Forget Red vs. Blue -- It's Slave States vs. Free States in 2012

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

I suppose that's why it's a good thing that neither party ever have 100% total control of the elected Government at any one given time. The system of compromise and meeting half way to 50% on either side of the middle in this nation is what has to be for it to work, IMO.

Exceptional conclusion Wrabbit.

As I see it both equality and freedom have value and deserve to be fought for, but I think a better understanding of the root of each sides desire will help create civility in a debate that often leads to uncivil responses.

I have no horse in this race, but I love when two opposite sides can see themselves as well as the opponents in a simple maner and gain some understanding of the other as a result.

God Bless,

reply to post by ElohimJD

As I see it both equality and freedom have value and deserve to be fought for, but I think a better understanding of the root of each sides desire will help create civility in a debate that often leads to uncivil responses.

I have no horse in this race, but I love when two opposite sides can see themselves as well as the opponents in a simple maner and gain some understanding of the other as a result.

Thank you. I agree....we all need to realize the roots of the divisive BS......
I hope you are not intending your response as a snide dig.

I really want for people to see each other's points of view, and come to a compromise, as much as possible.

Again, as frequently so far during this "election season" (if that's what it truly is, and not just a play-acting farce for the puppet-masters to laugh at), I'm feeling sorry for starting a thread here.

reply to post by badgerprints

I now realize that by virtue of being from the south I am unable to be anything but what I am labeled due to my geographical location and historic events.
Maybe if I moved to the northeast or to the west coast I'd be able to be something other than an arbitrarily designated racist and slavery loving scumbag.

What absolute crap.

No one labelled you, badger. The article addresses the mindsets that have been passed down over the centuries.
No one said you weren't interested in your fellow Americans' well-being.

Sheesh.

If you have some points to counter-point the point of the very left-leaning article that I merely posted, feel free to contribute further. Your automatic "shut-down", and appealing to the "ancestry" card is unwarranted.

reply to post by wildtimes


Well, the South has always been sluggish when it came to making changes to secure rights. Slavery, racial civil rights, interracial marriage laws, full women suffrage (with the exception of Oklahoma) have always arrived last in the South, and in all cases it would be by Federal force. I'm not sure what is it with Southern representitives, culture, that have made those societies skeptical of securing fundamental rights more so than other parts of the country. Believe me I know about the South, but it still boggles my mind to this day why they have been so sluggish to support fundamental rights. They say it's about States rights, but state or constitutional rights doesn't justify the position morally, ethically, it doesn't explain why you support racial segregation, why you supported slavery, why women shouldn't vote, and so forth.

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Believe me I know about the South, but it still boggles my mind to this day why they have been so sluggish to support fundamental rights.

I don't get it, either. I never knew there was a "school of thought" like the one in the OP! It was total news to me; I thought I would share it here, and get some reactions/responses.

I guess many members are knee-jerking defensively, rather than addressing the points made.



Folks, THE TITLE OF THE THREAD IS THE TITLE OF THE ARTICLE,
NOT MY COMPOSITION!

reply to post by wildtimes


As Biden would put it .... This is just a bunch of stuff...or...malarky...

You seem to have a hangup with race.

I want to extend my apologies for posting this article. I did not anticipate that people would take it as a personal attack.

My intention was not to alienate anyone, nor to label anyone.

Appreciation to all of you for responding.

reply to post by 11235813213455

You seem to have a hangup with race.

Nope, no hangup. I don't care what color anyone's skin is.

I care what their ethics and morals are regarding others' well-being.

That is all I care about.

The Souths mindset stems more from religious beliefs and prejudices then most anything else. Its not called the bible belt for nothing. People vote for who their preacher tells them too, and usually it comes down to the religion of the candidate and the stance on abortion.

Personally I take offense as being categorized as living in a slave state. Slaves haven't been owned in several decades. And it should be pointed out slavery was nationwide, not just in the south. To pull up differences more then 100 years old is a lame attempt for the writer to make a point.

There is no difference in the parties when it comes down to what common people see or do, and as a country we will never see a change until we do away with the two party system. Its all about money, manipulation, and control.

I have not decided yet who I am voting for this election, both are horrible choices.

Originally posted by wildtimes
It's about exploitation of the workers, regardless of their age, race, or gender.

With huge Government controls does the worker also get exploited? Who pays for all those controls and why would someone want to work when they can just live on subsidies?

With about 70% of the population working for small businesses what is it holding them back from hiring today 2012?

We get taxed the crap out of us, ALL OF US in the end to pay for it all and it still will not be enough. Please tell me what will prevent a slave state controlled by an overreaching Government?

reply to post by Xtrozero

Please tell me what will prevent a slave state controlled by an overreaching Government?

I can't tell you.
I don't know.
I'm confused, and frustrated with the system the way it is. I don't ask for, nor receive, government subsidies. I don't have any answers, like I said.

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by badgerprints

 

I now realize that by virtue of being from the south I am unable to be anything but what I am labeled due to my geographical location and historic events.
Maybe if I moved to the northeast or to the west coast I'd be able to be something other than an arbitrarily designated racist and slavery loving scumbag.

What absolute crap.

No one labelled you, badger. The article addresses the mindsets that have been passed down over the centuries.
No one said you weren't interested in your fellow Americans' well-being.

Sheesh.

If you have some points to counter-point the point of the very left-leaning article that I merely posted, feel free to contribute further. Your automatic "shut-down", and appealing to the "ancestry" card is unwarranted.

The article "labels" clearly and the conclusion pushes the agenda.

"This article makes sense to me. It's also a refreshing take on the divisions between Dems and Reps."
-Your words.

" Slave states versus free states."
It encourages the reader to see former slave states as always being slave states. It is not ambiguous about that. Your advocation of this article as a "refreshing take" is also clear.

Once again. The article is a condemnation of people based on their ancestry, location and political beliefs. It pushes an agenda based on the authors own desire to label present day republicans as racists/slavers and as such is an accusation.

You will always get a strong reaction to something that is offensive to the reader. Even more so when it alludes to a mindset that is a vile lie used to remove an individual's rights to choose by the concept of ancestral guilt.

(Bad southern white man. You're obviously a slavery loving racist if you don't vote Democrat.)

If you don't wish to get a strong response then don't advocate the extreme position.

My post is a short clear response that is pointedly responding to the ridiculous nature of the message without veiling it in a supposedly neutral dissertation.

So, yes. You labeled me.
No my "shut down" and "ancestry appeal" was not unwarranted as the article posits that ancestry and location are the driving mindset behind the present day Republican "Slave States".

reply to post by badgerprints

If you don't wish to get a strong response then don't advocate the extreme position.

My post is a short clear response that is pointedly responding to the ridiculous nature of the message without veiling it in a supposedly neutral dissertation.

I'm definitely no "extremist."

What's with the hostility? If you have a civil rebuttal, that would be helpful. Hate is counterproductive, as is labeling and projection of anger onto someone who merely brought up a subject that (evidently) rattles you.

Can you please address what you see as the errors in the article (aside from your taking it as a personal assault, which it wasn't)?

Originally posted by wildtimes
reply to post by badgerprints

 

If you don't wish to get a strong response then don't advocate the extreme position.

My post is a short clear response that is pointedly responding to the ridiculous nature of the message without veiling it in a supposedly neutral dissertation.

I'm definitely no "extremist."

What's with the hostility? If you have a civil rebuttal, that would be helpful. Hate is counterproductive, as is labeling and projection of anger onto someone who merely brought up a subject that (evidently) rattles you.

Can you please address what you see as the errors in the article (aside from your taking it as a personal assault, which it wasn't)?

I didn't call you an extremist. I said you advocated the extreme position.

Disagreement is not hostility.

I am actually being very "civil."

As for projections of anger, trust me, I'm not angry.

I believe you are the one who is rattled.
You still see the conversation as an attack on you and not as a reaction to the article that you find refreshing.

Parsing words over this particular article is pretty much a waste of time. Read the title. It is a very clear and accurate precursor to the contents of the article as a whole.

Slaves had more rights than todays unborn

The only party that considers people as property in 2012 is the DNC. Only the DNC says a woman owns everything in her body, including another person. Under the DNC, their property rights are so unrestricted, they can hire executioners to take those lives

reply to post by badgerprints

I didn't call you an extremist. I said you advocated the extreme position.

I said it made sense to me. That is what I said.

I did not say I advocated it; you are assuming that I "advocate" it because I posted it. FYI, the article was the very first one I came across when I did a simple "google" search for "alt.news."

I also pointed out it was very left-leaning.

So, you would prefer that this type of article not be presented at all? Or, do you want to enlighten us as to the reasons it is incorrect?

Go for it! PLEASE, disabuse ATS of the concept that is presented in the article.

Originally posted by wildtimes


So, you would prefer that this type of article not be presented at all? Or, do you want to enlighten us as to the reasons it is incorrect?

The article is vile. You found it refreshing.

Present it as you wish.

I see no reason to waffle about it. It's divisive garbage.

reply to post by badgerprints

The article is vile. You found it refreshing.

Present it as you wish.

I see no reason to waffle about it. It's divisive garbage.

It's very divisive. And apparently very offensive.

That's why I presented it, to get ATS' opinion on whether it was valid or not.
I see you took it as bait and your hackles came up.

I have not accused anyone on ATS of anything....
it was a "fresh" look at a historical perspective of how we got where we are.
And we are here.
Here we are.
It is what it is....
people getting pissy and argumentative and defensive and assaultive and taking a "very left-leaning" and inconsequential op-ed article I found and turning it into an attack!

If you think it's wrong, please explain your point of view, rather than attacking me for posting it.

reply to post by tnhiker

There is no difference in the parties when it comes down to what common people see or do, and as a country we will never see a change until we do away with the two party system. Its all about money, manipulation, and control.

I have not decided yet who I am voting for this election, both are horrible choices.

I agree with you.
We won't see a change until we get rid of the "red/blue" mindset.

Thanks for participating.

Originally posted by wildtimes


If you think it's wrong, please explain your point of view, rather than attacking me for posting it.

I have explained my point of view.

Once again. If you want to present an extreme point of view in an article then state that it makes sense and that you find it a refreshing take then you can expect a strong reaction.

Originally posted by wildtimes
www.alternet.org...
This article makes sense to me. It's also a refreshing take on the divisions between Dems and Reps.

As far as any personal "attack" you may have perceived from me, I apologize.
I will not, however, apologize for my position on this article.
It is divisive garbage intended to vilify a present day demographic based on race, location and historical events.