Slashdot Mirror
After Losing Support, Trump's Business and Manufacturing Councils Are Shutting Down (theverge.com)
Over a dozen anonymous readers share a similar report: Two White House advisory councils that once included tech leaders like Elon Musk and Travis Kalanick have dissolved, after several members resigned over President Donald Trump's weak condemnation of white supremacists. A member of the Strategic and Policy Forum told CNBC that it wanted to make a "more significant impact" by disbanding the entire group: "It makes a central point that it's not going to go forward. It's done." Soon after, Trump took credit for shutting down both that group and a separate Manufacturing Council, "rather than putting pressure on the businesspeople." The councils' members came from a range of industries, including several major Silicon Valley companies. Besides Musk and Kalanick, executives from Intel, IBM, and Dell had joined. It's been controversial from the start -- Musk and Kalanick both left months ago -- but a major exodus started this week, after Trump issued a vague statement blaming "many sides" for violence at a white supremacist rally that left one woman dead. Intel CEO Brian Krzanich resigned on Monday, saying that politics had "sidelined the important mission of rebuilding America's manufacturing base." Axios has more details.
Sounds like a win.
Trumpagedon style https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
It has nothing to do with the Left. When dozens of CEO's of American companies representing billions of dollars of shareholder value are running away from the supposed "leader of the free world".... well, you have to ask yourself did America seriously fuck up in choosing a President? I think the answer is pretty obvious.
Are you seriously faulting people for not denouncing a rampage that hasn't happened?
We aren't bashing Trump for being Trump but for being a POTUS that is dividing America in the worst possible way
Eh, no better or worse than violent communist vigilantes, really. Or racists that chant, "Dead cops now", and "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" or variants thereof, and shoot cops dead. Sorry, that last part WAS due to some BLM members and their denial of that is BS.
Every group has an internal spectrum but the worst of them are about the same.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Do you really think this is a left vs. right issue?
come try to punch me, I've got 9mm lead pills you'll enjoy ;-)
Fuck off Suiggy! I'm as American as it gets. I'm anti-statism in all its forms; be it spear-headed from from a communist or fascist movement, or institutionalized in government. I support calling out the Neo-Nazi movement for what they are, a hate group. No, what I'm truly angry about is the opportunistic nation of the MSM and K-Street to divide and conquered. Fuck them, and full all those that support this Orwellian oppression.
Life is not for the lazy.
If you don't want to be called a Nazi, perhaps don't act like a fascist, and don't defend those who do by providing shade for them to hide in.
Half a year in and Trump has fucked up on every single endeavor.
I agree, that userid is not one that has been around 15 years. Mine, yes, that one, no. Guess she could have got an ID after being an AC for years....
Per /. being a platform for conservative nerds that is a good one. I literally had to walk away from /. for about 5 years because it had become so leftist infested that I literally couldn't say a word without being modded straight down. On practically anything I said as a Conservative.
So, while the ratio of conservatives to liberals on /. now seems about 50/50 to me it has absolutely not always been that way.
Caution: Contents under pressure
you misspelled putin
Give me a break. This is a tech story. The president of the fucking United States has killed two boards, which consisted of several top CEOs, whose companies produces tech products and services that the vast majority of people in the fucking world use. If you think it's a left vs right issue, or a political issue, maybe you're not nerd enough to know the difference. Stop the whining. Open any news outlet's site and you will see a ton of Trump stories there. Look at Slashdot's front page, and in the last five hours, all they have run is a math article, a few Science-related stories, a story about Microsoft Office and another story about Google's services. That's a fucking fair balance.
Fuck them, and full all those that support this Orwellian oppression.
You mean like Trump and Sessions wanting the logs from an anti-Trump website? Or a bunch of African-American protestors who'd like the odds of "death by cop" to come down a few points?
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Anonymous Coward account.
by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
s/dividing/divided .. USA has been divided for years and it's not something that started all of a sudden when Trump took office. America is undergoing the tyranny of SJW's and has been for years. Trump simply exposes it for the hysteria that it is. He's very clumsy in doing so, but at least he isn't walking away from the over-inflated snowflake issues and all that comes from it. He may be a big bad bully but that doesn't make him wrong on all accounts.
Oh, and for the record, I'm not a US citizen, I'm looking at this from the other side of the ocean, wondering WTF got into you people.
To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
Do you realize your fantasy is ridiculous and will never come to pass? The revolution will not be homogenized.
Someone had to do it.
What history is getting rewritten? The South lost. Losers in wars don't get statues. History's not being rewritten, it's finally getting right.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Don't blame Slashdot because the President of the United States is a loudmouthed idiot.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Yeah real MURICAN you are. I saw your post advocating on asking Muslims to renounce their faith and then shooting them if they say no. Real fucking anti-statist of you. You're are disgusting human being.
The left hasn't done anything wrong, well, except for a few cop killings, and the speaker for the Women's March on Washington tortured a man for two weeks, including shoving a pipe up his ass because he was, in her accomplices' words, "a homo" before e killing him, and the time one of those antifa guys shot another one because he thought he was a nazi, and the time...
And you didn't quit, I FIRED you!
God that guy is pathetic.
all they see is money and big donation. They don't give two-fucks about what's best for the nation.
"Rebuilding the nation's manufacturing base" won't create more jobs than it destroys, nor will it bring America wealth. It will only bring slower economic growth and an increase in poverty among the working-class American. Thing is, nobody understands economics on that level--it takes a couple pages of analysis to work out the net impact for moving manufacture, and who really has time to spend an hour or two working out every little detail of everything they encounter?--so it's easy to sell an isolated system with access to an infinite external resource as a model of reality.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
You're seriously trying to sell it as a win?
Trump setup those councils when he took office. Everybody on the council left, and now he's disbanding them.
That's not a win. That's the loser kid sitting in a corner by himself because he smells like cat piss.
Plenty? How many? Provide a number, along with full citation and reference to the polls and/or studies used to derive the data. Go on, you've made a claim, now actually back it up.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Why are there conservatives and liberals? Why can't we have a reality-based community like HN?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Do you realize that if you keep antagonizing moderate on your right by calling them nazi, they might actually become such [and run over leftist cuckholds without shame] ?
Dafuq? "Liberals called me mean names and now that means I have to be an extremist murderer!"
Calm down already, you little snowflake.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Exactly right. I don't think Paul Ryan is a Nazi. I don't think Mitch McConnell is a Nazi. I don't think Ted Cruz is a Nazi.
Let's be pretty clear here, the majority of Republicans are not Nazis. But then again, those marching in Charlottesville with their white nationalist and white supremacist flags and sheilds are not your average Republicans. They are, well, yes, that's right, they're Nazis, and their so repugnant and evil that just about goddamned Republican out there is running from them as fast as possible...
With the exception of the Republican President of the United States.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
* - citation needed
wow you are a tool
And by "leftist propaganda", you mean calling out Nazis. Yes, truly a thought crime. How dare Nazis be condemned.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Why would i condemn the left when Trump shuts down his business advisory councils?
Are you suggesting that voting for the Great Orange Jackass might not have been the smartest choice?
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
What happened to all the personal responsibility the righties are supposed to have and value?
There are violent BLM members. No denying it. But BLM itself doesn't stand for violence, nor is that its goal.
White supremacists, on the other hand, do stand for violence, do stand for racism. You can criticize BLM for perhaps showing some tolerance for hooliganism, but groups like Vanguard America are, to the every last one of them, violent extremists who, like their spiritual forebears, use political conservatism and the First Amendment as cover for their evil ideology.
So no, it ain't the same, and I wonder why you are trying so hard to defend the white nationalists, white supremacists and Neo=Nazis, and trying so hard to make BLM and Antifa into some sort left wing version of them? Is it a silly attempt at equanimity, or perhaps do you sympathize with people who hate blacks, Jews, and believe white people are the master race? Go on, explain yourself.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
So you find antifa and BLM disgusting but say nothing of the literal nazis marching chanting heil trump preaching a message of all non whites must die? That doesn't phase you tho.
No you aren't fighting for America. You are fighting for an ideology that is hateful and disgusting. But keep telling yourself that you are right.
No, they just stopped leaning over for rightards
Do you realize that if you keep antagonizing moderate on your right by calling them nazi, they might actually become such [and run over leftist cuckholds without shame] ?
If a little bit of antagonism leads them to murder, they are human garbage and belong in jail.
Likewise, if you cannot control your violent or homicidal tendencies, you belong in jail.
Seriously... sticks and stones, and all that. Grow up.
---
According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
Feel free to leave. No one will miss you.
Ah, it never was NEWS.
The cited sources MAY be news, but Slashdot has no investigators and never claimed to have any.
s/dividing/divided .. USA has been divided for years and it's not something that started all of a sudden when Trump took office. America is undergoing the tyranny of SJW's and has been for years. Trump simply exposes it for the hysteria that it is. He's very clumsy in doing so, but at least he isn't walking away from the over-inflated snowflake issues and all that comes from it. He may be a big bad bully but that doesn't make him wrong on all accounts.
Oh, and for the record, I'm not a US citizen, I'm looking at this from the other side of the ocean, wondering WTF got into you people.
The fact that you believe this drivel is astounding.
As another non-US citizen, Trump is a complete dumpster fire in every way.
He isn't exposing things or confronting issues.. he's making issues worse with his horrible understanding and statements about them..
I find that entire argument pretty ridiculous. So, history is getting rewritten because statues are being removed? Do you teach from them?
There's a reason Germany doesn't have Hitler statues, you know, and it is not because they're willing to forget.
1. Hillary won the votes by 2.86 million, remember that always
2. Russia's fake news, blog bombing and comment robots created astroturf in the flyover states for Trump.
3. That's called Campaign Donations In Kind, and when done by a foreign government, as the CIA says, is a felony.
If anyone at Trumpland coordinated with this campaign donation, that is a separate felony AND an act of sedition.
Who brought the guns, the pipes and the shields?
To fight for this country, shoot the bastards who did bring deliberate and premeditated violence.
Anything else is fighting for Putin.
And I bet you really outraged when all those Lithuanians, Estonians and Latvians toppled statues of Lenin! Truly a crime against humanity.
The fact that you can still have statues of the likes of Robert E Lee and Jefferson Davis a century and a half after the Confederacy was beaten into the ground astonishes me. It's one thing to remember one's past, but to actually honor the leaders of the Confederacy with statues and memorials, no thanks, that's not remembering a bitter chapter from the past, that's celebrating it.
It all stems back to the fiction that the former Confederate states were allowed to propagate, that somehow the formation of the Confederacy wasn't about preservation of slavery, that somehow it was some great campaign for liberty. Well, that's bullshit. The Confederacy was entirely about slavery, and it stood and fell on that principle, so fuck Jefferson Davis, Robert E. Lee and all the other men who sent hundreds of thousands off to stain hundreds of battlefields red for the cause of keeping men in shackles because of their skin color. We shouldn't topple their statues, we should fucking dynamite them.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Do you realize that if you keep antagonizing moderate on your right by calling them nazi, they might actually become such [and run over leftist cuckholds without shame] ?
Not by 2.86 million votes.
No you asshole - because i may hate what you say but I defend your right to say it and be heard. That includes YOU who only support minorities so long as they AGREE with your white bread ideology.
Cracker.
DigiShaman: I'm a murican! not a racist!
DigiShaman: Fucking immigrants.
Many sides are to blame for the dissolution of the Councils. Noone is saying it, so I'll say it, where are Hilary's missing emails? JOBS! What about that infrastructure bill, huh? I prefer John McCains who don't vote against my healthcare bill. THE MOOCH! JOBS!
