The racist mindset of liberals, black or white

Here's something else for your friend to peruse

Roman slavery was not based on "race" in the modern sense.[28] Slaves were drawn from all over Europe and the Mediterranean, including Celts, Germans, Thracians, Greeks, Carthaginians,[29] and black Africans, usually called "Ethiopians" in Greek and Latin sources.[30] By the 1st century BC, custom precluded the enslavement of Roman citizens and Italians living in Gallia Cisalpina, but previously many southern and central Italians had been enslaved after defeat.[31]

en.wikipedia.org...

In short, slavery was as common as breadmaking throughout recorded history, and has been combatted over the centuries.

reply to post by OneL0ve


You started your post explaining that labels of political affiliations are just that, then end up denigrating all but liberals.

Do you see that?

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus



Please quote me on that.

I did not target any group, nor did I set out to defend all liberals. But then again, you only see what you look for. So if me saying that I am a libertarian triggered some sort of bell in your heart that yelled, "must disagree!" then I am sorry for you.

reply to post by ButterCookie



You just spit on the graves of the white liberals that were murdered for their activities with the civil rights movement.

newsone.com...
www.splcenter.org...


www.cnn.com...

voices.yahoo.com...

See any white conservatives in the martyrs of the civil rights movement???

It's because of the black and white liberals during the civil rights movement that you as a black woman can express yourself the way you chose.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by OneL0ve

 

You started your post explaining that labels of political affiliations are just that, then end up denigrating all but liberals.

Do you see that?

I am not sure why Liberal/Democratic supporters have a hard time swallowing history. What's worse, they try extremely hard to quickly defend the racism of their party because no one wants to be labeled as a supporter of the racist or pro-slavery party...

Technically, can one truly say they are not racist if they support the main ideologies of a racist party? If they support the party who blocked anti-segregation laws, the ending of Jim Crow, and the Civil Rights Act?

As I explained earlier, whites who 'identify' with liberal/democratic party and are closely associated with minorities are still expressing racism by the fact that, according to their political ideology, they do not believe minorities are on the 'same level' with whites, and therefore need lifelong handouts, lowed educational standards, and excuse their negative behavior= Racism.

Blacks who "identify" with this party feel the exact same way and feel that whites owe them for slavery= Racism.

Originally posted by olaru12
reply to post by ButterCookie

 

You just spit on the graves of the white liberals that were murdered for their activities with civil rights movement.

newsone.com...
www.splcenter.org...


www.cnn.com...

voices.yahoo.com...

See any white conservatives in the martyrs of the civil rights movement???

edit on 12-5-2013 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)

No, no, no.

If white liberals during that era were fighting in support of the Civil Rights Act, then why did they associate with the party that was strongly opposed to it?

They were uninformed about their party's platform, which has consistently been against the Equal rights of blacks...

uninformed as most liberals are today, when they disagree that they support a very racist party.

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Technically, can one truly say they are not racist if they support the main ideologies of a racist party?

Some of the "main" ideologies I support are as follows:

The protection of our environment, religious freedom, limited government rule over our civil rights, legalization of marijuana, the pro-choice movement, and the liberation of all individuals alike. These are a few of the main principles that led me to identify with libertarianism.

To answer your thoughtful question, YES, I can say that I am not a racist because I do not slander people of races different from mine, I do not degrade individuals for looking and being different from myself, and I do not condone or approve of these actions. I stand up for the little guy more than you would imagine, which of course would be hard for you because as I mentioned before, you do not know me.

Please stop living in the past. If "liberal" means "racist" to you, then that says more about you than it does about liberals.

Originally posted by OneL0ve
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

 

Please quote me on that.

I did not target any group, nor did I set out to defend all liberals. But then again, you only see what you look for. So if me saying that I am a libertarian triggered some sort of bell in your heart that yelled, "must disagree!" then I am sorry for you.

This was the paragraph which made me wonder if you were being an apologist for liberals..(maybe I was wrong....)

