot of the things mentioned aren't done anymore. There's no slavery, there's no segregation, there's no genocide. People still holding a grudge should get over it. If anyone needs reparations, there is a stronger case for Russia paying reparations to all eastern European countries for spreading communism as this happened even within the lifetime of millennials (I lived 2 years through communism). But I don't know any of my people actively demanding that Russia pay reparations or using Russian communism as an excuse for why they're addicted to drugs or getting into easily avoidable fights with the cops. None of that is an excuse. The same is true for Turkey. Turkey as the Ottoman Empire subjugated eastern Europe for centuries at the height of its power, nobody talks about how Turkey can pay for its sins, nobody tries to excuse their criminal behavior or the failures in their life by saying it's Turkey's fault (and if they did, they would be laughed at), pretty much all criticism of Turkey is related exclusively to the present. It doesn't even get criticism for the Armenian genocide, only criticism because it doesn't admit to it.

So to answer the question "Is there anyway for America to truly confront its past and change for the better or is it just too great a wound to heal?"

Yes, there is, and it's the same answer if it were any other country. Stop doing what you were doing, admit it was wrong, move on. (You should pay reparations if the injustice happened recently, like in the same lifetime, but you shouldn't if it happened long ago and most records were lost.)

America has changed, it isn't doing genocide/slavery/Jim Crow anymore and the consensus is that it was all wrong. Nobody apart from a fringe minority of ridiculous hillbillies supports these things. It's the woke left that isn't letting this issue go and pretending that "white supremacy" is actually a widespread belief.
Reply
#35
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 7, 2021 at 6:44 am)ToTheMoon Wrote: All these media influencers that like to focus on America's evil past should be looked at with suspicion because there are obvious signs they're pushing an agenda and they're not acting in good faith. Ask yourself, why are they focusing on this issue with such ferocity? Do they really want to improve the country or just stir up unnecessary conflict and make Americans hate their own country? What is their track record? Has their "activism" made the country better or worse? I'm not even an American citizen so I have no patriotic stake here, but there is a difference between specific, constructive criticism of one's country and demonization. The talking points these people use are the same I would use... if I was a psychopath and my intention was to destabilize a country and get people to hate each other. If you have a friend with a very unhealthy lifestyle do you slowly try to talk him out of it or do you mock him with things like "haha you're fat, you're ugly, you're dumb, you'll never be anything and you'll die of OD by 35"?
I can clear all of this up for you, as an american.  Yes, yes you would constantly screw with your buddy.  This is the american way. That handled, talking about and being aware of our past doesn't make any of us hate our country.  We're very happy to wave the flag even when - and sometimes especially when- we're up to no good.  

If you cant name a problem, you're probably not going to be able to fix it.  If your reaction to people pointing out the problem is to suggest that they're insurgents weakening the fabric of the country, you're part of the problem.  

Quote:Second, I don't agree with the implication that Native Americans had a valid claim to the entire land that is now the USA. Some of it, sure, but most of it was empty land with no government, no infrastructure, no clearly marked border. Why shouldn't it be up for grabs on a first come first served basis? Does it make any sense for a population to have ownership of millions of square miles simply because it is close to it? If I somehow build the first house on let's say Olympus Mons, Mars, do I get to claim ownership of the entire planet? How about half? How about just Olympus Mons? Or is it just the house itself, maybe the immediate surrounding but no more?
You'd be wrong there, the country was well developed when europeans arrived.  The forests and meadows were not natural..not even the amazon is raw wilderness.  Little known but fun fact, the american agricultural machine - wonder of the modern world- is built on the native agro-forestry model that was in place when europeans arrived. A huge number of the early ships across the pond carried no farming tools whatsoever - and alot of the time it wouldn't matter if they had as their tools couldn't work these soils. Some parts were on the cusp of something like our own classical history, with the emergence of city states and nations.  Persistent and active trade networks that stretched from canada to florida to california to south america.  There were native american cities that matched contemporaneous london in population. There's an idea that it was a vast unpopulated wilderness because we wanted it to be, and depopulated it to match our own needs...and much of it remains that way today, amusingly enough. You don't see us allowing the creation of a new country out in the midwest, just because it's a bunch of seemingly empty fields and no big red line drawn on the ground, eh?

