If his world view is a fairy tale it is no more so than yours or mine. His is based on his life experiences which are no less valid than anyone elses.
Demagoguery At Its Finest
- Thread starter Scat
- Start date
If his world view is a fairy tale it is no more so than yours or mine. His is based on his life experiences which are no less valid than anyone elses.
Sorry, but I just can't agree. A person who claims humans are a special creation from God is basing that claim on their life experiences, but that claim is not equally valid to my claim humans evolved from ancestral apes. A claim that racism is not prevalent in American society is almost as equally unfounded and mistaken.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Their claim in more valid based on life experiences unless you have those "ancestral apes" in your closet.
JAG
Well-Known Member
You have done your research and made a conclusion - but so have I. They differ. You can have your "fairy tale," and I can mine. Criticizing/resulting to demeaning language when referring to my view (saying that only I possess a fairy tale of the world) is oftentimes a compensation for a lack in some other area of communication and/or thinking (accroding to philosophers and psychologists.) Let us be mature and agree we both live in a "fairy tale." We are both basing it off of EXPERIENCES AND INDIVIDUAL RESEARCH. Same thing as the Creator v. Evolution from Apes. There is research on both sides frankly, and just like this issue, people (regardless of race (just so we are clear)) will decide for themselves based on the research they conduct and their experiences which one they choose to believe. No one claim on the Creator v. evolution issue will ever be considered completely valid by the entire population (especially in the Western world). This once again, is your view which is shared by many (both uneducated and educated) and the belief in a Creator is shared by many as well (both uneducated and educated.) These things are mistaken from your perspective, but you cannot go around thinking that people that do not share your same opinion live in a "fairy tale". Once again, its the "agree to disagree" concept which implies disagreeing in a mature, non-condensending way.
JGolds
Well-Known Member
Soo.... let us not bring your attraction of apes into this debate. lets just stick to politics. =) we all have points of veiw this is very obvious, everyone comes from different wlaks of life and experince, but that dosent make ones opinion less valuable. its what makes america great. this is a country of opporunity. we all have the choice to make the most of it. .
All I got from that is to you it is not valid. Well to them your claim has no validity either. So where does that leave us? Each in our own little fairy tell bubble.
JGolds
Well-Known Member
Now we just need to debate and argue about whose little fairy tell bubble is better.
So says you. Heck, at this point I think she tries to get a spanking on purpose. That or she just never wears panties with her school girl outfit.
**** just got real.
That was a great stump speech way back then.
BO is a pretty good racist himself, but a little bit confused what race is, or means. So far as I can tell, he didn't change anything, and his first two years of clear sailin' with a lock on the legislature, and all the powers he claims by executive orders, he didn't do any better for New Orleans.
OB is right about racism being alive and well, and it's my estimation of the human soul that it will be forever. It's just not right to like others more than you like yourself, or to like other "kinds" in any sense, better than your own "kind". We do a lot of legislation to try to make people do what's "right", and most of the time we'd do more "right" without the damned law. But it will always be a better way to do business, or government, by treating others with decency and respect. And the ideal set out in our Constitution of innate human rights is a fundamental truth that we should ever choose to uphold.
We didn't really get slavery ended when we approved our constitution, but the fundamental human rights which belong to all people did get a foot in the door with the concession that the slave trade would end in 1820. Slavery would have ended by 1880 without a Civil War on the basis of economics in the face of advancing agricultural equipment, and the cost of feeding the less efficient slaves would have made slaveholders give them their freedom, just like modern corporations have found the costs of American standards of wages and living have made offshore factories staffed by people living in cardboard shacks a better way to achieve shareholder value. . . . .
Lyndon LaRouche is right is observing that our present government is fundamentally genocidal, and dedicated in general to depopulating the earth of its human "burden", rather than acting to lift up mankind. And Barack Obama is part of that set of "progressives" who are dedicated to decimating us. His willingness to trample on, and shred, the Constitution is just one of many proofs of his inhumanity to man.
BO is a pretty good racist himself, but a little bit confused what race is, or means. So far as I can tell, he didn't change anything, and his first two years of clear sailin' with a lock on the legislature, and all the powers he claims by executive orders, he didn't do any better for New Orleans.
OB is right about racism being alive and well, and it's my estimation of the human soul that it will be forever. It's just not right to like others more than you like yourself, or to like other "kinds" in any sense, better than your own "kind". We do a lot of legislation to try to make people do what's "right", and most of the time we'd do more "right" without the damned law. But it will always be a better way to do business, or government, by treating others with decency and respect. And the ideal set out in our Constitution of innate human rights is a fundamental truth that we should ever choose to uphold.