For some feminists that definition isn't far off. Plenty of them hold a radical viewpoint that is discriminatory, allows for violence, and other socially unacceptable behavior that could be associated with fascism. But indeed anytime you start painting any group with a broad brush it's likely to be inaccurate. Not saying your wrong just pointing out that there's an element of reality there which makes it a poor analogy.
I don't believe in karma, I just call it like I see it.
I agree, that userid is not one that has been around 15 years. Mine, yes, that one, no. Guess she could have got an ID after being an AC for years....
Um? You're talking about user scsirob (246572), while you are OYAHHH (322809). Last I looked, 236,572 is less than 322,809 (commas added for clarity). And I, Pfhorrest (545131), was definitely here in 2002, 15 years ago, so both of you, with UIDs lower than mine, were here at least 15 years ago too.
-Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
"I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
The bigots have become emboldened now that they have a sympathizer in the WH. They have become more aggressive in the last year or so (really since Trump accepted David Duke's support and didn't seem to understand why that was a problem). I have been told that the left, as well, has become more aggressive...I have not seen that, but cannot say for sure.
The problem, as I see it, is that the bigots want to solve a problem that literally nobody else feels is a problem - not just that, that they see as something beneficial. It may not be a perfect analogy, but there are some comparisons to be made between bigots and anti-vaccers. Between the ignorance leading an aggressive and decisive charge and an unwillingness to enter into a dialogue that doesn't begin with baseless assumptions, really the only difference seems to be the firearms.
I have, over the course of my life, engaged many MANY racists. Having grown up in an area that housed multiple "White Supremacist" groups (Northern Idaho between 1965 and 1990) there was plenty of opportunity. What was consistent throughout pretty much ALL of those Q&A sessions (some of which lasted for hours...others mere minutes) was the near-religious ferver with which they argued their point.
Ask them why they think whites are "better" and you'll hear a variation of: Just look at them. It's obvious. (much akin to the "Of course God exists, just look at a tree to see that")
Point out that there have been plenty of intelligent minorities (with supporting evidence etc) the response is generally something like: "That's liberal/Jew/cuck propaganda. That was really invented by a white guy and it was STOLEN from him."
Race is a discussion that obviously needs to be had. The other party must understand the rules of debate and discourse (even if just a little bit) before that conversation can be had, and sadly most of these hatemongers seem to be vastly undereducated in that regard.
Do you really think this is a left vs. right issue?
Everything has to be portrayed as a left or right issue to keep people distracted and fighting among themselves instead of working together to solve the actual problems.
Based on the idiotic posts in this thread, that plan is working out really well.
Who's defended them? When both BLM and Antifa have caused actual real physical violence, destruction of property, and general lawlessness, we don't hear much of anything, let alone its prosecution.
Life is not for the lazy.
since the black community is underrepresented in the countries police forces.
Going to have to call bullshit on that, and yes, I did bring a citation.
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS): Local Police Departments, 2013: Personnel, Policies, and Practices
Click on the PDF link, and go to Page 5, Figure 5. Black officers are right around the 12% mark. Nationwide, blacks are about 13% of the US population. You couldn't ask for a more representative sample.
I don't think he said anything that was divisive. He acknowledged that both sides have engaged in behavior unbecoming of a civil society. That's not siding with Nazis, it's an accurate observation. I believe the whole Nazi ideology is poison and needs to die. However, holding that viewpoint is not mutually exclusive to pointing out that the antifa folks are just as bad for different reasons. How many times have these antifa folks burned cars, incited violence, broken windows, etc? Why should they get a pass?
I don't believe in karma, I just call it like I see it.
Nobody calls moderates Nazis or anything else - we call Nazis Nazis - and we will run them into the ground.
Two weeks ago, William Shatner was compared to a Nazi and called "alt-right".
http://paleofuture.gizmodo.com/william-shatner-attacks-snowflakes-social-justice-warr-1797386393
And recall that last year, the former president of Mexico compared Donald Trump to Hitler.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-donald-trump-felipe-calderon-mexico-wall-20160228-story.html
Neither William Shatner nor Donald Trump are Nazis.
Remember when Republicans called Democrats "commies" for 30-40 years, so all the Democrats nominated and elected President a watered down Stalin?
Me neither.
Must be a Republican thing, if you call them something they become it out of spite. Those sick, bed wetting, gun breaking, running-around-on-gravel-with-no-shoes-on, punching themselves in their own testicles if they're male, Democrat-voting, Republicans.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I come to slashdot for the community that tears apart mainstream science articles that overly hype or misrepresent the content of the actual study
/r/politics
I come to slashdot for the politics of open source vs. proprietary closed source code.
I come to slashdot for the articles regarding politicians attempt to compromise our communication networks in the guise of 'safety' or 'fighting terrorism/pedophiles'
I come to slashdot for articles about new tech breakthroughs that could effect our lives in the near-future
I don't come to slashdot for general politics, if there is only one article on the front page related to an issue that every other news blog/website is loosing their minds over, i'm fine with that. Better one article about the subject that is vaguely related to tech than dozens of articles about the same damn thing like
I suppose it depends on your point of view. They SAY BLM doesn't stand for violence, but they do nothing to stop it nor condemn it when their protests turn violent...which happens pretty regularly.
So whatever.
For better or worse he's going to be President of the United States for the next three years and a couple months. Everyone, those dozens of CEOs of "American" companies included, would do well to remember that.
These corporate shills won't do anything to help the country unless we force them to.
I hope Intel likes it when the US government becomes AMD's number one customer to improve the competitive market in semiconductors.
I hope Apple likes it when we tariff their products. That's if they're lucky. They have no right to our market and could be completely excluded if I had my way.
I hope they all like it when we pass a hypocrisy tax for complaining about US society/government, then doing business with some of the worst governments in the Middle East and Asia.
Antifa is an organization that openly embraces violence. So they are very much like the Nazis.
1. No she lost. Vote total is irrelevant. It's SUPPOSED to be that way. We are NOT a democracy. Why you libs insist on ignoring this is beyond me (well we do know).
No, you are the one who insists on ignoring this. What the GP said is that she won the total votes. The GP did NOT say that she won the election, and the GP nor did he say that wining the total votes mean some thing. It is just a simple FACT (referring to the number of total voting only). However, the person, whom you voted in, on the other hand, seems to not be able to admit that is the fact (including yourself) regardless.
Trump condemned every side that commits violence. It's hysteria to take umbrage at his failing to specifically call out one particular side of things. From the way people are reacting you'd think he closed his statement with a heil Hitler.
I don't like Trump, as I consider him a serious threat to free speech. Still, he was right on this one. Violence is bad and should be condemned. People guilty of it should be brought to justice regardless of their political affiliations.
I suppose it depends on your point of view. They SAY BLM doesn't stand for violence, but they do nothing to stop it nor condemn it when their protests turn violent...which happens pretty regularly.
So whatever.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/dallas-shooting-black-lives-matter-leaders-respond/
Getting it right? By re-framing it through the morals of the day... That is not getting it right. Why not put another statute up next to it to show future generations what we think?
They were a product of their time and to judge them against our morals is wrong. You miss the lessons learned. You miss the motivations. You are ignoring history.
How far does your offense go in destroying history? Robert E. Lee isn't the monster the left make him out to be. He held a position that persisted for hundreds of years. Slavery was an issue for hundreds of years. All of the founders had slaves... Are we to burn the constitution and abandon the ideals because they have because we judge them with today's standard? I have heard many support that because "3/5ths compromise" yet not realize that it was slave owners that wanted slaves to be counted equally!
ISIS destroys antiquity because blasphemy. We do it because offense. I see no difference.
Those statues do not tell us where we are going or where we are. They tell us where we have been. By destroying them and moving them out of sight we forget our past. We lose a part of us that help us become better.
It really makes me sad to see history destroyed and defaced. At least with moving it is still there but out of sight out of mind does not challenge you to understand it.
I believe he is referring to the excellent and well researched Youtube videos:
FEMINISTS BUSTED11!! - by unpcgamer82
Sarkeesian - EXPOSED! - by CARLOFSWINDON772
SJWS REVEALED!!! - by nogirlsallowed81
Also this is covered extensively in the book "SJWs and Feminists? Am I right? Right?" by Milo "Account suspended" Yiannocannohavotwitto. He comments extensively on the subject here.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
This NY Times article, quotes Trump's tweet:
Rather than putting pressure on the businesspeople of the Manufacturing Council & Strategy & Policy Forum, I am ending both. Thank you all! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) Aug. 16, 2017
But I'm more inclined to believe that Trump is disbanding the councils to avoid being embarrassed by the publicity of the people on those councils quitting. On the other hand, they don't seem to be really doing anything productive anyway:
Moreover, the panels have not been seen to be particularly effective. After a few high profile events for the groups early in the Mr. Trump’s presidency, there have been few meetings since, and none more are planned.
“So far they haven’t done much,” Ms. Admati said. “They had a few meetings with a bunch of fanfare, but it was more symbolic than anything else.”
Perhaps their intended purpose was simply to make Trump look good and the councils haven't achieved that. Certainly people quitting them en-mass doesn't help that effort either.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
I'm sure the Koch Brother, Both Bushes, and Fox News contributed
In my opinion, lashing out in a way that involves harming others or destroying their property is not justifiable, with the exception of imminent danger.
Group A: Formed due to belief that people of non-white skin color and of certain regions of the world are sub-human and deserve to be exterminated.
Group B, C: Formed to combat Group A as well as other social inequalities as a result of decades or centuries of oppression.
Group B and C are obviously equivalent of Group A. /s
Actually, the Electoral College is a handcuffed and corrupt body. If the Electoral College functioned the way it was originally intended then every member of it would cast their votes as they saw fit for whichever candidate they thought was better. However, it's members have been handcuffed by a variety of state constitutions that force a state's electors to vote according to their state's majority opinion. Electors don't vote as they see fit as originally intended. The Electoral College is in no way a Representative body when members of a given state cast all their votes one direction over a 51%/49% public vote in their state. If Electoral Votes were actually representative of the popular vote in each state during the last election, then neither candidate would have received 270 votes.
has Netcraft confirmed it?
ISIS isn't history. They are modern.
I don't see anyone arguing to destroy the Al-Azhar Mosque because ISIS or in this case Muslim Brotherhood.
I don't see anyone arguing the destruction of cathedrals because of the Inquisition.
What are you willing to burn to feel morally superior?
Well I thought it came with Oompa Loompas...
I want my money back.
~
I *still* don't regret my vote for Johnson, particularly since I'm in CA.
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
Other than hanging out with the POTUS, did these "boards" actually accomplish anything? Was there any legislation drafted that came from this? Obama had something similar called "President's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness" which also seemed to amount to nothing; it was abandoned "due to a lack of engagement from council members".
Nope but losers in elections get to keep saying 'If the rules were different, we'd have won'. 'I refuse to accept the results of the election'. 'I think I'll start a riot'.
It's a right wing cesspit, what are you even talking about?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
"I'm just a regular joe with a regular job, I'm your average white suburbanite slob..."
whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
But a state's representation in Congress is often a mix of Democrats and Republicans. A state's representation in the Electoral College is generally single party.
So no, the EC does NOT operate the exact same way Congress does.
All my liberal friends think I'm a conservative, all my conservative friends think I'm a liberal.
You are confusing your own media narrative with reality. You are a classic Usenet troll creating a fiction about their opponent and then proceeding to argue against that rather than facts.
They aren't literal Nazis. You are just calling them that because you think it gives you an excuse to strip them of their rights.
THAT is actual classic Nazi behavior.
The rules apply to everyone equally. That's a very key element of this whole "democracy and equality" thing.
In your sick twisted little world view, those that actually stand up for American values are accused of being Nazis in an attempt to silence them.
It doesn't matter even what a genuine Nazi is saying, that's never worse then people actually employing violence to silence others.
Yes, the guy punching the Nazi is actually worse than the Nazi.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I really doubt they left. These people were just groups of lobbiests. The CEOs will just send their lobbiests directly instead of collaberating through a single group of lobbiests.
TLDR; Nothing is changing. Welcome to washington DC.
> Honest question. Why do you continue to support him?
The other option thinks that it's OK to use violence to silence political opposition. There is no other option unless you want to vote for a Green or a Libertarian.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
You're the one who brought up Soros.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
So petty virtue signalling is better than telling Trump things he needs to hear. You really don't make me feel very good about voting Democrat in the next election. If you are an accurate reflection on the Democrat mindset then it's horribly unhinged and divorced from any sort of pragmatism.
That's an extra bonus above and beyond advocating the labeling people as Nazis so you can act like one yourself.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
This failure of the American political system is news for everyone and should matter to everyone.
Trump gets called out by his betters for being a jerk (again!), throws a hissy-fit (again!), decides to take his ball and go home (again!). He's a narcissistic toddler that got into the gun cabinet and I can't wait for him to be gone.
If you believe in your ideas and you win the election in terms of the rules but can clearly see that you've lost in the market place if ideas, you try to make your case. Obama won both popular and electoral votes but set out to be "everybody's president." When you win an election despite losing the popular vote *and* you know your ideas are wrong, you try to push through as much bad policy as you possibly can under the premise that you won't ever win another election. The Republicans aren't governing like winners, they're governing like hillbillies who get to spend a weekend at a mansion.
I take it you are not from the south and do not live in any of the southern states.
If that is the case, then you really don't have any ground to say anything about it.
It is fully up to the people of each of these states.
The only thing wrong here is many of these cases, is...that a few politicians are making the decisions rather than putting this to the vote of the people in those cities/states.
But you are not part of the state populations in question, and really don't have shit to say about it.
If you're not from there, you don't understand.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Yeah, I'm thinking white supremacists are a helluva lot more dangerous than any left-leaning protester/activist groups:
https://www.adl.org/sites/defa...
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Let's not forget about the real problem: leftist nutjob trying to rewrite history by tearing down confederate statue.
Don't Confuse History with Monuments:
There is a crucial difference between leaders like Washington and Jefferson, imperfect men who helped create the United States, Ms. Gordon-Reed said, and Confederate generals like Jackson and Lee, whose main historical significance is that they took up arms against it. The comparison, she added, also “misapprehends the moral problem with the Confederacy.”
“This is not about the personality of an individual and his or her flaws,” she said. “This is about men who organized a system of government to maintain a system of slavery and to destroy the American union.”
As for the idea of erasing history, it’s a possibility most scholars do not take lightly. But James Grossman, the executive director of the American Historical Association, said that Mr. Trump’s comments failed to recognize the difference between history and memory, which is always shifting.
When you alter monuments, “you’re not changing history,” he said. “You’re changing how we remember history.”
Some critics of Confederate monuments have called for them to be moved to museums, rather than destroyed, or even left in place and reinterpreted, to explain the context in which they were created. Mr. Grossman noted that most Confederate monuments were constructed in two periods: the 1890s, as Jim Crow was being established, and in the 1950s, during a period of mass Southern resistance to the civil rights movement.
“We would not want to whitewash our history by pretending that Jim Crow and disenfranchisement or massive resistance to the civil rights movement never happened,” he said. “That is the part of our history that these monuments testify to.”
“The amazing thing is that the president is doing more to endanger historical monuments than most of the protesters,” he said. “The alt-right is producing a world where there is more pressure to remove monuments, rather than less.”
Also, it seems like many of these Confederate statues glorify traitors and treason - not heritage.
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
Oh god, you actually believe that crap?
I have some lizard people running the country I have to show you. Seriously, I heard about it on InfoWars!
Fully licensed blockchain psychiatrist
so now it's Soros and the CIA colluding, earlier you said it was Soros, Clinton, and Obama.
Man, you are up in that conspiracy rectum really deep. Be sure to come up for air.
Someone had to do it.
Most business leaders lean Republican so that fact that they are abandoning the administration is very telling. A country needs good advocates for more conservative policies otherwise you end up with social safety nets that you can't afford. (Social safety nets are generally good but not if they bankrupt the county). The current Republicans aren't good conservative advocates. They seem to think that tax cuts for the rich are a magic wand that can achieve all policy goals. They are downright hostile to facts. I was a Republican 20 years ago and sometimes hope to be one again. But for all of their faults the Democrats tend to at least believe their own bullshit.
In Charlottesville, the evil right side had guns and were peaceful until they found some clergy to attack
FTFY
Someone had to do it.
You know the far right is on the ropes when they stop trying to defend their position and start pushing conspiracy theories about actors paid to put on a fake Nazi march and fight with the (real) leftists.
Of course, all these actors are so loyal to the cause, none of them have come forward with proof (like a paycheck).
This one is weaker than Pizzagate, on a par with moon landing denial.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
All 500 of them?
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
Not at all, that's a strange takeaway from my comments. I'm suggesting you're looking at only part of the problem, I'm not defending the cancerous part you are looking at.
Would you suggest I'm wrong for judging violent communist vigilantes by their most extreme members?
Its in the same vein of the name "Black Lives Matter" which, in and of itself, doesn't actually literally suggest that non-black lives don't; yet some people seem to see or hear an imaginary "more" at the end of the phrase which isn't there. It's also imaginary for some to think all people calling attention to *all* involved parties in that violence Saturday are somehow giving the nazi's and white supremacists a free pass and defending them; all the groups involved have a spectrum of extremism and a cancer.
I acknowledge Nazis and White Natl'l for the close-minded retards they are, but at the same time I don't consider Antifa or BLM heroes by any stretch.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
There's a statue of Lenin in Seattle. Right now. Try to tear it down if you want to see a riot.
It's so good that all those out-of-state Nazis came to support the maintaining of statues celebrating the glory of the Confederacy.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Trump condemned every side that commits violence. It's hysteria to take umbrage at his failing to specifically call out one particular side of things.
I guess you *really* do believe that there is an equivalence between the neo-nazis who would if given the chance systematically murder half the US population, and their assorted opponents. Yes, they are real Nazis, they are not ashamed of it, and they want to bring about the 'final solution' in the USA. They discuss it openly. I can only guess you are either entirely ignorant of history or you actually sympathise with them.
Sad.
When is the last time that you voted on putting up or taking down any statue?
When the statues were put up it was only "few politicians are making the decisions rather than putting [it] to the vote of the people." Why raise the bar now?
It would be great if the Electoral College Member was selected by the November Congressional district vote as opposed to the winner take all. The two College Members that represent the Senators should be based on the total of the state vote. Each party puts forth a slate from their state conventions and the person seated is based on how the party won the congressional district. The United States is republic, not a democracy and the Electoral College reflects that. If people want the popular vote to select the President pass a Constitutional Amendment.
on my keyboard it's between the space bar and a key with the windows logo.
We aren't bashing Trump for being Trump but for being a POTUS that is dividing America in the worst possible way
Incorrect. He has united the world like on one else ever.
Instead of thousands of little groups, now there are only two. One group hates him, the other loves him. I think you can all guess which group I am in. But I will just sit up here in Canada with my healthcare, and watch the festivities.
First law of people: People are generally stupid.
But BLM itself doesn't stand for violence, nor is that its goal.
They most certainly do. Here they are marching for dead cops in New York and Dallas There was protest in London with the same chant.
It's time for the left to own their own alt-left bullshit as they seem to like to call out the alt-right at every turn as your post exemplifies.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
By re-framing it through the morals of the day
Well yeah, because being against slavery is soo 2017...
They were a product of their time and to judge them against our morals is wrong.
Actually, if you look it up, quite a lot of these monuments got erected decades, even a century after the war. They were certainly a product of their time, just not the one you think.
You miss the lessons learned. You miss the motivations. You are ignoring history.
In order: The South got off easy. They wanted slaves. They lost. None of these monuments make any of that clear, so I fail to see what's being lost.
Robert E. Lee isn't the monster the left make him out to be.
This should be fun. Please explain to me how someone who owned slaves and decided to commit treason in order to be able to continue having slaves is not a monster.
All of the founders had slaves
Yeah, veneration of the founders has always baffled me too.
Are we to burn the constitution and abandon the ideals because they have because we judge them with today's standard?
What a bizarre argument considering the 15th amendment is sitting right there.
yet not realize that it was slave owners that wanted slaves to be counted equally!
ROFLMAO! Yes they did. Can you tell me why, though?
ISIS destroys antiquity because blasphemy. We do it because offense. I see no difference.
Well, one group thinks those statues desecrate their entire worldview. The other group thinks that celebrating treasonous slaveowners is not what modern democracies do. The fact that you can't see the difference says a lot more about you than either of those 2 groups.
By destroying them and moving them out of sight we forget our past.
Nah, I'm pretty sure the thousands of books, movies, history classes and artifacts from the era will manage to take up the slack.
We lose a part of us that help us become better.
Please explain to me how one statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest, let alone several, accomplishes this goal.
At least with moving it is still there but out of sight out of mind does not challenge you to understand it.
And I've yet to meet a leftist that has a problem with this solution.
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
I come to Slashdot for Vi vs Emacs flame wars, and Linux vs Windows flame wars.
First law of people: People are generally stupid.
You do realize that Robert E. Lee was against secession, right? He was more loyal to Virginia and at the time people were more loyal to their state than to the federal government. Even Abraham Lincoln asked him to lead the Union Army.
Read a history book.
Other people come to slashdot for other things. Accept it. Don't read and comment on postings that you're ostensibly not interested in.
Which this is...
This is the only article on the disbanding of certain Presidential advisory councils that included a slew of technology leaders. Your wish has been granted twofold.
Have you been in a cave? They're complaining about white cops and the police culture.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
The holy book of Islam reads more or less like the bible.
It is obvious you never read any of both.
Why spread your hate here? Get a psychological consultant instead.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Only 2% of the southern population owned slaves. 98% did not. Many opposed slavery outright. In New Orleans there were more free people of color than there were slaves and many of them owned slaves themselves.
This Trump-bashfest isn't for nerds, and it does not matter.
Yes. Yes it does.
So petty virtue signalling is better than telling Trump things he needs to hear.
That was what Elon Musk said months ago when he got flak for joining one of these councils. To his credit, he was a quick learner.
Yes, there are plenty of things Trump needs to hear, but he doesn't listen.
The only ideology worse than Nazi is Communism. Those "left-leaning protester activist groups" are mostly communist front organizations.
... after realizing that Trump was bad for business.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Antifa is an organization that openly embraces violence. So they are very much like the Nazis.
Well, they're very much like the Nazis if defending yourself from violent attacks is the same as ethnic cleansing. Which is to say, not in the slightest.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
If a single person can divide a country with one or two statement, there is a good chance the country was divided to begin with.
The Electoral College operates the exact same way the Congress does. It prevents the bigger states from being big bullies and pushing everyone around. Otherwise, the smaller states would have no interest in being part of the Union.
If you are butt hurt about the Electoral College then you should be equally butt hurt about the Congress. They are both designed the same way for the same reason.
In that case the system works exactly as intended because the way it works now is that the small bankrupt states bully the bigger solvent ones.
Look, I don't like the Rs or the Ds, but I think you're being very one-sided here. Both sides govern basically the same way. Both sides, when not in power, are full of fake umbrage when those in power do the same things the losers did the last time they were in power. Both sides have absurdly short memories. Both sides will do or say pretty much anything to win.