Quote:Third, everyone involved is dead, there's no wound to heal. The perpetrators are dead, the victims are dead, their direct descendants are likely dead (if we're talking about slavery, all of their direct descendants i.e. sons and daughters are dead, no exception). The people in the US government today are not the people of 1800 or 1900 or even 1950. The descendants of the perpetrators don't owe the descendants of the victims anything, one cannot even accurately determine which people alive today are affected by the injustices of the past and to what extent. Maybe in some hypothetical alternate reality where the US never had slavery or Jim Crow, a poor black dude is a millionaire with an amazing career. But you don't know this, he could still end up exactly the same because wealth, status and knowledge isn't always passed down the line. Sure, you can in theory sue a dead guy's family for damages, but there are limits on that so you don't end up with more injustices. For one thing, if you sue for a 1M$ but the estate is only worth 10k$, you can't get more than 10k out of the family. Are you able to prove precisely which people living alive today directly benefit from slavery? Strong doubt. Many descendants of slaveholders never inherited anything, wealth is actually easily lost over multiple generations.
-but not easily built.  The problem we have today has little to do with past slavery except as prelude for contemporary exploitation and disenfranchisement.  You;re worried about hyypothetical millionaires but the actual problem in mere reality is closer to the ground. The wealth gap is pronounced. It's not that..maybe, a man could be a millionaire today if he wasn;t a slave yesterday. It;s that he doesn;t have a pot to piss in today because he was a slave, then a second class citizen, until living memory (and, perhaps, still is). It's that if he had so much as a shack that shack would be worth something today, distributed as the case may be among all of his descendants...just like everyone else. He didn't, so they don't.

Wealth isn't easily lost, btw, that's a recent blip...and it's amazing how apopolectic the white and delightsome have suddenly become over this issue that has been the state of affairs for non-whites in the country since it's inception. Maybe we should lean in on that, on account of how it's fucking deleterious to the state of a nations people.

Quote:There is a reason civilized countries have a statute of limitations because it's simply not productive or practical to hold grudgers for extremely long periods especially over multiple generations where people barely even know members of their own family beyond grandparents. Maybe it's time a statute of limitations was put on injustices done multiple lifetimes ago.

Fourth, it's pretty obvious that the US has changed, a lot of the things mentioned aren't done anymore. There's no slavery, there's no segregation, there's no genocide. People still holding a grudge should get over it. If anyone needs reparations, there is a stronger case for Russia paying reparations to all eastern European countries for spreading communism as this happened even within the lifetime of millennials (I lived 2 years through communism). But I don't know any of my people actively demanding that Russia pay reparations or using Russian communism as an excuse for why they're addicted to drugs or getting into easily avoidable fights with the cops. None of that is an excuse. The same is true for Turkey. Turkey as the Ottoman Empire subjugated eastern Europe for centuries at the height of its power, nobody talks about how Turkey can pay for its sins, nobody tries to excuse their criminal behavior or the failures in their life by saying it's Turkey's fault (and if they did, they would be laughed at), pretty much all criticism of Turkey is related exclusively to the present. It doesn't even get criticism for the Armenian genocide, only criticism because it doesn't admit to it.

So to answer the question "Is there anyway for America to truly confront its past and change for the better or is it just too great a wound to heal?"

Yes, there is, and it's the same answer if it were any other country. Stop doing what you were doing, admit it was wrong, move on. (You should pay reparations if the injustice happened recently, like in the same lifetime, but you shouldn't if it happened long ago and most records were lost.)

America has changed, it isn't doing genocide/slavery/Jim Crow anymore and the consensus is that it was all wrong. Nobody apart from a fringe minority of ridiculous hillbillies supports these things. It's the woke left that isn't letting this issue go and pretending that "white supremacy" is actually a widespread belief.
A majority of white americans accept the five pillars of contemporary white supremacy.  It's such a widespread belief, that one of our two (count em, two) political parties is organized explicitly by it, and will very likely regain control of our government next cycle. The other party is scrambling to make accomodations for those people, trying to bring people who very much are white supremacists into their tent. That's the state of play. Meanwhile, the white supremacists themselves are rigging the vote and capturing local government so that even if they can be beat on the numbers in any location - it won't matter.

Discrimination. The white man is being reverse racism-d
Rights abrogation. The white mans rights and protections are being eroded, his wealth transferred to non whites.
Stigmatization and the denial of pride. The country is being slandered.
Loss of self esteem. The white man is being villainized.
Racial Elimination. The white man is being breed out.

These are not uncommon beliefs. We have posters here who get super pissy when you call them what they are, vehemently deny that they are what they are, all the while insisting that the items mentioned are true. Try out neutral formulations on americans you know. Ultimately, it's why I stopped identifying as a republican, why I stopped voting for repblicans..and, eventually, a huge part of why I stopped voting at all. It became impossible to maintain the fiction that there was any other principle or policy left in the republican party, and only a fool would believe that the dems would do anything other than make accommodations and carveouts for that view. I guess I wouldn't have had a choice in the end, as the purity purges are going through magaland now.

There's no conspiracy on the left to weaken the us by reminding it of it's past and taking issue with it's present. Those people are talking about how it could be improved, and they have no real friends in the institutional politics of this country. That's just something that right wing nutballs babble about. The miscegenated communist plot against white capitalist america, lol. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'll rephrase. Coastal elites vs the heartland. It's all about that neutral phrasing. Point is, that this isn't a real thing, but a talking point spread by those very same disseminators of white supremacist propaganda. Tell you something that might lighten the mood. It's hard to grow up a white supremacist on the beach in the US of A. All of these conflicting signals......

The short version of a long story is that there will never be reparations, of any kind, ever. We're too economically anxious for that. If that's what it means, and must mean, for america to atone for it's past, then the answer is a hard and enduring no. OTOH, so long as american white supremacists are motivated by populist appeals, there's a chance that rising tides can lift all ships. Not a good one - history as indicator...but a chance.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
Reply
#36
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
Define sin. Seriously.
Reply
#37
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 7, 2021 at 9:25 am)albatross Wrote: Define sin.  Seriously.
Any spiritually unclean/improper word or action.
"Imagination, life is your creation."
Reply
#38
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
But that means that it is specific religion based. Surely that can't be right? As for word (words) how can word/s be a sin? OK if a person describes Mohamed as a big girls blouse then that won't go down well but they have very strange beliefs. Similarly "improper" is religion based and in the case of the two Abrahamic religions actually vary with time.

I argue that while evil can be defined as an absolute sin can not. In fact the word emerged in the middle ages in Britain when it was adopted from archery where an archer who misses his target is said to have sinned. So any (usually Christian) who doesn't follow the teaching of the church is said to have missed the target and so sinned. Teaching of the church? THAT'S a can of worms in its own right when the claimed teaching of Jesus are considered!
Reply
#39
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 7, 2021 at 9:36 am)Ahriman Wrote:
(December 7, 2021 at 9:25 am)albatross Wrote: Define sin.  Seriously.
Any spiritually unclean/improper word or action.

This is what's known as, "kicking the can down the road."
[Image: Fenrir-sign.jpg]
Reply
#40
RE: Can America ever truly pay for its sins?
(December 7, 2021 at 7:11 am)The Grand Nudger Wrote: I can clear all of this up for you, as an american.  Yes, yes you would constantly screw with your buddy.  That out of the way, talking about and being aware of our past doesn't make any of us hate our country.  We're very happy to wave the flag even when - and sometimes especially when- we're up to no good.

If you cant name a problem, you're probably not going to be able to fix it.  If your reaction to people pointing out the problem is to suggest that they're insurgents weakening the fabric of the country, you're part of the problem.

It depends on how they say it and to whom. Children and college students are more impressionable than older adults for example. Any objective facts can be presented in a manner that pushes an agenda.