We didn't really get slavery ended when we approved our constitution, but the fundamental human rights which belong to all people did get a foot in the door with the concession that the slave trade would end in 1820. Slavery would have ended by 1880 without a Civil War on the basis of economics in the face of advancing agricultural equipment, and the cost of feeding the less efficient slaves would have made slaveholders give them their freedom, just like modern corporations have found the costs of American standards of wages and living have made offshore factories staffed by people living in cardboard shacks a better way to achieve shareholder value. . . . .
Lyndon LaRouche is right is observing that our present government is fundamentally genocidal, and dedicated in general to depopulating the earth of its human "burden", rather than acting to lift up mankind. And Barack Obama is part of that set of "progressives" who are dedicated to decimating us. His willingness to trample on, and shred, the Constitution is just one of many proofs of his inhumanity to man.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
Turns out Obama voted against foregoing the Stafford act in the case of New Orleans so he could vote against funding the troops in Iraq.
He also insisted on the Stafford Act match following the Joplin Missouri tornado.
https://dailycaller.com/2012/10/03/...stafford-act-funding-after-joplin-mo-tornado/
He ain't just a demagogue. He's a hypocritical demagogue.
He also insisted on the Stafford Act match following the Joplin Missouri tornado.
https://dailycaller.com/2012/10/03/...stafford-act-funding-after-joplin-mo-tornado/
He ain't just a demagogue. He's a hypocritical demagogue.
PearlWatson
Well-Known Member
The invention of the cotton gin increased the demand for slave labor to pick the cotton.
Yes, and the invention of the car has increased the amount of CO2 in our atmosphere. But turning back the clock isn't going to suck all the CO2 out of the air. We need to keep moving forward technologically and in that progress we'll find solutions to our problems. Eventually new farming equipment would have made the demand for those slaves go away.
From what I have generally read the President is not going after guns. He is unfairly attacked on that front based on the general liberal stance of stricter gun laws.
Even certain republican leaders (Boehner for example) have come out on certain gun issues and said that they agree with President Obama.
A current bill I am hearing about is that they (Congress) want to restrict online ammo sales.
Even certain republican leaders (Boehner for example) have come out on certain gun issues and said that they agree with President Obama.
A current bill I am hearing about is that they (Congress) want to restrict online ammo sales.
Which studies is your research based upon?
It's not only you. I certainly acknowledge I have my own unsupported, unsubstantiated notions of the world. However, the existence of racism in modern-day US culture is supported and substantiated. Choosing to deny is choosing to say that evidence doesn't matter.
In neither case is there research on both sides. There are no scientific studies that support Creationism over evolutionary theory. There are none supporting the notion that racism is non-existant in society. The Golden Mean is a fallacy. One side is actually correct.
I agree. That aspect does not make one person's opinion less valuable.
We could each try to provide evidence, such as systmatic studies. Would that work for you?
Provide proof how? The exact point being addressed in my post was our views of things being based on our life experiences. What are we going to do? Tell stories?
Also One Brow, no one here is denying that racism is alive and well in the U.S. and world. It is. Pure and siomple, it is.
However I am not willing to go around calling racism at everything a person does that I do not like.
In this case the white student union is idiotic in my opinion. However that does not automatically make them racist as you yourself have indicated. I've already linked where you said that.
My stance is let's wait and see what they do. If they start denegrating any non white, giving hate filled speeches or other racist things than yes this group would be racist. If they don't than they are not.
Being the victim of racism gives a person a unique view of the problem. However that does not make that person (or other victims) the only qualified person to say what is and is not racism.
Perhaps I am misunderstanding what JAG is saying. I'll try to step back and read it more carefully. Currently, my reading of him is precisely that he is denying this.
I think it's quite possible for a Polish heritage club (as an example) to not be racist. I also agree that merely being idiotic is not being racist. However, with regard to this specific student union, I provided specific verbiage from seems to be a refldection of their goals, and that specific verbiage, to me, revealed the union was trying to defend white rights, a position that is basically a racist position.
So far, you have shown no willingness to describe how an organization to promote/defend white rights could be anthing other than racist. You also have not disputed the purpose of this particular student organization.
Not all villians were black hats and twirl mustaches.
I do not have to prove how they won't be racist. That right there is the very notion that I reject! I refuse to automatically assume that they are. "...by your fruits ye shall know them..."
Automatically assuming anything is what helps continue hate in any form.
All libs are unpatriotic, all conservatives cling to bibles and guns, all mulsims are terrorists, all white groups "defending white rights" (your term, not mine) are racist, all blacks on welfare are lazy and dependant on the government teat, Baptists are hate filled, Asians are all smart math and science nerds, Mexicans are stupid, Americans are all fat and lazy, all European women are slutty...
********. Pure and simple ********. If that is how you want to view the world than God bless. You have that right. But I flat out refuse to. If you want me to think I am blind to reality, refuse to acknowledge the truth..whatever, that is fantastic. I feel the same way about you.
I will judge each and every group/person based on what they do. Not what others have done or what I think they will do.