To make a thread accusing most liberals of being racist is not only absurd, but it is clear evidence that you do not get out much (I state this confidently based on my observations of your blatant ignorance and placement of blame towards an entire group of people just because your friend who claims to be liberal said something you did not agree with).

Personally, I feel that liberals especially in the Democrat Party are racist when they think they are not, by targeting racial and ethnic minorities as potential voters and then cater to them by giving them special programs and welfare status and handouts of every kind. This is not real egalitarian society but one in which the Supreme State picks which elements of society are going to get the special handouts provided for by the Nanny State.
I admit I didn't get through your entire post because it tipped into defending liberals, so I missed the part about you having escaped a communist country. I hope you see what I am talking about regarding how the Nanny Staters push Totalitarianism and thus end up enslaving us all under the guise of helping minorities.

I did miss the Libertarian part too, but you defended liberals in another post too. Perhaps liberal translates into Libertarian for you.

reply to post by ButterCookie


I think part of the issue here is that Marxists have pushed for various so-called "egalitarian" rights as a means of income redistribution. Reparations are a neat way to get people on board with that redistribution theory of equalizing elements and groups in society. It is all a ruse to spread socialism. Many people are taken in by this, while probably not even realizing what it is based on.

Communists and socialists have preyed upon such people because it works.

Seems the Communist Party is at it again

radiopatriot.wordpress.com...


Indeed the Democrat Party has been overrun with people sympathetic to the Communist Party and communist subversion, which was completely evident when Maxine Watters outed the agenda for nationalizing the oil industry.
Frank Marshall Davis was a card carrying communist and very closely connected to controlling elements of the Democrat Party today and the elites in the WH now.

Communist subversion is and was since the inception of the Communist Party in the US in 1919 an important factor in all of this and they have simply hijacked the Democrat Party.

Here's a pretty revealing document on communist subversive activity in the US

www.usasurvival.org...

reply to post by ButterCookie

Seems like maybe you have your categories and time all mixed up together in your head. Republicans that were Democrats, Democrats that were Republicans...and now it's just the liberals that are all racists?

Well - since this seems to be your opinion, here's an interesting read:

The Conservative Fantasy History of Civil Rights

The civil rights movement, once a controversial left-wing fringe, has grown deeply embedded into the fabric of our national story. This is a salutary development, but a problematic one for conservatives, who are the direct political descendants of (and, in the case of some of the older members of the movement, the exact same people as) the strident opponents of the civil rights movement. It has thus become necessary for conservatives to craft an alternative story, one that absolves their own ideology of any guilt. The right has dutifully set itself to its task, circulating its convoluted version of history, honing it to the point where it can be repeated by any defensive College Republican in his dorm room. Kevin Williamson’s cover story in National Review is the latest version of what is rapidly congealing into conservatism’s revisionist dogma.

The mainstream, and correct, history of the politics of civil rights is as follows. Southern white supremacy operated out of the Democratic Party beginning in the nineteenth century, but the party began attracting northern liberals, including African-Americans, into an ideologically cumbersome coalition. Over time the liberals prevailed, forcing the Democratic Party to support civil rights, and driving conservative (and especially southern) whites out, where they realigned with the Republican Party.

Maybe it's more about geography: Southern Democrats :-)

What a weird OP. I have some - doubts... For starters - you make a lot of generalizations your own self. Thinking you can pick any group - left, right - whatever - and just plain state as fact that that group's mindset is any one thing - seems, well...you know. (Obvious)

If the more liberal members here at ATS started threads claiming all Republicans/conservatives were inherently racist there would be hell to pay. It's divisive, baiting - and ignorant

Anyhow - you are to be commended. Even as your dumb very good friend is talking - you're typing and setting us all straight here at ATS. Thanks :-)

I'd just like to add - it took a whole lot of people in many different categories working together and independently to achieve any kind of equality at all, for many different kinds of people - anywhere, everywhere and throughout history...

