Alt right protests
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
19-08-2017, 02:56 PM
RE: Alt right protests
So there were "tens of thousands" of counter protesters in the streets of Boston. When a scuffle started, Boston police just pushed themselves between the arguing parties and stood there as human barrier. It worked great.

His Orangeship said he saw lots of anti-police protesters and praised the police for handling it.

My fears of trump purposefully trying to start a civil war increase daily. And now Bannon can organize with his Breitbart. I smell a rat. Several, in fact. I hope I am wrong.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Dom's post
19-08-2017, 03:03 PM (This post was last modified: 19-08-2017 05:31 PM by Anjele.)
RE: Alt right protests
(19-08-2017 02:56 PM)Dom Wrote:  So there were "tens of thousands" of counter protesters in the streets of Boston. When a scuffle started, Boston police just pushed themselves between the arguing parties and stood there as human barrier. It worked great.

His Orangeship said he saw lots of anti-police protesters and praised the police for handling it.

My fears of trump purposefully trying to start a civil war increase daily. And now Bannon can organize with his Breitbart. I smell a rat. Several, in fact. I hope I am wrong.

Trump simply cannot speak out against the white supremacist groups...he can't and he won't.

All hell's going to break loose. It's a sad state of affairs.

See here they are the bruises some were self-inflicted and some showed up along the way. - JF

We're all mad here. The Cheshire Cat
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2017, 03:11 PM
RE: Alt right protests
(19-08-2017 02:06 PM)Dom Wrote:  
(19-08-2017 01:49 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  I know, I made that remark in another thread (or maybe this one earlier), but yeah, where are statues to Gestapo honoring their service across Europe? There are better far more effective ways to learn about history than seeing a statue in a park.

The concentration camps are preserved, and I hear that all school children are taken there to experience it. There are also bombed out buildings as reminders. And of course the museums.

I do think that tangible reminders of times gone by are worthy of preservation. But you don't need hundreds of them. That's just silly. And they should actually bear witness by having a plaque explaining the history and the reason they were erected.

I was being a bit sarcastic. I've seen dachau. Yes I've seen numerous museums on ww2 throughout Europe. That's kinda my point. The very uncomfortable reality of history is taught there. it's not sugar coated for easier consumption either.

Germany painted huge swatickas on the sides of buildings, after the war they sand blasted off, but you can still see where they were. As far as I knew after ww2 there was no movement to preserve that bit of history. In later years there was no outcry about preserving that bit of history to repaint them either. I know in one museum a wall was preserved and moved there, so people could understand and have a feel for how prevalent that symbol was...It was everywhere.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2017, 03:25 PM
RE: Alt right protests
(19-08-2017 01:43 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  
(19-08-2017 08:11 AM)Ruby Crystal Wrote:  You can't change history, no matter how much it goes with your ideas or not. Most of the people we call out greatest historical men (Mostly) were slave owners.

So what?

Yes, many of these statues were slave owners. At the time it was normal for such things.
I often refer back to a quote Atheist use. "If my beliefs shake your beliefs in God then maybe you don't believe as much as you think you do." meaning for people who believe in God, who say nothing can shake that, seem so scared of people who don't believe. So much for unshaken belief.

If you're so horrified by some slave over, who contributed to history, is a sign of slavery. Then you have no firm ground that we won't go back to slavery or learn from the past.
History is meant to be learned from, tearing it down wont' solve anything but make you feel better about getting rid of 'such evil' in the world. How "Dare we 'worship' a slave owner, for whatever 'minor' thing they did for our history."

Laughable really, you call out theists for saying about the same thing with different words. All because we have a statue of a man who did good things in history, but he dare be a slave owner in a time where slave owners were all around and common.

You do the same thing religious people do, for a different cause in different words.

We are not going back to slavery, a statue means nothing, it can't hurt you, it's history. Just as the bible being waved at me as the 'truth' and will 'save my soul' means nothing to me. A statue of a slave owner won't make me think 'you know I could be great like this guy if I slaves...' Facepalm

History is both good and bad, we already have conservatives trying to change it to fit their ideas, please stop pandering to the outrage of those who call 'slavery worship' if anything they are the ones worshiping slavery because it's a card to get what they want. Just as religious people use the bible as a card to get what they want in court.

Then again, even if you point this out to them, they will call you all sorts of derogatory names. Seems logic and reasoning has no place in an area where people feel strongly to their ideals, no matter how much it pushes against them, hey just like some other group we know of!

What history do you learn seeing a statue by a courthouse? Where do you learn why it was erected when it's been there since the 20s and it's just become part of the landscape to you? In fact many of the civil war "memorials" and statues came around during the early part of the 20th century, because quite honestly they were funded largely by Klan controlled areas. The Klan was everywhere, whether people want to admit that or not. So, it' s ok to pander to oppressors and allow them to keep their statues because they don't hurt you, but not the oppressed?

The whole civil war was ONLY about the states right to keep other humans as chattel. Despite the south trying to whitewash that part from history. Poor white people who didn't own slaves also had a dog in that fight, because that would make them on equal footing with the slave, if they were freed. The north was agrarian too, as the south, but the north had to pay their employees and their employees were free to move.

Read the letters of secession. Jefferson Davis truly believed that slavery was right and was elected as the confederate president on that platform. He believed that god created the black man to serve white people. This is all in his writings...We have the evidence that he did feel this way...He also believed that he might be able to persuade France and England to enter the civil war on his side because the south was practically the world's supplier of cotton by that time. Both countries had already abolished slavery and were actually placing some pressure on the United States to follow suit if they were going to be taken seriously on the world stage.