I'm all for pointing out the "sins" and hypocrisy of either party, but to try to say one side is even the slightest bit better than the other is a huge stretch - it relies on wearing some seriously rose-colored glasses or willful ignorance. Both parties are more alike than they are different.
Obama won both popular and electoral votes but set out to be "everybody's president."
LOL. The same could be said for every president. As in, every president and their winning party will tell you that's exactly what they've set out to do. Guess what? With each election, the losing side feels less and less like this is true. I thought Obama was an ok president, but his ability to reach out and unify with the "other" side seemed very much on par with all other recent presidents.
When you win an election despite losing the popular vote
I take issue with this because it's trying to change the rules of the election after the fact by implying that it was a false or flawed victory. All candidates knew the electoral votes were the only thing that mattered, and they strategized accordingly. The fact that Hillary won the popular vote does not in any way make Trump's victory less legitimate, but your statement seems to imply exactly that.
I wish Trump had not won, but he did. And guess what? Had he won the popular vote and lost the EC vote, he'd be saying the exact same things you are - trying to undermine a Clinton victory. It'd be B.S. in that case, just as it is now. It's as meaningful to say "Trump won despite losing the left-handed vote" or something - 100% irrelevant.
FWIW, I'm glad the EC exists. Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But it prevents California from being able to single-handedly choose the president each time, so... yay.
*and* you know your ideas are wrong
Oh, wow. Pause and listen to what you're saying. Do you really, truly, honestly think that's what the Republicans are all about? For the record, I'm not a Republican and I didn't vote for Trump. But if you've conjured up this notion of them being this hateful group of people who actually know they are in the wrong but are just being devious, then you've become part of the problem are as much to blame for the state of things as they are.
All across the political spectrum are people who care deeply for their country, care deeply about issues, have families, are real people, and who are trying to figure out the best solution to complex problems. I don't think very highly of many of the national politicians, and yet I'd wager that most of them - on both sides of the aisle - are sincere in their belief in their platform's positions.
The issues that divide the parties do so because the issues are complex and nuanced - there is not a single major issue that has a black and white, obvious solution, especially once you get into the nuts and bolts of implementing a solution. All actual solutions will be less than ideal, all solutions will involve tradeoffs, and all solutions will require everyone to compromise.
Because of this, they are hard to solve to begin with. But if both sides start demonizing the other side like you're doing, it pretty much guarantees that nothing will get done because that sort of bitter attitude prevents good faith negotiation and discussion.
For better or worse he's going to be President of the United States for the next three years and a couple months.
Maybe, maybe not. He's rapidly losing the support of Republicans in the House and Senate, and he really, really needs that support. The House has the power to impeach and the Senate has the power to remove him from office after the House impeaches. You know the Democrats would love to do both of those things (even knowing that Mike Pence is ready to step in), so Trump really needs to keep the Republicans on his side.
And then there's Mueller's investigation. Were a smoking gun proving Trump intentionally colluded to throw the election to have been found a few months ago, Trump might have survived it simply because the Senate would have refused to give him the boot. That is no longer true. He's become enough of an embarrassment to the GOP that if Mueller finds something even moderately bad, the Reps will kick him to the curb. And as time goes on, the Republicans are getting more and more fed up with him. A few more months of the current trends and they're going to be right there with the Democrats, looking for a reason to boot him, or worse.
At this point, I give Trump even odds of completing his first term, but that's only if he gets rid of Bannon, and starts accepting advice in the fairly near future. If he doesn't, the odds tilt heavily toward not making it four years.
I don't think he'll actually get the boot, mind you, he'll resign first. He never actually intended to be president and the job is nothing like what he thought it would be, so he might not even wait to be impeached, but instead resign in a fit of rage, blaming the media, Congress, disloyal staff and everyon else for his failure to accomplish anything of note. He may do it in the hopes that it will stop the Mueller investigation, but I strongly doubt that it would. I have no idea if Pence would pardon him if anything criminal came to light. Wouldn't shock me if Trump doesn't have any idea what Pence would do, either.
Bottom line, Trump had better figure out how to act like a president if he wants to be president for another three years and five months. And he'd really better step up his game if he wants another term. Either that or attempt to pull a Nicolas Maduro, but I don't think that would succeed in the US.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
In Lee's time people were deeply attached to their home state. The Army was mustered through the states. When it came to pick a side he said something to the effect that he couldn't fight his home state. He didn't so much as join the Confederacy but rather resigned to command the troops of his home state of Virginia.
You forget that many of these statues were erected half a century after the civil war to justify the righteousness of separate but equal race laws. They were never about the history of the people places or events, they were symbols used for a political end, the same way the Tea Party movement subverted symbols of the American Revolution to complain about modern-day taxation. If you think those old symbols of the Confederacy still hold no symbolic value 150 years later, you are incredibly naive. If they held no symbolic value, there would be no need to remove/relocate statues in the dead of night with armed guards. Let's face it, damn few people are THAT passionate about history.
Do you advocate tearing down the Korean War memorial in DC? The Wall for those killed in Vietnam?
I was going to give you shit for more stupid false equivalency, but it's late, so my answer is: Sure, why not?
Linux, you magnificent bastard, I read the fucking manual!
Putting people based on /. posts into a conservative or liberal box is pretty stupid.
And that is the main reason the USA voting system does not work.
Defining your self 'Conservative' is even more idiotic. So every time a new idea comes up, you are against it, because you are 'conservative'? Har har ...
I for my part want to be put into the box called 'rational' as I feel equally insulted regardless in what other box you put me.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
I agree. I find it really disappointing how many people here seem to be looking for ways to excuse Nazis. They go through a lot of trouble to make it seem "fair" and "objective" by drawing false equivalences, and trying to distract from real issues.
Because first, as you point out, BLM is not in itself a violent extremist hate group. Its fundamental message is, "It's not ok for police to kill black people." To all the people saying, "white lives matter," yes, of course that's true. That goes without saying, literally, which is the point. The reason they aren't saying "white lives matter" is that we all know white lives matter without even saying it, but some of us don't seem to realize that black lives matter too, equally as much.
But I digress. The point is, though there may be some violent people associated with BLM, they're not equivalent to Nazis. Any group can have some violent members, but you have to look at the group as a whole, and it's just not fundamentally a violent group.
But aside from all of that, it doesn't matter. Even if BLM were a violent extremist group, it's irrelevant. It doesn't serve to justify Nazi groups, not even a little. We should condemn the Nazis, full stop. No justification or equivocation. Other people's bad acts are for another conversation.
Because when you say, "Sure the Nazis are bad, but BLM is bad too!", it doesn't count as a condemnation of the Nazis. What you're actually doing is taking a combative rhetorical stance, assuming that your opponent is on the side of BLM, and you're taking the side of the Nazis. Sure, you're literally saying that the Nazis are bad, but then you're defending them by comparing them to a group you assume your opponent will want to defend.
You also see this approach where Trump supporters will say, "Maybe Trump has done some unethical and illegal things, but Clinton is a crook!" Even if we were to assume that Clinton was a criminal, that's not a valid argument that we should ignore Trump's misdemeanors (and possibly high crimes).
It's you.
Fun Fact: America doesn't like Nazis.
I'm sorry if that's a shock to you, but there it is.
As to why the story is in tech news, it's specifically referring to the business and manufacturing councils that tech firm CEOs were on.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
There hasn't been an effective far left/Communist movement in the United States since the 1930s. You might as well say "The only thing more dangerous than Nazis is ZOMBIES!!!!" Yes, Communists killed more people than Nazis, and PRC under Mao is responsible for the single largest mass death of people in history (the millions who died of starvation during the Great Leap Forward). But I don't know of any Communist regimes that explicitly picked out ethno-racial community and targeted them for complete extermination. You could argue Stalin tried it with the people of the Ukraine, but you will notice there are still lots of Ukrainians in Eastern Europe, and very few Jews, whereas after the Second World War, two out of every three Jews who had lived in Nazi-occupied areas of Europe had been murdered. So go on, keep peddling your moral equivalency.
The report I quoted shows that the "far left" is responsible for only a very small fraction of the number of extremist murders in the United States, whereas White Supremacist groups are responsible for MOST of the extremist murders in the US.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
You do realize that Robert E. Lee was against secession, right? He was more loyal to Virginia and at the time people were more loyal to their state than to the federal government. Even Abraham Lincoln asked him to lead the Union Army.
You do realize that Robert E. Lee took up arms against the United States, right? He was less loyal to the country, and entirely willing to forsake his sworn oath to defend the country against enemies, foreign and domestic. He rejected the chance to serve in the Union Army, and instead chose to wage war against it.
Read a history book.
Read one yourself.
Getting it right? By re-framing it through the morals of the day... That is not getting it right. Why not put another statute up next to it to show future generations what we think?
They won't let us do that either. They claim having another statue there, creates some sort of problem. Do you think nobody ever suggested your idea?
They were a product of their time and to judge them against our morals is wrong. You miss the lessons learned. You miss the motivations. You are ignoring history.
They were judged and condemned in their own time, and yet afterwards, those who could not accept it, erected statues to glorify them, and ignore the lessons learned, deceive about the motivations, and attack anybody who challenges their own false narrative.
How far does your offense go in destroying history?
How far do we need to go before we crush the lies?
Robert E. Lee isn't the monster the left make him out to be.
Robert E. Lee isn't the hero his apologists make him out to be.
He held a position that persisted for hundreds of years. Slavery was an issue for hundreds of years.
And? By your own claims, he knew secession was wrong. He did it anyway.
All of the founders had slaves...
And here's a factual manufacturing of your own. What's with that? You can say MANY did. You cannot say all.
In fact, there's evidence that several of them opposed slavery. Not all unfortunately. It was one of their great moral failings.
I have heard many support that because "3/5ths compromise" yet not realize that it was slave owners that wanted slaves to be counted equally!
Yes, because it would have given them an advantage. A captive population that had no say in government, but nonetheless, increased their representation. However, you may not know this, but many of the people who complain about the 3/5's compromise are attacking the Northern States for that suggestion, as if it was their judgment reduced the value of a man. Not, you know, the people OWNING slaves.
Are we to burn the constitution and abandon the ideals because they have because we judge them with today's standard?
As Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, the US Constitution is not the best building block to use today, no. Remember the hysteria over that? Or do you think we should be fools, and wrap ourselves in the Constitution, as many on the right do today? They're the ones with the moral standard you should question.
Yet...you don't, do you?
ISIS destroys antiquity because blasphemy. We do it because offense. I see no difference.
Here's the difference: You still want to destroy ISIS. We still want to destroy White Supremacy.
Those statues do not tell us where we are going or where we are. They tell us where we have been. By destroying them and moving them out of sight we forget our past. We lose a part of us that help us become better.
Nope, by destroying them or at least, moving them out of sight, we remember the past, and reject the part of us that makes us worse. Those statues are a false icon used to lie about
A remarkable source of inspiration indeed.
Can you give us any examples of American Muslims who want to enforce Sharia law on all Americans?
You know, you're a special kind of jackoff, DigiShaman. A loudmouthed, bigoted jackoff. You got nothing bad to say about neo-Nazis who loudly express their desire to put Jews, Muslims and "mud people" in ovens, but you literally make up some shit about how you're going to be forced to follow Sharia Law. You and motherfucking Trump. Disgraziati.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The fact of the matter is that the slave states left the Union because they had lost the fight to make a sufficient number of the new states that were going to be carved out of the Western Territory slave states, which meant that within thirty or forty years, there would be enough Free States in the Union to push through an amendment abolishing slavery. They didn't leave for any high purpose, they left explicitly to preserve slavery, proudly said so at the time, and it was only during Reconstruction that the myth that the Civil War was about the evil North trying to put down those brave southern states was spread. The victorious Union sadly allowed this happen, but since, particularly after Lincoln's assassination, the primary goal of Reconstruction was to rehabilitate the former Confederate states as quickly as possible, I suppose they thought allowing the myth that Secession was a states rights issue, rather than a slavery issue, was a useful one to allow to be peddled.