All those people deserve our respect - they don't deserve more of this same ole same ole toro poop

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


The paragraph to which you referred to was not meant to say that Liberal is the only correct way to be and that all other forms of political identity are incorrect.

It was meant to suggest that one should not stereotype an entire group of people. In all of my posts thus far, I have not introduced any idea other than "Do not judge others." I did not come here to defend or take sides. The only side I will take is one that holds individuals accountable for their own behaviors and does not make a whole group guilty by association.

I am a libertarian and yes, I do believe in liberty. What makes me libertarian and not liberal is that I recognize the need for social responsibility and that without others, we are nobody. However, my views and stances on the political spectrum have nothing to do with my initial point.

The democratic party and the republican party both have plenty of their own issues- there can never be one party that will satisfy the views and needs of every individual in the country. But the point of life is to learn from the past and to incorporate what we learned into the creation of a better future. No system is perfect. The minority citizens of this country have just as much of a say and right to freedom as you and I. To them, a republican system would be considered corrupt. If we argue about what is just and unjust about which party, we will argue forever and get absolutely nowhere.

reply to post by OneL0ve

The minority citizens of this country have just as much of a say and right to freedom as you and I. To them, a republican system would be considered corrupt.

Again, why are you focusing on Republicans? To say that Republicans are not as willing to grant minorities the rights they deserve means you do not understand the platform of either the Republican or the Democrat Parties and the mechanism by which Democrats control voting in this country by recruiting them to a false paradigm which ends up enslaving all of us.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


Interesting read.

It is true that the right has tried to re-write left-wing history, and the irony is right wingers accuse me of re-writing history when I show them the truth about what the right did to demonise the true left.

There is no left-wing in politics any more. What is now considered left-wing is just modern liberalism, which is not left-wing by the true original definition of those terms.

The original left-wing of the French estates was the anti-statists, whereas the right were the pro-state side. Left wing and right wing are based on authority, the extreme right being fascism, complete state authority, and anarchism the extreme of the left, complete liberty from coercive state systems.

The liberals are not left-wing. Modern liberalism came from the right, from the middle and upper middle classes (Small bushiness owners, management etc.), not the working classes (those who have only their labour to sell).

Socialism was a working class movement and had nothing to do with governments and politicians. When it wouldn't go away the capitalist politicians appropriated left-wing terms and used their power over the state to demonise those terms. After WWII decimated working class solidarity, the state replaced that with social climbing and individualism, in order to weaken the power of the working class. They continue weakening the power of all people by outsourcing jobs to cheaper labour markets.

If the workers owned the means of production that wouldn't happen.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


I think your perception is skewed, which would make it quite difficult to understand where I am coming from. My main focus is not any particular party. I could not possibly care any less about republicans or democrats than I already do. If you choose to ignore everything I said thus far and only focus on the one part that you do not agree with, which wasn't even meant to suggest that I disagree with everything Republicans stand for, then my job is done here. The last thing I will write on this thread is this:

Your opinions are not more correct than mine, and my opinions are not more correct than yours. This isn't an argument (at least not on my part). This is an exchange of thoughts and beliefs. They should not be disputed or accepted, they should simply be considered and digested.

That is all. Farewell and happy mothers day.

reply to post by ANOK


One of the only truly intelligent people in this goofy thread. Remain uninvested, think freely, and stay outside of the superficial constructs of ideology. Sounds a little Yoda-ish, but it is the real deal. All of us, except for the super wealthy and politically powerful, should be anarchist's at heart and scientific at mind. Learning the truth is always more important than dictating the "truth".

reply to post by ANOK

Really is a good read - and worth reading the whole thing

It's too bad history, and the evolution of our thinking - isn't as black and white or left and right as some people need for it to be to feel superior to everyone else

We still manage to lurch slowly and awkwardly forward - somehow

:-)

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus

Whoa...

