• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Mass Shooting at Sikh Temple Outside Milwaukee [W:211]

LOL... No Cephus. He is saying that Sikhs aren't Muslim, not that the shooters aren't Muslim.

He wasn't clear and since someone had suggested that some Muslims were violently opposed to Sikhs, he could also have been talking about that possibility. I have no doubt, however, that this is religious in nature.
 
So what side of the political spectrum is a group that espouses modern left wing beliefs like, bringing up the common man through social programs and the like, but also believes in ethno/racial centrism?

Oh! I know! I know! (jabs hand in air repeatedly)
 
At least hearing the gunman is dead is music to my ears! My blood boils when someone who commits this senseless type of crime is even given a trial.
 
It's not nonsense.
I mean progressives were pretty darn racist, not to long ago.
Good lord, now you abandoned your silly semantic argument about what a social conservative is.

FFS.



Like the progressives, Jacksonian democrats right?
Pretty left wing, in many, many areas but pretty darn racist in others.
You are applying a specific political definition of modern ideologies.....to a party from nearly 200 years ago?!?

More nonsense!
 
The idea that you can be bigoted against a political ideology is silly. Sure, in the broadest possible dictionary definition of "bigotry", maybe that could be true. But not in any meaningful or important sense. Real bigotry is about demographic groups, not political ideologies. You can hate political ideologies. It doesn't even make sense not to, since some of them directly contradict one another in fundamental ways....

This whole thing lately where the right is trying to confuse the concept of bigotry to include everything under the sun is just a lame attempt to divert attention from real bigotry. Nobody is falling for it.



Repeating an already failed deflection: Poor tactics.

A "political ideology" consists of what? People. Can you be bigoted against people? For whatever reason? Yes you can, if your negative beliefs towards them are irrational and based on ignorance, bias, assumptions and stereotypes... as your attitude about "the right" is.


You're a terrible embarassment to all reasonable Progessives and liberals every time you open your mouth lately.
 
Last edited:
Good lord, now you abandoned your silly semantic argument about what a social conservative is.

FFS.

No I haven't.
Progressives were some of the first modern liberals.
With many modern liberals wanting to preserve their traditions and beliefs.
They also happened to be pretty racist.

You are applying a specific political definition of modern ideologies.....to a party from nearly 200 years ago?!?

More nonsense!

So it's meaningless that they supported "left wing" policies, but also happened to be racist?
 
You all realize that this political stuff is all idiotic, right? It's like saying all Muslims are bad because of 9/11 or saying that all Christians are bad because of the morons at the Westboro Baptist Church. Overgeneralizations tend to be lazy man's arguments. You want to group all people of a political ideology in a neat package, you're not only going to fail, but you're going to make yourself look dumb. This is for all of you, left or right, who do this. You know who you are... and of course, those of you who do it won't admit it or stop doing it. You'll just continue to spew illogical overgeneralizations and continue to look foolish. At least the rest of us can keep pointing it out and laughing at you.
 
Repeating an already failed deflection: Poor tactics.

You're a terrible embarassment to all reasonable Progessives and liberals every time you open your mouth lately.

Obviously the source is proving a little elusive!
 
I say we stop speculating and blaming and all try to be Sikh for the afternoon:


To promote positive qualities both personally and among the community. To embrace Sat (Truth); Daya (Compassion); Santokh (Contenment); Nimrata (Humility); and Pyare (Love) as positive qualities of life.
 
No I haven't.
Progressives were some of the first modern liberals.
With many modern liberals wanting to preserve their traditions and beliefs.
They also happened to be pretty racist.
This is just stupid beyond belief, you have twisted the modern understanding of what a "social conservative" in US politics means, and now you are in engaging in absolutism trying to argue that US Progressives hold to any and all ideas from past progressives......and try to twist that into "social conservatism". Unbelievable, utter and total nonsense.



So it's meaningless that they supported "left wing" policies, but also happened to be racist?
What a liberal was 200 years ago is not the same as what a liberal is today....you just keep on with this silly nonsense.
 
WRONG...it consists of IDEAS.

Ideas don't hang in the air unsupported, like balloons. They are held up by something... by the belief of those who embrace them.

For instance, the Constitution would have no power if people no longer believed in it. It would just be used paper.

An ideology consists of a group of people who espouse those beliefs. A person can be bigoted against a group of people regardless of his selection criteria, if his negativity towards them is based on irrational, unsupported, biased or ignorant beliefs about them.

Case in point: Teamoisil. I wouldn't be surprised if when he stubs his toe he exclaims "Those damn right-wingers!" :lamo
 
No I haven't.
Progressives were some of the first modern liberals.
With many modern liberals wanting to preserve their traditions and beliefs.
They also happened to be pretty racist.



So it's meaningless that they supported "left wing" policies, but also happened to be racist?

I'm not really following this argument too well. What message are you trying to make about modern politics based on the positions and attitudes of the Jacksonian democrats?

And secondly, what has it got to do with the shooting of Sikhs in their gurduwara?
 
On the general side of ideologies, right wing or left.
One is not automatically racist or not racist.
Now you are creating a non sequitur, my comment had nothing to do with inherent racism of ideologies.

You can keep on with these absolutely ridiculous posts.....but this is just beyond belief.
 
This is just stupid beyond belief, you have twisted the modern understanding of what a "social conservative" in US politics means, and now you are in engaging in absolutism trying to argue that US Progressives hold to any and all ideas from past progressives......and try to twist that into "social conservatism". Unbelievable, utter and total nonsense.

I don't actually believe that because some progressives were racist 100 years ago, that they're racist today.
It's just fallacious to say that ethno/racial centrism is automatically right wing.

What a liberal was 200 years ago is not the same as what a liberal is today....you just keep on with this silly nonsense.

Even if liberals support the same things today?
 
They are held up by something... by the belief of those who embrace them.
OK....but ideologies ARE NOT "made up" of people, they consist of ideas......people and ideas/ideologies are very different things.

I just cannot get over the level of conversations going on here, they have such limited basis.
 
When you hear these people speak about the Sikh community and what has happened to them today, they are unbelievably peaceful and understanding.

We could all learn something from them.
 
Now you are creating a non sequitur, my comment had nothing to do with inherent racism of ideologies.

You can keep on with these absolutely ridiculous posts.....but this is just beyond belief.

You said,
As I already pointed out RW Authoritarianism DOES trend towards racist behavior/ideas, you might be trying to apply absolutes to diminish an argument.

Typically, any kind of authoritarianism does this and left wing groups can be just as prone to it as anyone else.
The fact is here, that people are automatically calling racism and ethnocentrism as right wing.

It gets automatically assigned to the right of the political spectrum, when any group can pick up these ideologies and use them in their cause.
The constant and incessant assumption that racism = right wing is wrong.
We have many examples of left wing groups espousing racist beliefs.
 
I'm not really following this argument too well. What message are you trying to make about modern politics based on the positions and attitudes of the Jacksonian democrats?

And secondly, what has it got to do with the shooting of Sikhs in their gurduwara?


Nothing to do with it... the thread got hijacked by haters of various stripes.
 
I don't actually believe that because some progressives were racist 100 years ago, that they're racist today.
It's just fallacious to say that ethno/racial centrism is automatically right wing.
Anyone who says that ethnicity is RW doesn't make make any sense, they are incongruous.



Even if liberals support the same things today?
There you go AGAIN with a absolutism.

FFS.
 
Repeating an already failed deflection: Poor tactics.

Actually, it worked. You responded to my points the second time around.

A "political ideology" consists of what? People. Can you be bigoted against people? For whatever reason? Yes you can, if your negative beliefs towards them are irrational and based on ignorance, bias, assumptions and stereotypes... as your attitude about "the right" is.

No, a political ideology is not a group of people, it is a set of beliefs. The people who support those beliefs come and go. Beliefs can be good or bad, so fighting against an ideology can be good or bad as well. The reason that bigotry is bad is because members of a demographic group did nothing to choose to be in that group and do not have the choice to leave. So it is just pointless malice. Hatred of a political ideology is not pointless. If you beat down bad ideologies, the world becomes a better place and you free the people afflicted with it to go on and lead productive lives.
 
I'm not really following this argument too well. What message are you trying to make about modern politics based on the positions and attitudes of the Jacksonian democrats?

Some people here believe that racism is automatically right wing.
When there are many instances of left wing groups espousing racism.

It's an example.

And secondly, what has it got to do with the shooting of Sikhs in their gurduwara?

Nothing, except that someone decided to start crapping on this thread by accusing right wing people of being racist, hate mongers.
In a manner of speaking.
 
Back
Top Bottom