CRT for example is just not an objective or even fair take on history or current events. It's more ideology than facts. For instance, it makes the false assumption that any disparity in outcome is proof of discrimination. Individual choices or other circumstances don't seem to be factored in. Intersectionality is purely ideological to me, I don't believe you can lump all these different groups (blacks, trans, women, atheists) together and somehow assume their issues are similar.

CRT is extremely myopic in its analysis of let's say encounters between cops and black suspects. Take for example the George Floyd case. It's clear that the cop Derek Chauvin used excessive force and that cops in the US seem to be poorly trained to handle a suspect going through some kind of drug crisis. But there's no proof that he was motivated by hatred of black people. Advocates of CRT don't consider that maybe Chauvin has an inherently violent personality or that he simply lost patience with a difficult suspect. That wouldn't be a good excuse, but it would show he wasn't racist.

To state or imply that Floyd was killed for being black (and by that extension if you're black, you might be next if you don't do something about it) is grossly irresponsible, not backed up by evidence any more than any religion is, and has sparked riots that actually got other black people killed. Floyd himself is not entirely blameless in the matter, he'd been in trouble with the law before, he got himself heavily intoxicated in public to the point where I'm not even sure his grip on reality was still there (you can see him in the video acting like a crazy person), he failed to follow lawful police instructions. Put yourself in his shoes (you can be black for the sake of argument) and realize that if you simply did what the cops told you, Derek Chauvin wouldn't even be present. Oh that's right, he was not the officer first responding to the scene, he only came after the previous officers failed to control him.

That's not to excuse Derek's poor judgment but I do say it to argue that it's extremely unlikely a regular black person would have been killed in this circumstance.

This is what many in the woke media do all the time, take a story, put a spin on it to weave a narrative of widespread racism that just isn't supported by the evidence and in fact is actually quite implausible when there are more likely explanations.

I also wanted to point out that you can have legit racist cops treating black suspects fairly. It all depends what they value more. Maybe some cops value their duty more than their racism. Thoughts don't always translate into behavior. This is why it's silly to try to equate all police brutality with racism.


Quote:You'd be wrong there, the country was well developed when europeans arrived.  The forests and meadows were not natural..not even the amazon is raw wilderness.  Little known but fun fact, the american agricultural machine - wonder of the modern world- is built on the native agro-forestry model that was in place when europeans arrived. A huge number of the early ships across the pond carried no farming tools whatsoever - and alot of the time it wouldn't matter if they had as their tools couldn't work these soils. Some parts were on the cusp of something like our own classical history, with the emergence of city states and nations.  Persistent and active trade networks that stretched from canada to florida to california to south america.  There were native american cities that matched contemporaneous london in population. There's an idea that it was a vast unpopulated wilderness because we wanted it to be, and depopulated it to match our own needs...and much of it remains that way today, amusingly enough. You don't see us allowing the creation of a new country out in the midwest, just because it's a bunch of seemingly empty fields and no big red line drawn on the ground, eh?

Well, the question I'd have is if there are any truly empty lands left in the world apart from maybe Antarctica or some remote island nobody cares about?

Pretty much everything of value has been claimed in some form or another. Even those empty lands in the US actually have some rangers overseeing them, there is satellite coverage, powerlines, police responds if it's ever necessary, like if you get lost there. It doesn't seem to be quite as empty anymore.

Either way, it's impractical to revert to what existed pre-US. The closest thing to justice would be having a libertarian-like system with low taxes so no faction feels like they're forced to follow rules they never agreed with unless the non-aggression principle is violated.


Quote:-but not easily built.  The problem we have today has little to do with past slavery except as prelude for contemporary exploitation and disenfranchisement.  You;re worried about hyypothetical millionaires but the actual problem in mere reality is closer to the ground. The wealth gap is pronounced. It's not that..maybe, a man could be a millionaire today if he wasn;t a slave yesterday. It;s that he doesn;t have a pot to piss in today because he was a slave, then a second class citizen, until living memory (and, perhaps, still is). It's that if he had so much as a shack that shack would be worth something today, distributed as the case may be among all of his descendants...just like everyone else. He didn't, so they don't.

