• 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!

Which political lean is most responsible for the shooting in Charleston?

Which lean is responsible?


  • Total voters
    53
Do you mean to tell us that no conservative group has ever burned a flag? Are you sure about that?

No group that I would define as actually being "Conservative," particularly not in the mainstream political sense of the word, burns the American flag.
 
No group that I would define as actually being "Conservative," particularly not in the mainstream political sense of the word, burns the American flag.

I didn't say the "American" flag; I said "a" flag.

And yes, there were plenty of Iranian flag burnings by conservatives in 1979. And a handful of Soviet flag burnings throughout the cold war. So it's no good to complain that all the bad behavior that comes out of political gatherings is fomented by liberals. As you've seen, such a claim is simply a lie, and also a poor one.
 
I didn't say the "American" flag; I said "a" flag.

And yes, there were plenty of Iranian flag burnings by conservatives in 1979. And a handful of Soviet flag burnings throughout the cold war. So it's no good to complain that all the bad behavior that comes out of political gatherings is fomented by liberals. As you've seen, such a claim is simply a lie, and also a poor one.

Ooookaaay... No offense, but who gives a sh*t?

My point was that American "Conservatives" don't burn the American flag, while bearing public faith and allegiance to the flags of foreign nations in its place. Roof did both.

He was not "Conservative."
 
Ooookaaay... No offense, but who gives a sh*t?

My point was that American "Conservatives" don't burn the American flag, while bearing public faith and allegiance to the flags of foreign nations in its place. Roof did both.

He was not "Conservative."

Gonna have to do better than that.
 
Gonna have to do better than that.

No, I don't. You're apparently just ignorant.

Patriotism is probably the single most defining and universal aspect of the modern American "Conservative" movement, and it always has been.

Seriously, try and come up with an example of any self respecting American "Conservative" burning an American flag in contempt, and showing respect to a foreign flag in its place. I dare you.
 
Last edited:
Why not ask which religion, hair style, movie, book, music or firearm was "most responsible" for the shooting? So far we have the blame being shared with (placed on?) the continued display of the stars and bars flag, too little "gun control" and now we get to try to blame a political lean? Why not just accept the idea that within a nation of over 300 million folks a small number of them will occassionally commit some seriously violent criminal acts?

Because if we did that then we wouldn't get to blame anybody!! Duh!!!

:lol:
 
No, I don't. You're apparently just ignorant.

Patriotism is probably the single most defining and universal aspect of the modern American "Conservative" movement, and it always has been.

Seriously, try and come up with an example of any self respecting American "Conservative" burning an American flag in contempt, and showing respect to a foreign flag in its place. I dare you.

Who said this guy was "self-respecting"?

Someone being so disillusioned with America that they'd burn a flag instantly becomes "not conservative"? The WBC prattles on about how God hates America because we're decent to homosexuals. Guess that makes them a bunch of libs.
 
Gonna have to do better than that.
Hmm...

In theory it's probably possible to be left-wing AND a ridiculously racist asshole murderer like roof

But this guy seemingly identified with two (three?) extremely racist governments from the past, and to my knowledge they were mainly conservative in nature - albeit nothing any conservative these days would touch (at least not publicly, but then no one is racist publicly these days, if they're in politics)
 
Who said this guy was "self-respecting"?

Someone being so disillusioned with America that they'd burn a flag instantly becomes "not conservative"?


Ayup. The minute you throw "God and country" to the wind, and espouse the overthrow of our Constitutional Government (which is exactly what he was doing by burning our flag, and trying to start a 'race war') you forfeit all right to be called "Conservative," and you cease to have any affiliation whatsoever with the ideological movement as it exists in the American political mainstream.

Again, I dare you to find anyone of consequence in modern Conservativism who either agreed with this kid, or condoned his actions. You're simply not going to find such a thing.
 
If you read the manifesto and see his selected pics of himself , we get a person who
1- supports the Confederacy
2- embraces the painting of African Americans in the worst possible light
3- was obsessed with the Martin case and felt he got what he deserved

No how many liberals here can check off those three boxes?

And how many self declared people on the right - be they conservatives or right libertarians - can check of those three boxes?

An honest answer there tells you the answer to this poll.

1. Well, there is no Confederacy any more. In fact we're 150 years to the day that Stand Waite surrendered.

2. I don't see too many folks pointing out African Americans as a whole as being a problem. There are, however, some significant problems in a number of African American communities and those problems do indeed get pointed out.

3. Trayvon Martin bit off more than he could chew when he attacked Zimmerman. He made his choice and paid the price.
 
Hmm...

In theory it's probably possible to be left-wing AND a ridiculously racist asshole murderer like roof

But this guy seemingly identified with two (three?) extremely racist governments from the past, and to my knowledge they were mainly conservative in nature - albeit nothing any conservative these days would touch (at least not publicly, but then no one is racist publicly these days, if they're in politics)

How are you defining "Conservative," first off? As with the word "Liberal," there are many different meanings associated with the term, and they vary quite a bit depending on where one happens to live.

In Europe, for example, what they tend to call "Liberal" is basically what an American would describe as being "Conservative (i.e. limited government, free market, center rightists/moderates with significant focus on national pride and more traditional values)," where a European "Conservative" would basically be someone like Paleocon (i.e. a Monarchist, who believes in things like State Religions). In American political parlance, by way of contrast, "Liberal" is basically used as a proxy term for someone who supports "Social Democrat" or moderate "Democratic Socialist" causes and beliefs.