So, let me get this straight Third Eye - what you're saying is it's the communists what done this to us?

I'd like to ask you a serious question...once, when you were a kid - did a communist steal your lunch?

Or, asked another way - how is it that anything that might (by some) be seen as bad turns out to be the work of leftists/Marxists/socialists/progressives/liberals/commies?

Serious question - which I hope you will actually answer: is the world for you divided down the middle between good and evil? So much so that, in the end, even the civil rights movement was just a cover for the communists?

Is equality just a lucky accident - a fortunate by product of a communist plot? Or are you arguing that the whole damn thing is a mess - civil rights included?

Or, as our OP suggests - was all the good ever done in this country done by the conservatives?

Originally posted by openlocks
All of us, except for the super wealthy and politically powerful, should be anarchist's at heart and scientific at mind. Learning the truth is always more important than dictating the "truth".

Thankyou, and very well said mate!

Yes, "anarchist at heart and scientific in mind", I like that quote.

If only people would wake up and realise that capitalism is what gives governments and state systems their power and control. Capitalism and authority go hand in hand.

There is no freedom in capitalism.

"The liberals and conservatives and Libertarians who lament totalitarianism are phoneys and hypocrites. . . You find the same sort of hierarchy and discipline in an office or factory as you do in a prison or a monastery. . . A worker is a part-time slave. The boss says when to show up, when to leave, and what to do in the meantime. He tells you how much work to do and how fast. He is free to carry his control to humiliating extremes, regulating, if he feels like it, the clothes you wear or how often you go to the bathroom. With a few exceptions he can fire you for any reason, or no reason. He has you spied on by snitches and supervisors, he amasses a dossier on every employee. Talking back is called 'insubordination,' just as if a worker is a naughty child, and it not only gets you fired, it disqualifies you for unemployment compensation. . .The demeaning system of domination I've described rules over half the waking hours of a majority of women and the vast majority of men for decades, for most of their lifespans. For certain purposes it's not too misleading to call our system democracy or capitalism or -- better still -- industrialism, but its real names are factory fascism and office oligarchy. Anybody who says these people are 'free' is lying or stupid." Bob Black "The Abolition of Work"

B.4 How does capitalism affect liberty?

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


So the 8 hour day, the 40 hour week, overtime pay, weekends, holidays, workplace safety, banning of child labour, etc., were implemented by conservatives?

No, we got all our rights in the work place because of the left, because of the labour movement, because of unions. Not because of any government, who fought against those rights until popular opinion cause them to capitulate.

Without the left America would be like China, low wages, long hours, no weekends, no overtime pay, no holidays, child labour, unsafe working conditions.

What did the capitalist give us? Outsourcing.

Do you honestly think that would be better? How about some respect where it's due?

BTW why do you think we have a labour day? It came from the movement for the eight hour day, by socialists!

Don't be afraid to absorb a little true history....

The eight-hour-day movement and the birth of American labor

America used to have a very strong labour movement, not so much anymore. The right wing has been very successful in demonising it's competition, so much so that even the neo-left has very little in common with the real left wing of the original anarchists and Marxists. So much so some idiots think anarchism, libertarian socialism, is right wing. Libertarian was always a left-wing term, it can only be because right wing is not libertarian, it is authoritarian. Capitalism is not libertarian, it is authoritarian.

reply to post by ANOK


I don't know if I'd say Capitalism is what gives the State its power... to me the real issue is their pseudo-legitimizing legal frameworks that gives them a monopoly on force. Economics is just a tool to oppress subjects and repress uprisings and over-throws imo. If people are too poor, both materially and psychologically, to defend themselves then that is when totalitarianism is possible. I'm not anti-markets per se, but I definitely cannot support ancaps ideology and do not think markets, even those devoid of state presence, can protect or maintain liberty. Your info on anarcho-socialism is interesting... I really have yet to look into it. Guess I've always just associate socialism with central authority, so I never saw how the two were compatible.