Wealth isn't easily lost, btw, that's a recent blip...and it's amazing how apopolectic the white and delightsome have suddenly become over this issue that has been the state of affairs for non-whites in the country since it's inception. Maybe we should lean in on that, on account of how it's fucking deleterious to the state of a nations people.

Slave owners probably had a lot of money back in the day, but no, such wealth wouldn't survive to 2021 without effort, especially given the number of heirs, it would be very fragmented and people had way more children back then. An estate like that needs to be maintained else it crumbles to dust. Leave any property uninhabited for a few years with no maintenance, you're not going to be able to live in it. Land needs to be worked to have any utility, crops don't grow by themselves. Money needs to be re-invested into a profitable asset (like a good business) else it loses its value through inflation. This is how wealthy families are no longer wealthy after several generations. And very few white people actually had slaveholding relatives anyway. Lots came to the US with nothing to their name, do they still have this white privilege thing?

A slave could have earned some money and passed it down to his son or daughter so they wouldn't have to start from scratch. Or built a "shack" for them but keep in mind that shacks don't last a lifetime. If you can't maintain those properties they become worthless sooner or later.

Or (as is the case with many people of all races) he could have spent it all during his lifetime, leaving nothing for his descendants.

Or he may have had so many descendants it all got fragmented to the point it didn't matter.

Never rely on your parents for wealth or income. Build it yourself. And even if you get a lot, assume it's going to be lost very soon unless you invest it well.


Quote:Discrimination. The white man is being reverse racism-d
Rights abrogation. The white mans rights and protections are being eroded, his wealth transferred to non whites.
Stigmatization and the denial of pride. The country is being slandered.
Loss of self esteem. The white man is being villainized.
Racial Elimination. The white man is being breed out.

This sounds a lot like moving the goalpost.

White supremacy just means someone believes whites are better than everyone else, nothing more.

Believing that there is discrimination against whites is not white supremacy and the CRT proponents have a demonstrable bias against white people. You cannot genuinely say you're for equality and tolerance but then turn around and say things like:
- "racism against whites doesn't exist because whites are privileged" (as if this was relevant)
- "Whiteness is bad" (how would we react if people were saying Blackness or Jewishness is bad? you would think the article was written by a Nazi if you replaced "white" with "Jew")
- "the c-word isn't as bad as the n-word" (why?)
- "check your privilege, white people"

I'm actually sympathetic to a world where people just ignore race altogether and focus on common values and individual merit which is why CRT looks like such a bad joke to me. In fact, it's self-refuting. If you want people of different races to get along they have to follow the same standard, you can't have overt racism being tolerated just because it comes from a group that is oppressed or perceived as oppressed.

I could say the same thing about the other 4 points, those points could be valid or invalid, but they don't necessarily involve white supremacy. Some white supremacists bring them up, but so do plenty of people who aren't.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  At what point is America no longer a safe place for me to live? TaraJo 41 1076 July 16, 2022 at 8:38 pm
Last Post: TaraJo
  America. Worse than North Korea. deepend 195 2927 March 26, 2022 at 2:05 pm
Last Post: TaraJo
  Can Japan Ever Truly Pay for it' s Sins? onlinebiker 29 447 December 7, 2021 at 5:24 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  Ayn Rand blamed for current state of America Tomato 61 1645 June 24, 2021 at 6:17 pm
Last Post: no one
  The Republican America Tomato 19 506 November 23, 2020 at 3:56 pm
Last Post: Anomalocaris
  Make America Nice Again Secular Elf 53 1579 November 9, 2020 at 6:20 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Police in USA arent racist, its just American culture is all Ramus932 10 454 June 14, 2020 at 1:49 am
Last Post: Zepp
  [Serious] The Mental Illness Crisis in America T.J. 9 550 August 19, 2019 at 12:03 am
Last Post: AFTT47
  Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill brewer 55 3042 August 4, 2019 at 7:25 am
Last Post: BrianSoddingBoru4
  Anyone Else in America See Your Taxes Go Up? DeistPaladin 17 1216 April 12, 2019 at 2:48 pm
Last Post: RobbyPants



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)