But no matter how much you and the other Confederate apologists try to make this a "North" vs "south" issue, the fact was that secession only happened when the question of the Western Territory couldn't be decided and an avowed supporter of the Abolitionists became president.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
What, you're pleading with a card game?
It is fully up to the people of each of these states.
That's right -- and those are the exact people who decided to take the monuments down.
So, what's your point, exactly?
What planet are you living on. At the rate he is burying himself Christmas might even come early this year.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
It all stems back to the fiction that the former Confederate states were allowed to propagate, that somehow the formation of the Confederacy wasn't about preservation of slavery, that somehow it was some great campaign for liberty.
That's the cover story.
In reality, all of those statues were put up during the Jim Crow era, and were part of a deliberate effort to make sure that blacks never forgot who the boss was. Other elements of the effort included segregation, regular lynchings, and use of the criminal justice system to recreate the system of black slavery, only at lower cost and with less regard for black lives, because they were now an operational expense not a self-replicating capital investment.
I recommend Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II by Douglas Blackmon, to learn about this incredibly nasty and hypocritical part of American history that has been effectively excised (not accidentally!) from American education.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Also, it seems like many of these Confederate statues glorify traitors and treason - not heritage.
Many of the people who object to the removal of these monuments think the Confederates were right and either believe the civil war never really ended or would like a new civil war to begin.
In that light, their viewing the monuments as heritage to be honored, and their viewing the people that the statues celebrate as equivalent to George Washington, etc., actually makes sense.
Actually that is just an elaboration of what it means for Trump to be Trump.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
In Trump's worldview, there is nothing worse than "losing", so he will always and forever find a way to think of everything that happens to him as a win.
So no, you can't give a single example of an American Muslim calling for Sharia Law to be enforced against all Americans.
You're garbage.
You are welcome on my lawn.
See my response above. None of Secessionist and future Confederate leaders were the least bit shy in saying they seceded to preserve slavery. That was a pleasant fiction that southerners told to each other after they had lost, a way to preserve their pride after unmitigated defeat and military occupation.
Once the political battle to maintain a sufficient balance of new slave states being formed out of the West was clearly a non-starter, the slave states had no choice. Once the Free States became large enough in number over the next few decades, slavery would have been abolished anyways. The Civil War was directly caused by the failure of the Compromise of 1850 and the election of Abraham Lincoln. It is absolutely absurd to claim that slavery was only some minor constituent of Secession when it was the overarching point of discord between the Free and Slave states for over a decade prior to the Civil War. The fact was that the failure of the compromise and Lincoln's election represented to the Slave States the death sentence of slavery.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
They aren't literally members of the old Nazi party but they literally call themselves Nazi's and spout the same slogans. It isn't necessary to accuse them of being Nazi's when they are sporting Swastica tattoos and chanting blood and soil.
So taking them at their word and referring to them as Nazi's seems quite reasonable.
Reasoning with Nazi's, whether they are literally Nazi's or just acting like Nazi's, isn't going to be any more successful today than it was 80 years ago, though I'm sure the Commander-in-Chief could convince himself that he could have made a great deal with them and prevent WWII.
I'm pretty confident that being a Nazi is worse than punching one in the face. Maybe we can ask some of the WW2 vets who were sent to Europe to do more than just punch Nazi's in the nose. But, sure, punching Nazi's in the nose is a crime and I don't recommend it. If you want the moral equivalent of a Nazi I'd go with a serial killer. I'd put them on about the same level of worseness.
Please explain to me how one statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest, let alone several, accomplishes this goal.
Because it's a window to understand history for anyone willing to learn. Because it's a story that a people from a different time wanted to tell future generations. Either as a warning, a lesson, or to just be remembered. Reading the Wikipedia... Why wouldn't you want his story to be told? Seriously... I think his is a story that should be told.
He is one of the few officers in either army to enlist as a private and be promoted to general officer. "The Wizard of the Saddle" to the 1st Grand Wizard of the KKK who ordered the KKK to take off their masks and "“volunteered to help ‘exterminate’ those men responsible for the continued violence against the blacks.”
The most important aspect I think relevant to the conversation about racism: "By the end of his life, Forrest’s racial attitudes would evolve — in 1875, he advocated for the admission of blacks into law school — and he lived to fully renounce his involvement with the Klan that he headed and abolished."
Times change. People change. If a Lieutenant General of the Confederate Army and 1st Grand Wizard of the KKK can change their view on race, any one can. Do you think there is a lesson to be learned? Do you think we can learn from him? Do you think anyone can read his story and reflect on their own life to be a better person? ... I don't understand what you perceive history to be but it's a flawed dirty mess of people just like us.
The fact that you believe this drivel is astounding.
Why is it amazing? It was a perfectly accurate observation. That you're trying to wish away the reality of the situation, and were either blind to the lefty/media nonsense we've been suffering since long before the November election, or know you're lying but are hoping everyone else is too dumb to notice ... tells us all we need to know about your understanding and agenda.
Yes, is IS exposing things. The political left has come completely unhinged, shrieking for months about completely fictional things (Hillary lost because Trump worked with the Russians, not because she was an awful, corrupt, serially lying candidate who didn't even VISIT places like Wisconsin while campaigning, though she still blames Trump and Russia for that - hilarious), and displaying a parade of incredible hypocrisy at every turn. The left's childish tantrums in such areas is grandly on display because of who they're railing against. One doesn't have to be an actual Trump supporter to be very glad the liberals weren't rewarded with the Clintons being handed, again, the power they so crave.
So sure: he's confronting issues. He confronted Clinton's casual assertion that she wanted to use the Supreme Court as a surrogate legislature to make up for the fact that her party has lost nearly a thousand legislative seats, most of the state governorships, and both houses of congress. Trump named a rational, strict constitutionalist to the court, confronting that peril with perhaps the most important thing he could or will do.
He's already swung a big, sharp ax at the insanity of counterproductive, redundant, stupidly expensive federal regulations. That confrontation alone was worth his annoying personality. But it's nice that he's also confronting illegal immigration - which has dropped enormously just because of the change in enforcement priorities since he took office. There are things he can't gracefully confront in short order. Like, say, those charming black-masked "antifa" thugs who like to smash and burn things and beat people bloody in order to muzzle impure, insufficiently lefty thought and speech. He confronts it, but of course the lefty media immediately calls anyone who condemns planned, organized lefty violence a racist.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Aaaaah, finally a sane voice in all this craziness.
Hey, I'd be fine with calling the White Supremacists, Skinheads and Neo-Nazis "Nazis". We can call the White Nationalists "Nazi Collaborators". There's some nuance!
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
there are multiple stories that Trump doesn't listen to anything he needs to hear.
I don't believe that being a Feminist implies "death to all men" as there are some like Christian Hoff Sommers that are quite opposed to the brand of feminism that tends to get a person labeled as a feminazi. The modern wave of feminism may not consider people such as Sommers as feminists though so there's some debate to be had there still.
Nazism on the other hand basically requires antisemitism or white race-based nationalism by definition. These things are parts of their 25-point program that was promulgated early in the party's history.
I don't know if earlier more radical feminists were big on things like "death to all men" as a whole. Dworkin certainly had some things to say about men that weren't particularly nice, but I don't think she advocated for killing them in the same way Nazi's wanted to exterminate the Jews. The SCUM Manifesto certainly did though and it is interesting to note that the author Valerie Solanas tried to kill Andy Warhol, but I don't think there was a wide degree of support for her or her book.
The people posting the "death to all men" stuff on Twitter or Tumblr blogs are probably about the same as the people posting edgy right-wing shit on 4chan, mostly younger teenagers or college kids that aren't going to do anything because they spend their life in doors on the internet. The mainstream internet feminists that get associated with the social justice crowd certainly advocating that position or aren't publicly stating it at any rate.
I agree, those who forget the past... at the same time, violence isn't a good answer either.
If you are butt hurt about the Electoral College then you should be equally butt hurt about the Congress. They are both designed the same way for the same reason.
It's interesting you mention that; they are both incorrectly proportional for the same reason, which is specifically to make them unfair in precisely the way that you believe to be justice. See, the purpose of the electoral college was never to ensure that that populous states couldn't walk away with the election; it was literally to take the vote out of the hands of the people so that they couldn't get carried away. At least, that's what Alexander Hamilton intimates in Federalist Paper No.68.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Only responding to one thing.
You do realize that Robert E. Lee took up arms against the United States, right?
Yes and it cost thousands of lives. After the civil war they had to put the nation back together after the bloodiest conflict the US has known. That means there was Pardons for ex-Confederates.
People that think like you hold grudges and don't know when to let water be under the bridge. When the war was over the nation had to heal and overcome the divide that killed so many. When John Wilkes Booth killed Lincoln and fled to the South he thought he would be embraced as a hero. He was not and he fled, was chased, and killed because he betrayed the peace that too many had died for and everyone wanted.
Using the word "won" is highly misleading here. She received more votes, but more votes doesn't "win" anything in this context. And, since most of us ought to understand that aspect of the electoral college before we leave elementary school, it's a really useless point for people to keep bringing up.
The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
They aren't literal Nazis. You are just calling them that because you think it gives you an excuse to strip them of their rights.
They are functionally equivalent to Nazis, down to their imagery and ideology. Why would the appropriate response be any different?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I take it you are not from the south and do not live in any of the southern states. If that is the case, then you really don't have any ground to say anything about it.
Uh, no. It's the losers in the southern state who don't have anything to say about it, because they fucking lost. Furthermore, even the sitting president doesn't like those fucks since they are losers, so good luck keeping the stupid statues.
If you're not from there, you don't understand.
We understand that racist horse shit perfectly. If you don't believe it's racist, you don't understand yourself.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Also, it seems like many of these Confederate statues glorify traitors and treason - not heritage.
No, it's both. The statues glorify a heritage of treason. They'd better hide those things in shifty museums that nobody goes to before they all get destroyed by people who are actually opposed to slavery.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Trump's not nearly as bad as George Bush Jr in that regard.
Why you libs insist on ignoring this is beyond me
For the same reason there were over 60 "symbolic" votes in the House to repeal ACA. (For a total cost of 180 million dollars) - by the way, how's that repeal going for ya?
For the same reason there were 13 investigations into Benghazi (One of which cost 13.8 million dollars). By the way - how many times was she found guilty? Oh yeah - none. Including the last investigation run by republicans.
For the same reason there were redistricting in voting districts to ensure republicans won.
For the same reason republicans push the false narrative that there is a lot of vote fraud going on - to disenfranchise those that won't vote republican.
You don't get to say 'really, we won
Ok. But 61% of the people don't think "We won" with Donald John Trump as president. This is the second time in 20 years America got a president the majority didn't want, policy not to their liking, and the minority republicans force their agenda on an unwilling nation.
The other odd thing to my mind is how frequently republicans fall into displacement/transference mental illness. EG: Obama is gonna declare martial law, oh noes! But here's trump, talking about "delaying the 2018 and 2020 elections to ensure that there isn't massive voter fraud again." and republicans are fine with that. You complain and shout down people over fears of what they might do, while they go about doing exactly what they accuse others of trying to pull.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
the Conservatives have been trying to play identity politics for at least 25 years with the rise of Rush Limbaugh on talk radio.
How many stories have you submitted to the firehose? (I'll admit, I haven't submitted any, but then I'm not the one complaining.)
That said, yeah, I think it's just you. But there sure is a lot more politics and less tech than there used to be.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Only conservacuck libtards use emacs.
The problem is, if you went to public school in the south, you were taught that the confederacy were the good guys, the northerners were the aggressors and that the civil war had nothing to do with slavery. These are the original US "Alternative Facts".
Simply put, CEOs of publicly traded companies have a fiscal responsibility to their companies. They constantly ask the question, "Will this increase or decrease the value of company shares?"As soon as it becomes apparent that it will DECREASE the value of the stock, they get the hell out of there! Note that this is not a complete explanation, since some of the people that resigned were not the CEOs of publicly traded companies. Apparently they also thought it would be bad for them to be associated with the Trump train wreck.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Shatner is Jewish too.
In the American system, simply getting more votes doesn't get you victory.
Thus, its not a "win".
It's a statistical curiosity, nothing more.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
This is where people can't separate one thing from the other and help to move the country forward
Your'e all thinking it, I just said it for you
Not to mention most of these statues were put up in the 20s as a show of force anyhow. It's not like any of those statues actually meant anything important happened at that location.
I'd be more sympathetic to that argument if gerrymandering wasn't a thing.
Everyone, those dozens of CEOs of "American" companies included, would do well to remember that.
I doubt there's a single person who can forget it.
I don't believe you and you're going to have to provide some substantial evidence for that because I know a number of people who have gone through the school system first hand that disagree with you.
But then we need a word to refer to them all as a group. I got it! How about "assholes"?
Someone had to do it.
Maybe I missed a digit, bad eyesight. Ugh. I'll trust your opinion, taint worth my time to track it down.
Regardless, I definitely have been here a long time. Have a good day..
Caution: Contents under pressure
> Defining your self 'Conservative' is even more idiotic. So every time a new idea comes up, you are against it, because you are 'conservative'? Har har ...
Your assertion assumes I agree with your definition of "Conservative". Probably not so.
Have a great day.
Caution: Contents under pressure
Get your head out of the sand. Trump is well and truly hated by much of the right too.
I've been given ultimatums by far to many liberals to bother with trying to work "together" any longer.
Not saying conservatives don't do the same thing.
But, I'll stick to voting my conscience, electing the people who will do what I desire. It is a lot easier.
Caution: Contents under pressure
Ha ha, you may be right. And I bet I get finished quicker as well. And if you don't like that C-g to you.
Caution: Contents under pressure
politics had "sidelined the important mission of rebuilding America's manufacturing base ...
Nice suckup there Brian.
Actually it wasn't politics, it was just a relatively minor Trumpian faux-pas. It wasn't the worst or dumbest thing he's ever done, or will do. It's is if, after 9/11, George Bush had said that the people working in the World Trade Center had been just as responsible for the attacks as the people on the planes. Or after the San Bernardino massacre, Obama has said "14 Americans got an unpleasant surprise as they came together to celebrate the holidays. The injuries and possibly worse were the result of actions by everyone present". Trump knows where his voter base is and didn't want to upset anyone with harsh, politically incorrect labels like "intolerant" or "hate-monger" or "racist" or "dickless inbred, syphalic-brained diarrhea guzzler".
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
My gut says msmash is largely responsible.
Caution: Contents under pressure
Trump condemned every side that commits violence. It's hysteria to take umbrage at his failing to specifically call out one particular side of things.
Yeah like the side that started it, the side that breached the conditions of the rally, and the side that killed someone with intent and seriously injured many more. They totally fit in with the rest of the group.
Get some fucking perspective.
I find that entire argument pretty ridiculous. So, history is getting rewritten because statues are being removed? Do you teach from them?
Given most people's grasp of history I'm inclined to think this is now the common source for all their knowledge. See a statue of the guy, read the plaque at the base.
There's a reason Germany doesn't have Hitler statues
Yep. When they lost the war the winning side (reads: Americans) forced them to introduce policies to wipe any possible resurgence of the Nazi regime and any mention of it. They not only took down statues but also possession of any Nazi materials illegal including books that gave an insight into the mind of Hitler, and introduce laws that made reference to Nazis illegal too.
Thanks America you wonderful champions of free speech.
The "They lost" argument is weaker than the moral argument. In addition, it qualifies for removal all statues of Native Americans currently on local and federal government property.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
Robert E. Lee fought for the right to own other humans. If that makes a hero to you then you are proclaiming your own views by defending him.
once more into the breach
He fought for the right to own humans. That is the core of the issue. He cannot be anyone's hero without explicit understanding of that fact. Not a lot of black americans idolize Robert E. Lee.
once more into the breach
Please explain to me how one statue of Nathan Bedford Forrest, let alone several, accomplishes this goal.
Because it's a window to understand history for anyone willing to learn. Because it's a story that a people from a different time wanted to tell future generations.
Yeah we should've left all the Nazi paraphernalia up in Europe after WW2 too right?
Ever heard of a museum or a library?
less than 2% of the population rape children. If the other 98% were willing to die in a prolonged war defending child rape I still wouldn't be cool with them putting up statues to glorify their effort.
once more into the breach
Have you been in a cave? They're complaining about white cops and the police culture.
Have you? NWA was calliging out racist black cops in the mid-80s, and I am sure they weren't the first.
Check your confirmation bias.
Check yours.
Ambush-style killings of police up 167% this year. (2016) You think that's just coincidence?
These assassins had BLM affiliations or sympathies.
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
Here are some very anti-white racist statements by BLM co-founder Yusra K. Ali.
https://archive.fo/kpjIG/e8a79...
Remember this?
http://www.washingtontimes.com...
Many lawsuits pending for their violence:
http://www.wnd.com/2017/07/aut...
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
It's a picture, used to tell a story of lies.
It's a picture that has the onus on you to find out more. Others thought it relevant and important for you to see and so it is up to you to find out what, if anything, it means for us today. It doesn't tell us anything about where we are or where we are going but where we came from. You have to figure out if it means anything and if you can apply that to be a better person.
Do you want a story
History is a story. It's compelling because it happened with real people and real events that affect us today. Telling history as a story is more about making it interesting. Regurgitating facts make history boring. You can tell the truth by telling stories of history. Every event and figure has a story.
Find one statue of him that displays that message.
You mis-understand. The onus is on you to find the message. Others thought it important to put it there. As a statue, it stares you down to learn why it was stood up. Any plaque or paragraph will be partial. There is always more history more lessons to learn. It doesn't matter whether one statue or any statue says what you want it to say. The point is that the figure in question is another person from a different time. And like us was a product of their time. There is something powerful in recognizing that historical figures are like us. Yet, it's also a warning that we are just as fallible as they.
Any statue of Martin Luther King Jr. won't tell you the full struggle of his life or his cause. A few well verse sentences are the tip to wet your appetite but you have to learn more to find out why people respect or admire him enough to put up statues. If in the future religion becomes as offensive as racism is today (why not for how many people have died to it) and people decide to tear it down MLK monuments because he was a religion man (err follower of hate filled ideology that has killed millions) ... It's sad but that is what we are doing now.
And slavery has been around since the beginning of human history and was debated for centuries by his time. In fact, it's still going on today. I think putting it as "anyone's hero" is disingenuous. He was well respected in his time by both sides and still respected for a variety of reasons (particularly military) but also as a means to remember the Civil War.
It's not about idolizing the figures. It's about remembering. History is uncomfortable.
Yes, a museum and library. But somethings are important enough to be put front and center for every passerby to see. A statue in downtown stares you in the face begging you to learn why it stands there from a people long since dead.
Nazi's were modern that set up their own monuments. It wasn't history, it was current events. It wasn't put up by people after the Nazi's. I don't think the monuments dedicated to WW2 or Holocaust should be taken down.
How about an entire poll.
https://www.centerforsecurityp...
Now go fuck yourself and be gone!
Life is not for the lazy.
. But maybe we
But it isn't we that put it up asking the future to hear the story. It was a past generation that wanted us, the future, to see it and remember something. If we have something to tell the future we should do the same thing and we are! We put up statues of Martin Luther King Jr and the like. What does that tell the future about us?
heroic war-like statue... totally different statement.
I think that's because he was an effective general. Part of his story is his military accomplishments.
I never said he was a hero. I said he wasn't the monster the left makes him out to be and that there are lessons to be learned. He was a product of his time and so are we.
Everything has to be portrayed as a left or right issue to keep people distracted and fighting among themselves
I suggest you get out more. Congress came together to sanction Russia, and they seem to be coming together more and more in opposition to pretty much anything Trump says. Left and Right is trash talk, if you get past the headlines, there's a lot of problem solving happening in Congress and the Senate.
That's a fine conclusion to draw. I always thought it seemed unnecessary, though as I kid I worried more about unfaithful delegates than scenarios like this one. Still, "we should change this to something more sensible" isn't the same argument as "if we had changed it to something more sensible in the past, things would be different now, so let's talk about that imaginary world a lot."
The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
If you think the US is Communist, then you really have no idea what the fuck Communism is.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
"The other option thinks that it's OK to use violence to silence political opposition."
Most disingenuous statement ever. Since the (White Nationalists, KKK, Alt-right, insert favorite right leaning extremist here) advertised in advance they would be armed. They came looking for a confrontation. Trump endorsed it, then condemned it, then endorsed it.
It was funny watching the Creamsicle Charlatan's head nearly explode as he tried to defend the indefensible.
Great comedy troupe, shitty government.
Donald Trump, on a crusade to make Nixon look respectable
You're going to cite a poll done by Frank Gaffney? You pitiful scumbag.
This is Frank Gaffney:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/...
And even HIS poll doesn't show what you (and he) says it shows. Read the motherfucking poll, not Gaffney's "analysis". You alt-Right jackoffs really are a sick and twisted bunch, you know? And you've done a whole lot more damage - perpetrated a whole lot more terrorist attacks - than Muslims or BLM or any other group in the US. You, buddy. You're the baddie.
You are welcome on my lawn.
"I like football and porno and books about war.
I've got an average house, with a nice hardwood floor."
https://news.vice.com/story/vice-news-tonight-full-episode-charlottesville-race-and-terror
Contains plenty of those 'not-nazis' talking about how their long term goal is eradication of 'others'.
Reality is a slackware box running on a 386 tucked away in god's sock drawer.
Wish I had mod points.
Nazis are deplorable, and there is no place for racist thugs in modern society.
That being said, the rights enshrined in the Constitution allow for ignorant hillbilly racist fuckheads to be ignorant hillbilly racist fuckheads (as long as it doesn't violate someone else's rights), just the same as it allows for me to be able to call them ignorant hillbilly racist fuckheads without fear of legal sanction or prosecution. And, just like the ignorant hillbilly racist fuckheads will bear the consequences of their ignorant hillbilly racist fuckhead ways, I will bear the consequences of my choice to proclaim them as such under the rights of free speech.
For some reason, this concept is either too hard to understand, or just willfully ignored by some people. And, even though I called them ignorant hillbilly racist fuckheads no less than six times, I'm sure someone will reply saying that I'm a nazi supporter in all seriousness, because I didn't immediately join in lock step with wanting to lock them all up and throw away the key (or something more violent) because of their belief in ignorant hillbilly racist fuckheadism.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
Or they don't want to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the first President in modern history to claim there were "really good people" in a fucking white supremacist rally shouting anti-semitic slogans long before the violence started.
Any truly good people would have found their car keys and used them to get the fuck out of there when the torches and jew hate started. That "press conference" was unbelievable, and I blame nobody for running as far from this administration as they can.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
While I agree it is astounding, your comparison with what cheapened with more or less a revolution, is not correct. The US is supposed to be a stable democracy and there are laws and judicial ways to get a status removed. Mob rule is not one of them. What next ? If a mob decided to destroy one of the general of the north, would you accept it ? Maybe a Rosa Park statue by white supremacist ? If you don't like the idea, then maybe you are accepting mob rule for the viewpoint you like... And refuse it for those you dislike... Then it ain't a state of justice and law anymore. The one destroying the status should have tried/continue to try for a legal way, and if the legal way fail, campaign loudly on media to show the politician refusing to remove the status. Destroy the narrative that it was just to remember confederate, when most of those were done at a time of jim crow laws, EVEN in state which sided with the union (and therefore cannot be about the confederation but certainly about racism), point out that the groups setting up those statues did it for racist reason (IRC daughter of confederacy).
But taking it into your own hand and destroying public property is not good, and should be punished. Otherwise what will be next ? Public lynchage ?
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
He was a product of his time and so are we.
With this reasoning, is there any crime that can't be justified, if it was committed by large enough group? Hell, even actions of Breivik can be justified this way. If only he didn't read the wrong literature and had more diverse circle of friends, he wouldn't have killed all those people.
Even worse for Lee, he didn't live in the world where it was an alien idea that blacks should be as free as whites. He lived at the crossroads and he made a choice.
Finally, for Lee himself the statue means nothing, because he is dead. Those statues are for those still living. For example, I grew up in a state with plenty of statues of Lenin and monuments for the Red Army. After regaining independence, those things were removed. Not because we wanted to forget the terror of soviet regime, but not to live in a country which prides itself for having soviet terror.
well, you have to ask yourself did America seriously fuck up in choosing a President?
You need some suitnignogs to leave the ship to see that? I mean, watching the guy trying to talk for 3 minutes is enough to see that he is a complete and utter moron with no right to be in any place of power at all.
I looked up feminism in the dictionary today and found it was redefined to "the paranoid bullshit in x0ra's head".
So I guess you're right!
SJW n. One who posts facts.
The definition of a conservative is that he wants to conserve the status quo. Hence the word: "conservative".
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Statues of racists without context are not remembering anything but nonsense. Put the statues in museums, and everyone can still learn, but not have to put up with celebrations of racists in their daily lives. That seems fair.
The first one doesn't mention BLM at all. Furthermore while ambush killings went up 167% in 2016... well that's because it went from 6 in 2015 to 16, which ties it with 2014. So yeah I can explain it pretty well, the sample size is very small and thus the data is very noisy.
ZOMG it went up by infinity percent because last year it was 0 and now it's 1!
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
On the other hand, there is no known statue for Hitler.
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
So,
"But look at all the good Hitler did!" is something you'd defend also?
Your sig here!
Yes, I think watered down is the right term. While he's promoted violence against protesters, threatened to jail opponents, refused to accept the results of the election even after he won it - and is making plans to disenfranchise large segments of the population; while he has scapegoated vulnerable minorities including blacks, muslims, and hispanics, and promoted hatred against them, and while he has indicated support for neo-nazi groups, and included at least two people with links to neo-nazi groups in his staff, he has not yet promoted wars of aggression or murdered those groups he's scapegoating.
So yes, I would strongly advise using the term "watered down" at this time.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Actually, I AM the good guy. I stand to fight, and destroy oppression around the world. That includes Islamists, Nazis, Antifa, BLM memembers, and anti-abortionists that would blow buildings. I'm not alt-Right, but I do lean right insomuch as taking a stand for Liberty; something the left never does. The Left is down-right motherfucking Orwellian! And yes, the Nazi movement has far far more common with the Antifa (anti fascists) that you would ever admit (yes, the irony is rich) .
Nothing gives me a hard-on like seeing leftist institutions fail. I literally jump for joy when it happens; because the lessons of left-ism couldn't hurt enough. Pain, is natures way of saying "don't do that you fucking idiot". So yes, I have a nice drink to when the USSR failed, N.Korea imploded and stays in the dark, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, (Middle East in general with theocratic control) or any of these oppressive dictatorships and institutions of oppression fail. It's glorious!! It's a reminder to the youth of the world of "see, that's fail, don't do that, learn from that god awful mistake."
If you stand with any of these left-ist institutions of fail, then you are the enemy of humanity!
Life is not for the lazy.
I don't know, why you bother. roman_mir is insane. Has been for years.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
I know it's pointless arguing with lefties but.... Lenin was NOT part of their culture/people/nation, he was just a foreign invader. I'm not american but i guess you consider those southerners as some other nation. Either you consider them americans and accept their history, or not. PS: no worries after American gets invaded this will all become moot.
By "defending child rape" you mean defending their children from soldiers rape. No?
So that unprecedented slew of ambush style cop killings between the time of Ferguson riots and 2017 didn't happen?
You don't think that was a result of BLM and/or their rhetoric? It was just random coincidence, I'm sure. Way to look the other way.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
I am on the side of individual freedoms
Questionable at best
anti-collectivism
Ayn Rand made up that term but never actually defined it, hence you can use it to mean pretty well whatever you want.
anti-socialism
That statement you actually can support with your own writings.
anti-fascism
That statement is an outright lie. You are arguably the most vocal proponent of fascism on slashdot today.
anti-communism
That is another of the rare statements you make that actually goes with what you write in other comments.
anti-religion
You are not fooling anyone with that line of shit there, roman. Compared to you the pope is an atheist. This post, like so many others that you write, is just another one of your attempts to bring people into the ranks of the religion that you so tirelessly promote here.
anti-government
Questionable at best. You have many times told us who you want to see in charge of government. If there is a government - even run solely by your own personal lord and savior with him not beholden or responsible to anyone else - there is still nonetheless a government.
anti-income-and-wealth-taxation
Considering how fondly you speak of the things that you take advantage of that are produced with the proceeds of income and wealth taxation, it is highly unlikely that you are actually fully opposed to taxation. More likely you - like so many others like you - are just opposed to being expected to pay taxes yourself.
You could could pay people to walk down the street carrying anything you want shouting 'Heil Musk', that will not make Musk a Nazi sympathizer.
It would if he came out and defended them. People who sympathize with nazis are known as nazi sympathizers. "A lot of fine people" with a permit my ass. The idea that those protesters were somehow paid by the left is too stupid to address.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
It's not trying to "change the rules" of the election. Nobody is suggesting installing Hillary. The political term is "mandate" and the Republicans clearly didn't get one. That's why they are struggling so much to govern right now. You don't have a mandate with 49% of the vote. Do I really, truly, honestly think that's what the Republicans are all about? Certainly not all of them. There may be no good neo-Nazis, but I have no doubt that there are good Republicans as individuals. However, having watched the Republican primary debates, every single candidate would answer each and every question with an inspiring vision of a great society followed by declaring that they would achieve that outcome by cutting taxes for the rich. I don't believe that cutting taxes for the rich is a panacea and I can't imagine any thinking person actually subscribes to that. So if you are going to stand up and proclaim such a thing, you aren't being intellectually honest. The Democrats consistently put policy before politics and genuinely believe in their policies (even though some of them are a bit unreasonable). The Republicans put politics first because they only policy they care about is corporate welfare. Many of the ideas that the Democrats put forward scare the life out of me, but at least I know that, when elected, they will try to implement policies that they think will make our country better. The Republicans, tax cuts for the rich only. Bad social policy that tries to help people isn't ideal. But it's better than bankrupting the country to put a few extra bucks in billionaires' pockets.
Good Thing Trump didn't defend either side.
He called both sides out for bad behavior. And he's right. Both sides were in the wrong. Pure and simple.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
You know the far right is on the ropes when they stop trying to defend their position and start pushing conspiracy theories about actors paid to put on a fake Nazi march and fight with the (real) leftists.
This isn't a new thing, it's something they spent the entire election campaign doing. They didn't promote their own policies and values, they spent all of their time trying to sling shit at Clinton. Well, Americans got the government they voted for.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Read the 14th Amendment chump
No, it is NOT supposed to be that way, at least since 1868
2.8% is not a "statistical curiosity"
it is a direct contravention of the 14th Amendment Guarantee of "equal rights, privileges and immunities"
T... It prevents the bigger states from being big bullies ....
No, it prevents the 14th Amendment guarantees from working!!
Says no one who has ever read the 14th Amendment
Equal does not mean equal STATES it means equal CITIZENS with equal power to choose our leaders!
Exactly right. I don't think Paul Ryan is a Nazi. I don't think Mitch McConnell is a Nazi. I don't think Ted Cruz is a Nazi.
Let's be pretty clear here, the majority of Republicans are not Nazis. But then again, those marching in Charlottesville with their white nationalist and white supremacist flags and sheilds are not your average Republicans. They are, well, yes, that's right, they're Nazis, and their so repugnant and evil that just about goddamned Republican out there is running from them as fast as possible...
With the exception of the Republican President of the United States.
I dont think anyone in their right mind is calling normal conservatives Nazi's. Whilst Nazism and Fascism is a far-right philosophy, nationalism, it's also inseparability intertwined with authoritarian rule. I think it's fair to say that the majority of Americans, regardless of political leanings want a dictatorship. Put simply, not everyone who leans right is a Nazi (and the corollary, not everyone who leans left is a communist).
Most Republicans are rational people, so are most Democrats. The sad thing is, the media has polarised political issues so much, its hard to hold the middle ground due to the bleating of the extremists on either side.
The thing that separates Nazism from regular classical (Italian) Fascism is that Nazism specifically institutionalises racism, both in believing that some races are inherently inferior (untermesch) and others are inherently superior (Ubermesch). Apologies for any mispellings in German. The problem with Nazism and White Supremacist is that they are extremist ideologies and not at all rational, hence they do irrational things when opposed. What surprises me is that there are people defending them, I would have thought any right minded republican or conservative would be trying to distance themselves from these groups, wanting to make sure it was known that these groups do not represent the majority of republicans (as a white male, I'd be quite offended to be lumped in with Nazis and white supremacists simply for being white and male, fortunately being a white male I'm immune from such generalisations).
The point is, these groups are extremist and should be opposed not because they're on the far right, but because they're too far to the right. I'd say the same about extremist left groups, but none seem to exist any more because we opposed them into extinction.
I honestly believe that the biggest threat to western nations is not any external power or foreign terrorist organisation, but the rise of extremism in our own countries. For the US, UK and other Anglo nations, this is the extreme right as we're nations that tend to lean right and are more tolerant of it. It seems entirely possible that the extreme right can gain enough support that they get to dictate extremist laws or use violence to enforce their ideology. The extreme right needs to be opposed and contrary to popular opinion it cant be done with the extreme left, the opposite of extremism is rationalism, to oppose the far right, we should support the moderates.
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
Well hell, if you can't trust nogirlsallowed81's youtube expose, who CAN you trust?!
They are, well, yes, that's right, they're Nazis, and their so repugnant and evil that just about goddamned Republican out there is running from them as fast as possible...
With the exception of the Republican President of the United States.
I am curious. What makes you think that the President of the United States is not "running" from them?
I have read his words and see nothing supporting the self-titled "Nazis". I did notice that his words did seem to disparage the ... anti-Nazis(?) but they applied equally well to the "Nazis".
Perhaps I missed something here but I see nothing that would lead a rational person to believe that the President offered ANY support to the "Nazis". I am seeing a hysterical amount of spin and bias along with a lot of innuendo... but this makes me even more suspicious that this outrage against Trump is being manufactured. Requiring him to "run away as fast as possible" is absurd. He is the President and should not be manipulable. Simple condemnation should be enough... and I read his words and they contained condemnation.
For the record, I wanted neither Trump nor Clinton for president and support neither of them.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
I did not read DigiShaman's posts because they were modded too far down for me to see without effort; however, I did want to comment on the Sharia law on all Americans thing.
Islam is designed to gather as much control as possible, as are some other religions. Sharia law is demanded by many (how many? can't give exact numbers) Muslims. Many places where a government is weak have implemented Sharia law, except Saudi Arabia where the government is strong and supports Sharia law explicitly.
Fearing that Sharia law will come to America is a legitimate fear. It is practiced in some Muslim communities in addition to regular "law and order" regardless of whether or not a government recognizes it.
The lack of ability to point to a specific American Muslim person supporting Sharia is not a huge problem. I am sure it would not be difficult to actually ask American Muslims if they would support Sharia law and find some that say yes. Here is a link discussing actual numbers but take it with a grain of salt: http://www.pewresearch.org/fac... as there is no number given for American Muslim support for Sharia. It is still safe to say that there is more than one.
All of that being said, hatred, stereotypes, racism, nationalism, religionism(?), sexism, etc are all repugnant to me.
Christianity (maybe others too?) teach that God is Love. That is respectable (but I am not Christian). If you act with love in your heart, you will find that violence and such is a VERY rare need in this "modern" world.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
Show me one fucking story, just one, of an Antifa member defending a single person being "attacked"?
Step 1: Remove head from asshole
Step 2: Read this fine article
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It's not trying to "change the rules" of the election. Nobody is suggesting installing Hillary. The political term is "mandate" and the Republicans clearly didn't get one. That's why they are struggling so much to govern right now. You don't have a mandate with 49% of the vote.
So the whole concept of a mandate (from the people, I'm assuming is what you mean) is fairly pointless when US elections typically get only 60% of eligible voters to even cast a vote. Let's follow your logic through: from your comment I'm assuming you feel that Obama's 2008 win with 53% of the vote counted as a "mandate"? He won with 69.5 million votes. In 2016 Trump got 63 million. To say that one got a mandate from the people when the other didn't seems like there must be a pretty incredibly thin line between what qualifies as a mandate! Guess what? The reality is that *neither* of them received any sort of mandate. The US has about 200 million eligible voters but about 80 million of them don't cast a vote for either a D or an R in any given election. Obama got about 34% of the eligible voters to vote for him. Trump got about 32%. Those are both quite low and both quite close - either they are both mandates or, much more likely, neither are.
There is no firm definition of what would even count as getting a mandate from the people, but if you can only get about 1 out of 3 people to throw their support behind you, that probably doesn't cut it.
(and BTW, I'm just going to skip over the whole notion that the Republicans are struggling to govern and that the source of that struggle is the lack of a mandate - that seems like quite a stretch and you didn't provide any evidence to support it, so... moving on!)
Do I really, truly, honestly think that's what the Republicans are all about? Certainly not all of them. There may be no good neo-Nazis, but I have no doubt that there are good Republicans as individuals. However, having watched the Republican primary debates, every single candidate would answer each and every question with an inspiring vision of a great society followed by declaring that they would achieve that outcome by cutting taxes for the rich.
You're missing the point: just as you like the D convention and were repulsed by the R convention, there are a similar number of people out there who liked the R convention and were repulsed by the D convention. You don't seem to be even open to the idea that the vast majority of the "others" are rational, caring human beings. Both parties have the nutters on the extreme, and unfortunately those types make for entertaining news coverage, but on neither side are they representative of the vast majority of the people in either party.
I don't believe that cutting taxes for the rich is a panacea and I can't imagine any thinking person actually subscribes to that.
This is a straw man argument. Please show me where any candidate came out and said "the solution to our problems is to cut taxes on the rich" (their position, not your wild interpretation of it). And then show me where that candidate came anywhere close to claiming that such a move would be anything close to a "panacea". You have taken their position and used your own bias to distill it down to something absurdly simplistic and not actually representative of their position.
Again, it seems like you've dreamed up a caricature of the other side and are arguing against that. I know, I know, it's far easier to feel good about a position if you can demonize and/or belittle the opposing point of view, but the reality is that both sides' positions on every single issue are far more nuanced than you seem willing to believe. Defense spending, abortion, gay rights, states vs federal powers, entitlements, budgets, healthcare, and on and on - every single one of those involves tradeoffs and less than perfect choices.
At a very high level, pretty much all sides want prosperity, fairness, the good of the country, e
It's not demonizing when you have facts and results that prove their intent. Their words are empty, but their actions show you everything you need to know.
I agree! Oh, wait, are we talking about Republicans or Democrats?? (your statement applies equally to both)
A Republican would rather see a homeless person die than take care of them. They don't deserve any political consideration when their platform is one of control and oppression.
You sound like someone who is living in an echo chamber. Here's a tip: for every news story you read on a liberal website, go find the same or another story on a conservative one. Do the opposite if you tend to get most of your news from a conservative source. I know, it's more work than in the good old days, but that's the nature of things.
Any time you reach the point where you just can't comprehend how the other side can be so dense / cruel / evil / selfish / whatever, then it's a pretty good indicator that you have fallen into the trap of being insulated from reality. Too much of your information is coming from a source that shares your biases. Too many of your social media friends share your political views. If you think the other political side is full of demons, then you've become part of the problem.
The process of confronting your biases is painful but liberating. You should try it.
"One side had a permit" and "many fine people" sound like more of a defense than anyone marching alongside swastikas deserves.
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Yes, a museum and library. But somethings are important enough to be put front and center for every passerby to see. A statue in downtown stares you in the face begging you to learn why it stands there from a people long since dead.
Or encourages people to follow in their footsteps.
We know enough about human behaviour that if you leave rocks around someone will start throwing them. Dangerous ideas need to be delivered in a controlled manner, ie museums, libraries and schools etc...
16 ambush shootings in 2016 is not unprecedented, because 16 ambush shootings occurred in 2014. Horrifying, yes, but not unprecedented. From the article you cited:
It ties for the deadliest year for such attacks, matching 2014's 16 ambush-style killings.
The reason the increase is so high is because 2015, the year immediately after Ferguson, there were only 6 (A 167% increase from 6 is 16). If you fit a trend line to those 3 points (16 in 2014, 6 in 2015, and 16 in 2016), it would be flat. Since 2014 and 2016 are both the deadliest years, there may be a trend that exists from before 2014. If the trend began before 2014, then what you're saying doesn't match up with the timeline of events.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
This has everything to do with the left and marxists. That woman that took down the statue? Notice how they don't talk much about her? Well she thinks North Korea is great - http://conservativetribune.com... .
This is what they do, come in, rile up people and overthrow the government and then we can be like Cuba or Venezuela. Kiss everything you have goodbye. No more property rights, no more anything really. Rename things, blow them up, remove them, etc. We have our own little isis people doing the same thing we see in the middle east.
We know enough about human behaviour
I don't know how true that is with the current political climate.
. Dangerous ideas need to be delivered in a controlled manner
I disagree with this. It doesn't matter how an idea is delivered - what motivates people to act on ideas doesn't change. If we value free speech we have to allow it in any way that people we disagree with want so long as actions do not follow.
You can say you hate whatever you want but the moment you decide to act or plan to act is when we take legal action.
A permit is irrelevant. Permits allow you to gather, not excuse bad behavior.
There were people in both sides that were equally guilty of misdeeds. To berate only one side would imply endorsement the other.
The bottom line is there were two groups of people out to start trouble. The real question is what is this being used to distract the gullible public from?
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Actually, the Electoral College is a handcuffed and corrupt body. If the Electoral College functioned the way it was originally intended then every member of it would cast their votes as they saw fit for whichever candidate they thought was better. However, it's members have been handcuffed by a variety of state constitutions that force a state's electors to vote according to their state's majority opinion. Electors don't vote as they see fit as originally intended. The Electoral College is in no way a Representative body when members of a given state cast all their votes one direction over a 51%/49% public vote in their state. If Electoral Votes were actually representative of the popular vote in each state during the last election, then neither candidate would have received 270 votes.
Well if each member can just vote for whoever they see fit and their votes are the only ones that count then what would be the point in the whole election charade?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
"Congress came together to sanction Russia"
Is that supposed to be a good thing?!?!
E.g., I will defend the RIGHTS of religious people to have their beliefs.
OTOH I personally consider religious people to be collectively deluded.
Do you COMPREHEND the difference?!?!
It doesn't matter what the idiot "nazis" have as viewpoints. If they are not committing any crimes, then their right to free speech must be defended.
Funny. They wear Nazi regalia and use Nazi salutes and pursue Nazi messages of intolerance. It's walking like a duck and quacking like a duck. Who gives a fuck if they are "actual Nazis". We kicked the "actual Nazi"'s asses in WWII -- and for good reason. Of course they aren't fucking "actual Nazis". The fact that you need to be so pedantic over how some people are confusing intolerant assholes with "Nazis" and "Fascists" (something else they aren't) rather trying to defend their goals just goes to show how bankrupt your argument is. Either you can't defend it, or won't defend it. Instead you quibble with the shorthand people use to label it.
They're intolerant in a society that is built of a requirement for tolerance. We're a country literally founded on the notion of accepting all races and religions of people from all over the world, and they want to be intolerant. In the pursuit of their narrow, bigoted agenda, they want to fuck it up for the vast majority of us who are happy to live and let live. That makes them assholes as well.
There, are you happy now?
There's a paradox in a society built on tolerance: the only thing we cannot tolerate is intolerance.
This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
1. It isn't "petty virtue signalling". Refusing to associate with racists is "actual virtue".
2. There is no point in "telling Trump things he needs to hear" if he "isn't interested in listening".
3. Vote for whoever the fuck you want to; why do we give a shit? The post you're replying to has nothing to do with "Democrats", so the fact that you took it as an opportunity to say you won't vote Democrats tells us you weren't going to anyway.
4. You're projecting.
5. When the fuck did "pragmatism" become a thing when it comes to fighting against bigotry and racism?
You seem to be unclear about how Nazis acted if you think AC's "thank god they aren't racist" is comparable to gassing millions of innocent people or starting two wars.
This comment is my opinion and does not represent an official position of Donald Trump or others I do not work for
Not relevant, says the 14th Amendment
And you want America ruled by Kentucky?
Or do you prefer Mississippi?
The Constitution says EQUAL rights, privileges and immunities
From that very day the EC was as unconstitutional as the 3/5ths votes of slaves.
And Texas would have added to Hillary's win.
Why be pro-slavery when slavery is outlawed?
The EC was created for the sole purpose of keeping the slave holding states in the Union by promising outsized control over elections
Now we have the 14th Amendment, forbidding this
Why has the SCOTUS refused to hear a single challenge?
Since Nixon that is.
I don't know how true that is with the current political climate.
Really? Trumo is the equivalent of a 12 yea rold. He is a man-baby. Everything he does is exactly what you would expect if 12 year old entitled rich kid was President.
.
I disagree with this. It doesn't matter how an idea is delivered
You can teach kids about Hitler in history class or they can join the Hitler youth. Its the same information only delivered differently. If you can't see the difference then there's no point discussing any further...
"Congress came together to sanction Russia"
Is that supposed to be a good thing?!?!
It counters your claim that everything is portrayed and left or right. Republicans and Democrats ignored political sides and acted in the best interest of the country.
Whenever politicians put country before party it is a good thing.
2.8% is a statistical curiosity when simple majority isn't a "victory" condition.
And no it is NOT a contravention of the 14th Amendment..
You are guaranteed the right to vote and the privileges that come with it (if you're a citizen).
But the electoral system determines that the presidency isn't merely a popularity contest.
Otherwise California would always have unassailable say in who becomes president. Even if the rest of the country voted for someone else. The electoral system requires that a would-be president have a broad base of support across the country.
Chas - The one, the only.
THANK GOD!!!
Hey - how bout that anti-stateism?
14th Amendment says equal rights
EQUAL rights to elect President
The EC is unconstitutional.