Being largely authoritarian regimes, neither of the African nations mentioned here would really qualify as being "Conservative" in the American sense of the word, let alone the modern American sense of the word. Frankly, neither would the vast majority of Roof's personal ideology.
 
Last edited:
You mean like how so many on the right felt the need to remind us constantly that, after the recent riots, Baltimore had been run by Democrats for decades? That kind of sadness?

Yeah. That's not really any better.

Although trying to blame conservatism for what some nut job did is more hollow and disingenuous
 
How are you defining "Conservative," first off? As with the word "Liberal," there are many different meanings associated with the term, and they vary quite a bit depending on where one happens to live.

In Europe, for example, what they tend to call "Liberal" is basically what an American would describe as being "Conservative (i.e. limited government, free market, center rightists/moderates with significant focus on national pride and more traditional values)," where a European "Conservative" would basically be someone like Paleocon (i.e. a Monarchist, who believes in things like State Religions). In American political parlance, by way of contrast, "Liberal" is basically used as a proxy term for someone who supports "Social Democrat" or moderate "Democratic Socialist" causes and beliefs.

Being largely authoritarian regimes, neither of the African nations mentioned here would really qualify as being "Conservative" in the American sense of the word, let alone the modern American sense of the word. Frankly, neither would the vast majority of Roof's personal ideology.

I'm not really sure myself how I'm defining it.

In a general sense, as "opposed to most changes".

Certainly I don't think modern conservatives in the USA or Europe would find any common ground with the former nations mentioned (they're both gone now, right? well at least South Africa changed leadership)

I was also thinking "right politically", and in that sense both those nations and conservatives are on the same "side" of the political....scale?

But then we get into how you determine political position, and a linear measurement system is not that useful for such things.

Like....authoritarian does not necessarily mean conservative, and the like.
 
After scanning through some of the threads, clearly there are opinions on this so don't be shy, which "side" is to blame?

Getting the poll together.

None are responsible
 
1. Well, there is no Confederacy any more. In fact we're 150 years to the day that Stand Waite surrendered.

2. I don't see too many folks pointing out African Americans as a whole as being a problem. There are, however, some significant problems in a number of African American communities and those problems do indeed get pointed out.

3. Trayvon Martin bit off more than he could chew when he attacked Zimmerman. He made his choice and paid the price.

1- so why are there those on the right who seem to not be able to let this issue go and insist on defending the Confederacy?
2 - I previously listed a thread with a whole bunch of posts which would have given comfort to the SC killer.
3- the point is not to reargue the Martin case but to point out that the SC killer would have taken comfort in many of the posts here
 
Because if we did that then we wouldn't get to blame anybody!! Duh!!!

:lol:

Sure we would, but just not having the same same definition of an enemy influence. The bottom line is that many are exposed to the same potential (negative?) influences but few choose to "go postal" over them.
 
1- so why are there those on the right who seem to not be able to let this issue go and insist on defending the Confederacy?
2 - I previously listed a thread with a whole bunch of posts which would have given comfort to the SC killer.
3- the point is not to reargue the Martin case but to point out that the SC killer would have taken comfort in many of the posts here

I've run across various arguments supporting the confederacy along the lines of "it was about states rights more than keeping slavery (although one of the things they would probably have kept was slavery, at least for awhile)".

I think SOME amount of merit exists there, but...
 
I've run across various arguments supporting the confederacy along the lines of "it was about states rights more than keeping slavery (although one of the things they would probably have kept was slavery, at least for awhile)".

I think SOME amount of merit exists there, but...

yes - the states right to practice slavery.
 
Liberals fault. Before the evils of liberalism befell the great nation of the US, no man would ever dream of shooting up a building full of another man's property. Were it nor for the progressive agenda, this crime would never have happened.
 
Yep, the three stooges were quite extreme. ;)

My sons had those back in the 90's. The kid was out of style, so why are we even talking about it?
 
yes - the states right to practice slavery.
Yeah, and that's where the states rights argument falls flat for me.

States rights might sound good and all, but then you throw enslavement of fellow humans into the mix and it ****s your whole argument up.
 
Yeah, and that's where the states rights argument falls flat for me.

States rights might sound good and all, but then you throw enslavement of fellow humans into the mix and it ****s your whole argument up.

To be fair, the South's entire economy was basically built around slavery. The economic depression resulting from its removal, as well as the damage of the Civil War, was something that the Southeastern United States only really began to claw its way above in the later half of the Twentieth Century. Given that fact, it's not hard to see why many Southerners were wary of having some Yankee president all but "pull the rug out" from under them while sitting pretty in a part of the country that would be more or less completely unaffected.

It's also worth noting that there were a number of people in the South who actually wanted to move away from Slavery anyway. They just wanted to do so more slowly, on their own terms.
 
No political ideology helped cause the tragic murders in any way, shape, fashion, or form. Whoever murdered the nine innocent humans caused the murder.

Whoever did this was likely an extremist that acted alone and was off the deep end in the first place...
 
It is evil to even suggest such a thing. The response from the people involved is the most incredible thing I have ever seen. I wanted to go and meet those people but I live too far away. I know many people who CLAIM to be Christians and go to church several times a week but most of them are hypocrites. I believe those people in Charleston are the real thing.
 
Back
Top Bottom