So why are there any statues to him around today (aside from in museums)? What purpose does it serve to celebrate his birthday as a holiday like two states still do? Why do you think that flying the confederate flag on a state building might be offensive?

More than a decade after the civil war, blacks were treated just as poorly as when they were slaves. If they didn't work, they could be arrested and jailed. They often worked the same land, but their "living expenses" were taken out of their wage and they could end up owing the plantation owner money if the crop failed. Some refused to pay them, but instead held their earnings for them, so they wouldn't spend it frivolously. They could be beaten for not doing a good job and even killed. If they wanted to grow vegetables or keep chickens, they had to pay for that space. The sharecropper, rented the land, and returned some of the crop to the landowner before the crop was sold. However, generally the landowner got a better price for their portion of the same crop, plus got to charge for their rent, equipment use, food, and anything else they could think of...

Their children could be forced into apprenticeships if the former slave parents had debt. During the final months and year of the civil war, they even forced slaves to fight for the confederacy. How fucked up and weirdly ironic is that?

If they didn't have cash, they usually weren't allowed to buy their own land -- no bank would give them loans. Their reparations were ignored by congress.

In the north, because of Jefferson Davis buying influence in northern newspapers to capitalize on the anti war sentiment, suddenly black people living there were subjected to prejudices they hadn't faced before. Segregation became more commonplace.

The klan was born after the civil war, and we all know about them, but their influence spread like a virus across the country. Especially in the south, black people could be not allowed to vote for any reason the town/county/state. The bar would be moved at the whim of the county registrar. He could ask them anything. It's amazing to think that a large swath of a counties population wouldn't be allowed to vote to effect a positive change because some white folk were afraid of losing power.

Duke Ellington and his orchestra appeared in a movie and the director made some of his band darken up their faces so that they wouldn't appear to be light on camera so people wouldn't think his band might be integrated. Because that shit was illegal.

Even in the post WW2 1950s, entertainers like Sammy Davis Jr and Nat King Cole weren't allowed to stay in the hotels they performed in.

This shit continued until the civil rights act was passed in 1964 almost 100 years AFTER the civil war ended. It didn't stop the oppression, but emboldened the oppressors to double down on their shit.

In the 21st century this shit shouldn't still be around except for museums where the appropriate context can provided. Because the context of a statue sitting in a park is lost on the general public, it just becomes something they're used to seeing -- like background noise it's not noticed until someone points it out to them and they're finally willing to listen.
This pwnage was so complete and comprehensive it was almost painful to read.... almost. Wink Bowing
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2017, 03:26 PM
RE: Alt right protests
Did you know that the swastika was around for thousands of years before Hitler turned it into the hateful symbol we think of it now as?

To quote this article:
"To this day it is a sacred symbol in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism."

So, food for thought---as we travel the world and see a swastika, we shouldn't automatically condemn it and associate it as being Nazi. For some people it is a genuine ancient symbol that is part of their heritage.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php...d=10007453

(The more you know...)

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2017, 03:29 PM
RE: Alt right protests
(19-08-2017 03:26 PM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  Did you know that the swastika was around for thousands of years before Hitler turned it into the hateful symbol we think of it now as?

To quote this article:
"To this day it is a sacred symbol in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism."

So, food for thought---as we travel the world and see a swastika, we shouldn't automatically condemn it and associate it as being Nazi. For some people it is a genuine ancient symbol that is part of their heritage.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php...d=10007453

Unless used by Hindus (modern ones no longer use it I don't think) in a proper spiritual or historic context we absolutely should Imo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes adey67's post
19-08-2017, 03:31 PM
RE: Alt right protests
(19-08-2017 03:26 PM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  Did you know that the swastika was around for thousands of years before Hitler turned it into the hateful symbol we think of it now as?

To quote this article:
"To this day it is a sacred symbol in Hinduism, Buddhism, and Jainism."

So, food for thought---as we travel the world and see a swastika, we shouldn't automatically condemn it and associate it as being Nazi. For some people it is a genuine ancient symbol that is part of their heritage.

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php...d=10007453

I don't really give a shit. When a white nationalist dons it, it's not because their a fucking buddhist or Hindu.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Momsurroundedbyboys's post
19-08-2017, 03:33 PM
RE: Alt right protests
adey67 and moms....agreed and agreed. But did either of you take the time to actually read the article? My point is that Hitler hijacked an ancient symbol of something good and turned it into something bad.

Where are we going and why am I in this hand basket?
"Life is not all lovely thorns and singing vultures, you know." ~ Morticia Addams
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-08-2017, 03:47 PM
RE: Alt right protests
(19-08-2017 03:33 PM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  adey67 and moms....agreed and agreed. But did either of you take the time to actually read the article? My point is that Hitler hijacked an ancient symbol of something good and turned it into something bad.

No because I already knew it was a symbol for good in Hinduism but that's to me irrelevant, in the form of black on white on red its a nazi symbol of evil, if they'd used the Pillsbury doughboy the cross of Lorraine or a picture of the Virgin Mary it would be the same.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like adey67's post
19-08-2017, 03:48 PM
RE: Alt right protests
(19-08-2017 03:33 PM)outtathereligioncloset Wrote:  adey67 and moms....agreed and agreed. But did either of you take the time to actually read the article? My point is that Hitler hijacked an ancient symbol of something good and turned it into something bad.

Yes, I'm well aware of the history. it doesn't matter in the least because Hitler. I'm sorry but no one can take that shit back now because of him. It is what it is. I'm sure a bunch Hindu's went around and said, "this is why we can't have nice things. Assholes."

That turd cannot be polished into anything. It's unfortunate but we can't be so complacent to think otherwise. As long there are racist thugs who embrace that symbol, it has no place in our society.


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: