• 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]

Anyone who says that ethnicity is RW doesn't make make any sense, they are incongruous.

Not ethnicity, ethno centrism.

There you go AGAIN with a absolutism.

FFS.

I'm not being absolutist.
I'm merely stating that if a modern group, generally believes many/most of the same things of groups in years past, that makes it comparable to a modern group.
The can be identified together.

I do not believe most modern liberals or left wing groups are racist, I'm just saying that there have been racist liberals and left wing groups.
 
Actually, it worked. You responded to my points the second time around.



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.


Bud, you're a hater like any other hater, you just selected a politically-correct target.
 
You said,


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.
Uh...i think the point SOME might be making is that in the US, the RW is primarily made up of white conservatives ....who tend towards racism, especially compared to US liberals. I can't believe that is a problem for you to understand.
 
Uh...i think the point SOME might be making is that in the US, the RW is primarily made up of white conservatives ....who tend towards racism, especially compared to US liberals. I can't believe that is a problem for you to understand.

The problem is, that what may be perceived as racist, isn't always racism.
 
Indeed, in fact as modern Pakistan was being created as a home for Indian Muslims and the Muslims were being partitioned to the new state, the Sikhs formed a gauntlet and murdered as many as they could. They are opposing groups.

Got to say though, I feel a bit unclean having this discussion in a thread about a horrendous event that has to be tearing the hearts out of family and friends of the victims.

What's unclean about it? If Sikh's outnumbered Christians they'd be slaughtering Christians here too. Balkanized America here we come.
 
Bud, you're a hater like any other hater, you just selected a politically-correct target.

I never get why conservative posters do this... Maybe liberal ones do too and I just don't read as many of their posts... But if you were not able to come up with a counter argument, why did you hit reply?
 
Nothing to do with it... the thread got hijacked by haters of various stripes.

IMO, you failed miserably to rise above and set an example--your knee-jerk overzealous defense is 1 of 2 that it takes to tango.


Again, I think we should all keep our thoughts focused on those suffering today--such a peaceful community of people attacked like this for no logical reason. Look to your own communities, rise above and reach out to a non-Christian.

What have we done in a positive way to make a Sikh, a Muslim, a Hindu feel that they are as American as we are?
 
Not ethnicity, ethno centrism.



I'm not being absolutist.
I'm merely stating that if a modern group, generally believes many/most of the same things of groups in years past, that makes it comparable to a modern group.
The can be identified together.

I do not believe most modern liberals or left wing groups are racist, I'm just saying that there have been racist liberals and left wing groups.
Thanks professor, as if that was not understood, and the idea of trying link Southern Dems of 100 to 200 years ago to modern US liberal just won't fly. The party has nearly always had a north-south split...and then later those Southern Dems were incorporated into the GOP.
 
IMO, you failed miserably to rise above and set an example--your knee-jerk overzealous defense is 1 of 2 that it takes to tango.


Again, I think we should all keep our thoughts focused on those suffering today--such a peaceful community of people attacked like this for no logical reason. Look to your own communities, rise above and reach out to a non-Christian.

What have we done in a positive way to make a Sikh, a Muslim, a Hindu feel that they are as American as we are?

Could be wrong, but I have the impression that the Sikh community feels very well-accepted in the United States.
 
What's unclean about it? If Sikh's outnumbered Christians they'd be slaughtering Christians here too. Balkanized America here we come.


And none of our founding fathers were Sikhs.
 
Thanks professor, as if that was not understood, and the idea of trying link Southern Dems of 100 to 200 years ago to modern US liberal just won't fly. The party has nearly always had a north-south split...and then later those Southern Dems were incorporated into the GOP.

So you try to separate groups (that were ideologically similar) based on geography, rather than say, sometimes, left wing groups can be racist.
 
One thing we learned from the theater shooting in Colorado that it will be a couple days for we have enough information to make any opinion.

I will go out on a limb here and predict the killer was a cowardly underachiever.
 
To stop tolerating right wing hate across the board. No more presidential candidates giving speeches about how Jews are culturally superior to Palestinians, no more saying that you're going to go the NAACP to tell them to get off the food stamps, no more calling gay people "perverts", no more banning cultural studies course, no more Glenn Beck, no more Rush Limbaugh, no more movements to ban the construction of mosques, no more ranting about "islamofascists", etc.

Thank god you didn't say "no more bigotry"...you would've ended up calling for the end of yourself

Horrible situation yet again. Like Colorado, my heart goes out to the victim. If it turns out that it's motivated by religious/racial reasons it becomes even sadder as it'll likely hightlight the further ignorance of the shooter in thinking sikhs = muslims when it's decidingly different
 
Thank god you didn't say "no more bigotry"...you would've ended up calling for the end of yourself

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.
 
Um...because a racist act is caused by racism, the application of a racist ideology.

I can't wait for more semantic magic that will probably follow...

Yes but sometimes, things that are perceived or accused of being "racist" aren't actually racist.

Goldwater not supporting the Civil Rights Act, was considered racist by many, but his stated reasoning for not supporting it, were clearly not racist.
Was his position racist or wasn't it?
 
Last edited:
So you try to separate groups (that were ideologically similar) based on geography, rather than say, sometimes, left wing groups can be racist.
Uh...the point is that the split was based on ideology, many in the north did not support slavery that those in the south did, and that ideological spit showed itself as recently as the Civil Rights voting.

Further....please don't insinuate that Southern Dem, because they were dems, were somehow a left wing group.
 
Another month. Another mass killing. Well, at least its not weekly.


Yet.

I guess the nice thing is lots of posters can just go to current gun threads and copy their posts without burning too many brain cells. Lets see now

*** no gun zones kill people
*** a few crazy people should not spoil it for everyone else
*** its not the guns
*** the Founding Fathers wanted it this way
*** mental illness is the culprit

Did I miss anything?
 
Another month. Another mass killing. Well, at least its not weekly.


Yet.

I guess the nice thing is lots of posters can just go to current gun threads and copy their posts without burning too many brain cells. Lets see now

*** no gun zones kill people
*** a few crazy people should not spoil it for everyone else
*** its not the guns
*** the Founding Fathers wanted it this way
*** mental illness is the culprit

Did I miss anything?


Why do you hate America?
 
Uh...the point is that the split was based on ideology, many in the north did not support slavery that those in the south did, and that ideological spit showed itself as recently as the Civil Rights voting.

Further....please don't insinuate that Southern Dem, because they were dems, were somehow a left wing group.

Then explain how they supported many of the same policies?
Just because they were racist, doesn't mean they weren't left in nature.

What made them right wing?
 
Could be wrong, but I have the impression that the Sikh community feels very well-accepted in the United States.

Not today.

And when they talk about the many attacks they suffered because they were mistaken for Muslims--breaks your heart for both them and Muslims. So much ignorance still in our society.

Both cultures have so much to offer us and teach us--America is made a better place by Sikhs, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists.
 
Yes but sometimes, things that are perceived or accused of being "racist" aren't actually racist.

Goldwater not supporting the Civil Rights Act, was considered racist by many, but his stated reasoning for not supporting it, were clearly not racist.
Was his position racist or wasn't it?
It was a stance held by racists, he used it to try and gather Southern votes. I'm not sure how racist he was then, but I do know many of his views became much more liberal as he aged.

Edit: Holding to conservative "states rights" ideas to the point of allowing state sponsored racism might not be racism, but sure give license to it.

Buckley was a racist, he believed early on in the superiority of whites and it was reflected in his writings, which were the basis of the modern US RW ideology...but even he came to regret those views that he held.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom