• 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!

"Parasites" and the hypocrisy of the elite

Condor060 said:
As history remembers it, It was the origination of the Republican party that freed the slaves and from 1869-1935, every black Senator was Republican.

Black-American Representatives and Senators by Congress, 1870–Present |

US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives
Click to expand...

It's fair to tar the Democratic party with accepting the racist white southerners for so long. It's a shameful past and there's no excuse for it, really. But the opposition to civil rights, Jim Crow, and more was nearly all in the South, white conservatives, who ruled every institution of power in the south for 100 years post Civil War, state, local, national government, business leaders, church leaders, universities, and more - all white, all opposed to civil rights as institutions.

In states outside the south, for example, the KKK was mostly Republicans. For example, Indiana had the largest KKK organization in the country and that state was mostly ruled by Republicans.

So the problem as I see it in 2020 isn't that the Democratic party won't own up to its racist past. It did that, and way too late but very forcefully said in 1964 that the racist white southerners could go **** themselves, and the party as a whole jammed the CRA right over the heads of the southern Democrats that controlled much of Congress, then when the southern states balked at implementing it, LBJ sent troops down to the South to keep the segregationists in line. The party hasn't swayed from that over the next half century.

The problem is the South hasn't ever come to grips with our past. Fake history like you're pushing is more of the denial - it wasn't the white southern power structure at every level that was racist - it was....DEMOCRATS!!!! Well, that's damn convenient when you're now a republican in a lily white party that tried and succeeded in THIS ERA in gutting the Voting Rights Act that you're applauding elsewhere on this thread. So you want to give the GOP all the credit for the VRA in 1965, but pretend it's not significant that in this era, the current GOP tried and succeeded in dismantling much of it, then as soon as the ink was dry on that, proceeded to prove why the VRA was necessary. See, e.g., NC and Texas where the GOP pushed voting rules that so targeted minorities, with "surgical precision" in NC, the courts were forced to strike them down as discriminatory, which was the intent of course.
 
TurtleDude said:
more nonsense. Some GOP members are racist but racism is institutionalized by the Democrats. Many Democrat policies are motivated by racism-from gun control to affirmative action
Click to expand...

It's a shame black lawmakers and voters cannot recognize the racism in the party they support. I guess you think they're idiots, too stupid to see what's plain to you, which of course is not a racist view of black voters or black office holders.

And of course, Republick policies like the voting rules changes in NC that targeted black voters with "surgical precision" aren't racist either.

Etc....
 
JasperL said:
It's not me who is parroting him exactly - that's you.
Click to expand...

You might find this impossible to believe but people who might believe the same historical facts aren't all followers of D'Souza. I might have seen him 3 or 4 times on the news about his arrest. I have no clue what organization or speeches he might be giving.

And what you're demonstrating is more of the same willful dishonesty that he spreads, and you are repeating. I'm sure it's just a coincidence.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't know.

Bottom line is the story Dinesh D'Souza tells us is the Democratic party are the REAL racists, which is why nearly all blacks run for office as Democrats, and blacks vote something like 80-90% Democratic in every national election. Or something..... :confused:

Do you think black voters and office holders are stupid? If not, why do they run as Democrats and vote Democratic for the racists and bigots in the Democratic party, that among other things advances blacks to positions of leadership, including President of the United States, and as mayors and governors in the state and local arena?
Click to expand...

Its more obvious than you can comprehend. Democrats promise free stuff. Minorities jump on board. Thats the bottom line of todays politics but it is now changing. Why would a group of black congressional leaders not clap for the lowest unemployment in the history of their race? Because Trump did it and he's a Republican. They could care less about anything positive that doesn't come from the party of free money.

Why do we have 78% of black children being born to single parents today? Promise of free stuff yet Democrats rarely deliver.

When President Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965, he cemented a political alliance between African Americans and the Democratic Party that continues to this day. His famous statement of I'll have those ....... voting Democrat for 200 years.

But now there is a movement in the black voters of this country. For the first time in history they have the lowest unemployment and the lowest amount of people on food stamps. Even the NAACP is complaining about the rising percentage of blacks supporting Trump. Movements about getting off the Democrat plantation are becoming more and more prevalent.

Over the past 40 years, black voter support for Republican presidential candidates has consistently registered somewhere between embarrassingly low and nonexistent. Running for re-election with a red-hot economy, President Reagan got just 9 percent of the African-American vote in 1984. Trump was around 8% in 2016.

The new Emerson poll puts Trump at 35 percent with black voters and 38 percent with Hispanics. If you add in Asian voters at 28 percent approval, notes Emerson’s director of polling Spencer Kimball, our number is very close to the new Marist poll, which finds Trump’s approval at 33 percent among non-white voters. A recent Rasmussen Reports poll has Trump support among black voters at 34 percent, and even the new CNN poll has Trump’s approval among non-white voters at 26 percent. Even the NAACP are admitting to over 20% support.

These are numbers never seen for a Republican presidential candidate to include:

1. Trumps reelection campaign has raised over 460 million in donations with 9 months to go. The highest ever raised by a presidential candidate was 149 million by Obama.

2. Trumps campaign grew by over 600,000 supporters and 154 million dollars during the impeachment debacle

3. There has been a decline in black voters for Democrats since the 2012 Obama campaign and Clinton lost over 240,000 more votes than Obama did.

4. Blacks for Trump, Latinos for Trump, and Evangelicals for Trump are gaining a huge amount of steam and as far as I can find, its the first time in history I have ever seen a movement of this size of minority voters supporting a Republican.
 
Condor060 said:
Let me fix it for you

Democrats had slaves for 200 years, fought a war to preserve the institution of slavery and then put in place laws which kept the Black Man down as little more than a slave for another 100 years.

Get your history right.
Click to expand...

The Democrats are masters at revising history. If they keep their hold on the news dissemination, they will STILL be writing that Trump colluded with Russia 20 years from now. They just make stuff up and are allowed to get away with it.
 
Condor060 said:
You might find this impossible to believe but people who might believe the same historical facts aren't all followers of D'Souza. I might have seen him 3 or 4 times on the news about his arrest. I have no clue what organization or speeches he might be giving.
Click to expand...

It's a coincidence you're demanding the same 200 Dixiecrats becoming Republicans as D'Souza did by tweet. You randomly selected the same number out of a hat he did, a number that has no basis in anything but being a round number. Of course... :roll:

And it's not just the number, but the argument itself. Maybe D'Souza is one of many making the same dishonest argument, but he's the champion of it and claims historical knowledge to back it up, and he's ignorant and/or lying.

I wouldn't know.

Its more obvious than you can comprehend. Democrats promise free stuff. Minorities jump on board. Thats the bottom line of todays politics but it is now changing.
Click to expand...

No offense but you just moved the goal posts to "but blacks support DJT!!" We'll see in November.
 
JasperL said:
It's fair to tar the Democratic party with accepting the racist white southerners for so long. It's a shameful past and there's no excuse for it, really. But the opposition to civil rights, Jim Crow, and more was nearly all in the South, white conservatives, who ruled every institution of power in the south for 100 years post Civil War, state, local, national government, business leaders, church leaders, universities, and more - all white, all opposed to civil rights as institutions.
Click to expand...

Jim Crow laws were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation in the Southern United States. All were enacted by white Democratic-dominated state legislatures after the Reconstruction period. Don't even try to make this a Republican thing. That will never wash.

In states outside the south, for example, the KKK was mostly Republicans. For example, Indiana had the largest KKK organization in the country and that state was mostly ruled by Republicans.
Click to expand...

Again, you're trying to shed years of KKK run and fomented by Democrats on Republicans. Not gonna fly.

So the problem as I see it in 2020 isn't that the Democratic party won't own up to its racist past. It did that, and way too late but very forcefully said in 1964 that the racist white southerners could go **** themselves, and the party as a whole jammed the CRA right over the heads of the southern Democrats that controlled much of Congress, then when the southern states balked at implementing it, LBJ sent troops down to the South to keep the segregationists in line. The party hasn't swayed from that over the next half century.
Click to expand...

LBJ did it for one reason and everyone knows what it is. Lets not pretend anything different.

The problem is the South hasn't ever come to grips with our past. Fake history like you're pushing is more of the denial - it wasn't the white southern power structure at every level that was racist - it was....DEMOCRATS!!!! Well, that's damn convenient when you're now a republican in a lily white party that tried and succeeded in THIS ERA in gutting the Voting Rights Act that you're applauding elsewhere on this thread. So you want to give the GOP all the credit for the VRA in 1965, but pretend it's not significant that in this era, the current GOP tried and succeeded in dismantling much of it, then as soon as the ink was dry on that, proceeded to prove why the VRA was necessary. See, e.g., NC and Texas where the GOP pushed voting rules that so targeted minorities, with "surgical precision" in NC, the courts were forced to strike them down as discriminatory, which was the intent of course.
Click to expand...

The only thing fake was the Democrat myth of the Southern Strategy. It was born to do what you are trying to do in this very post. Shed the past of Democrat racism to the other party. There were not over 200 racist Democrat congressmen, Senators, and high level state politicians called Dixiecrats that converted to Republicans. If there were you could provide a list of those names as they would be forever engraved into our history. Its a myth.

And I don't need Dinesh D'souza for a history lesson. Its been debunked for decades.

The myth of Nixon’s ‘Southern Strategy’ | TheHill

The Myth of the Racist Republicans - Claremont Review of Books

The Myth of ‘the Southern Strategy’ - The New York Times
 
JasperL said:
It's a coincidence you're demanding the same 200 Dixiecrats becoming Republicans as D'Souza did by tweet. You randomly selected the same number out of a hat he did, a number that has no basis in anything but being a round number. Of course... :roll:
Click to expand...

Uh, No. Its only in EVERY written account of the SS Myth. D'Souza didn't just pull that number from a hat. Its the number claimed in this myth for anyone who ever read ANYTHING about it.

And it's not just the number, but the argument itself. Maybe D'Souza is one of many making the same dishonest argument, but he's the champion of it and claims historical knowledge to back it up, and he's ignorant and/or lying.
Click to expand...

Maybe instead of everyone (you claim) are just parroting D'Souza, just maybe its D'Souza parroting the actual findings that everyone already knows. Where in the world did you ever get the idea that this is some manifesto designed and accredited to D'Souza?

Thats it, isn't it. You thought D'Souza created the SS Myth? I just got that. Thats why you are tying the 200 member claim to D'Souza. You thought this was all his creation? The New York TImes ran stories on this before D'Souza ever mentioned it.

No offense but you just moved the goal posts to "but blacks support DJT!!" We'll see in November.
Click to expand...

I was trying to account how the black voter is moving in the current political wind. But like you said, we will see in November.
 
bullseyelqcs said:
Conservatives......that is the word you are so desperately looking for but refuse to use.

The people who brought forth the Trail of Tears were the conservatives of thier time. Party name matters not. Thier ideology is what drove them to do that ****, not the party name. Hell, they could have called themselves the Plesiosauras Party, and it wouldn't have changed anything about what they did. Thats the point here. A conservative ideology drove those acts, not the name Democratic Party.

Try to keep up.
Click to expand...

conservative and liberal are terms that only are accurate when used in context. For example-in the fifties, Stalinists and Maoists were the conservatives in Russia and China. more useful are collectivist-authoritarian vs freedom/decentralization.

The left in the USA makes up most of the collectivist-authoritarian advocates. True, some social conservatives approach collectivist-authoritarian in some areas but not in most areas. And some left wingers are truly anti authoritarian though almost always collectivist. The founders were anti collectivist-authoritarian.
 
JasperL said:
It's a shame black lawmakers and voters cannot recognize the racism in the party they support. I guess you think they're idiots, too stupid to see what's plain to you, which of course is not a racist view of black voters or black office holders.

And of course, Republick policies like the voting rules changes in NC that targeted black voters with "surgical precision" aren't racist either.

Etc....
Click to expand...

many "civil rights" leaders benefit from the institutionalized racism of the DNC
 
Condor060 said:
Jim Crow laws were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation in the Southern United States. All were enacted by white Democratic-dominated state legislatures after the Reconstruction period. Don't even try to make this a Republican thing. That will never wash.
Click to expand...

I haven't! I said the power structure in the South was white CONSERVATIVES and that's true. They were also racists and segregationists. My point was that it's not a party thing, but a white southern thing, and it wasn't just Democrats in the South who supported Jim Crow and segregation, but the overwhelming majority of whites, PERIOD. There was no significant white "Republican" opposition to slavery or Jim Crow in the South, and certainly no "conservative" opposition to those laws.

Again, you're trying to shed years of KKK run and fomented by Democrats on Republicans. Not gonna fly.
Click to expand...

No, I'm not, I'm pointing out in a number of ways the KKK was racist whites, and party didn't have much to do with anything. Whites in the south were not liberals - they were conservatives, on economics, unions, religion, foreign policy, and on race. Jim Crow was a "conservative" position, it was the state of affairs for the hundreds of years prior, and southern whites sought to "conserve" their way of life. Buckley - the most famous conservative at the time - (in)famously championed the southern segregationist cause.

LBJ did it for one reason and everyone knows what it is. Lets not pretend anything different.
Click to expand...

You can attribute bad motives to him all you want, but what he DID was tell the southern racist block to go F themselves and jammed the CRA right up their rear ends. When Wallace and others balked, he told them to go **** off and sent troops down there to show who was boss, and it wasn't the redneck crackers - they LOST.

It's just more GOP historical revisionism to downplay what the Democratic leadership DID and give the credit to the GOP, when without LBJ's push none of that happens. LBJ said 'nigger' so it doesn't count! Well, bottom line is what he did, not on why you think he did what he did. Ultimately that doesn't much matter. Today do you care if someone IS a ___________ insert policy (e.g. defender of the 1A) in principle, deep down, or do you care what they DO? I care what they DO. YMMV.

The only thing fake was the Democrat myth of the Southern Strategy. It was born to do what you are trying to do in this very post. Shed the past of Democrat racism to the other party. There were not over 200 racist Democrat congressmen, Senators, and high level state politicians called Dixiecrats that converted to Republicans. If there were you could provide a list of those names as they would be forever engraved into our history. Its a myth.
Click to expand...

That's just not true. What redeems if it does the Democratic party is what they did, which was pass the VRA, CRA, and since then been reliable defenders of civil rights for blacks, and LGBT and other minorities. Blacks have rewarded the party by being its most reliable voting block.

And you've created that "200 Dixiecrats who became Republicans" strawman, coincidentally parroting Dinesh D'Souza. No historian alleges that's how it worked. So he's created a DISHONEST straw man, then attacked the ever loving **** out of it. And historians know why - Democrats shifting parties lose their seniority and their power, they go from committee chairmen, to nobodies, behind 40 other Republicans with more seniority. So the incentives for an existing Democrat to remain in the party were IMMENSE, and most didn't switch. What happened is illustrated by Trent Lott. He worked for a segregationist Democrat, and when that guy retired, that Democrat then endorsed for his open seat a REPUBLICAN, his protege, Trent Lott.

And I don't need Dinesh D'souza for a history lesson. Its been debunked for decades.

The myth of Nixon’s ‘Southern Strategy’ | TheHill
Click to expand...

Author: Dinesh D'Souza!! :lamo

The Myth of the Racist Republicans - Claremont Review of Books

The Myth of ‘the Southern Strategy’ - The New York Times
Click to expand...

OK, this is a lot more of the same. What I said in previous posts is the Republican party didn't have to become racist, and I haven't argued they did become racist. But what Reagan's speech in Philadelphia Mississippi was designed to do was signal that the GOP would not take actions like LBJ did in 1964 and 1965 that threatened white segregationists, and they didn't.

continued....
 
From your second link:

Now to be sure, the GOP had a Southern strategy. Willing to work with, rather than against, the grain of Southern opinion, local Republicans ran some segregationist candidates in the 1960s. And from the 1950s on, virtually all national and local GOP candidates tried to craft policies and messages that could compete for the votes of some pretty unsavory characters. This record is incontestable. It is also not much of a story—that a party acted expediently in an often nasty political context.
Click to expand...

So your author agrees with me, which is always nice. Yes, the southern strategy was real, and it's as described. From that link again:

Let's start with policies. Like many others, Carter and the Black brothers argue that the GOP appealed to Southern racism not explicitly but through "coded" racial appeals. Carter is representative of many when he says that Wallace's racialism can be seen, varying in style but not substance, in "Goldwater's vote against the Civil Rights Bill of 1964, in Richard Nixon's subtle manipulation of the busing issue, in Ronald Reagan's genial demolition of affirmative action, in George Bush's use of the Willie Horton ads, and in Newt Gingrich's demonization of welfare mothers."

The problem here is that Wallace's segregationism was obviously racist, but these other positions are not obviously racist. This creates an analytic challenge that these authors do not meet. If an illegitimate viewpoint (racism) is hidden inside another viewpoint, that second view—to be a useful hiding place—must be one that can be held for entirely legitimate (non-racist) reasons. Conservative intellectuals might not always linger long enough on the fact that opposition to busing and affirmative action can be disguised racism. On the other hand, these are also positions that principled non-racists can hold.
Click to expand...

The problem here is if you ask, "What would a racist segregationist support" and it's those GOP policies, that's the Southern Strategy in a nutshell. Heck, we can all argue the point that "states' rights" as an issue isn't INHERENTLY racist. But it was used by racists to defend Jim Crow, and support for "states' rights" is what southern voters supported. It didn't matter all that much what motivated Goldwater's opposition to the CRA, and principled people can believe in "states' rights." The south knew it helped perpetuate Jim Crow, and why Goldwater supported it isn't all that relevant. So he won the racist vote in the South.
 
Condor060 said:
Uh, No. Its only in EVERY written account of the SS Myth. D'Souza didn't just pull that number from a hat. Its the number claimed in this myth for anyone who ever read ANYTHING about it.
Click to expand...

OK, quote someone claiming "200" who supports the Southern Strategy narrative.

Maybe instead of everyone (you claim) are just parroting D'Souza, just maybe its D'Souza parroting the actual findings that everyone already knows. Where in the world did you ever get the idea that this is some manifesto designed and accredited to D'Souza?
Click to expand...

Because he spends a great deal of time online spreading this dishonest narrative. You quoted him as one of three sources, for goodness sakes, then claim his views aren't relevant, which was funny.

Thats it, isn't it. You thought D'Souza created the SS Myth? I just got that. Thats why you are tying the 200 member claim to D'Souza. You thought this was all his creation? The New York TImes ran stories on this before D'Souza ever mentioned it.
Click to expand...

D'Souza wrote a book, then made a movie pushing this anti-historical nonsense.
 
JasperL said:
I haven't! I said the power structure in the South was white CONSERVATIVES and that's true. They were also racists and segregationists. My point was that it's not a party thing, but a white southern thing, and it wasn't just Democrats in the South who supported Jim Crow and segregation, but the overwhelming majority of whites, PERIOD. There was no significant white "Republican" opposition to slavery or Jim Crow in the South, and certainly no "conservative" opposition to those laws.
Click to expand...

There are conservatives and Liberals and whites in both parties. You've convoluted the 3 to try and minimize the Democrat history.

DEMOCRATS instituted Jim Crow laws. Not Republicans or whites or Liberals or Conservatives, Democrats.

DEMOCRATS were the reining institution of the KKK. Not Republicans or whites, or Liberals, or Conservatives.

It has ALWAYS been a party thing and you can't disguise it as whites of the south.


And you've created that "200 Dixiecrats who became Republicans" strawman, coincidentally parroting Dinesh D'Souza. No historian alleges that's how it worked. So he's created a DISHONEST straw man, then attacked the ever loving **** out of it. And historians know why - Democrats shifting parties lose their seniority and their power, they go from committee chairmen, to nobodies, behind 40 other Republicans with more seniority. So the incentives for an existing Democrat to remain in the party were IMMENSE, and most didn't switch. What happened is illustrated by Trent Lott. He worked for a segregationist Democrat, and when that guy retired, that Democrat then endorsed for his open seat a REPUBLICAN, his protege, Trent Lott.

Author: Dinesh D'Souza!! :lamo
Click to expand...

I provided that in my example of 3 different resources. He isn't the only resource you think he is

OK, this is a lot more of the same. What I said in previous posts is the Republican party didn't have to become racist, and I haven't argued they did become racist. But what Reagan's speech in Philadelphia Mississippi was designed to do was signal that the GOP would not take actions like LBJ did in 1964 and 1965 that threatened white segregationists, and they didn't.

continued...
Click to expand...
.

I am of the opinion (living on this earth for 60 years) that the Democrat party has continued to use racism as a weapon for recruitment. No, I don't think the Democrats of today are of those from yesteryear but minorities have not profited in their cultures in the last 50 years as promised by the Democrat party.

Thats my take on it.
 
Condor060 said:
There are conservatives and Liberals and whites in both parties. You've convoluted the 3 to try and minimize the Democrat history.

DEMOCRATS instituted Jim Crow laws. Not Republicans or whites or Liberals or Conservatives, Democrats.

DEMOCRATS were the reining institution of the KKK. Not Republicans or whites, or Liberals, or Conservatives.

It has ALWAYS been a party thing and you can't disguise it as whites of the south.
Click to expand...

Not quite 100% of northern Democrats supported the CRA and VRA and not quite 100% of southern democrats and Republicans opposed it - 100% of Southern Republicans voted against the CRA for example - 0-11. Here was the real split on the CRA.

North - 90% in favor
South - 95% opposed

Doesn't matter what party those Congressmen belonged to.

So it was a southern, white thing, not a party thing.

And I know you like to forget, but the Congress was controlled by Democrats and the President was a Democrat, and it's Democrats who pushed HARD and won the CRA and VRA. Yes, the GOP supported it too, outside the south, but by a smaller percentage than northern Democrats, but you're arguing that the REAL RACIST party is who proposed, passed and signed the CRA and VRA. It's nonsense.

I am of the opinion (living on this earth for 60 years) that the Democrat party has continued to use racism as a weapon for recruitment. No, I don't think the Democrats of today are of those from yesteryear but minorities have not profited in their cultures in the last 50 years as promised by the Democrat party.

Thats my take on it.
Click to expand...

Fine, then you believe blacks are too stupid to know that party they support and run under is the real racist party. I don't think that works as a theory, but it's what you have to work with....
 
JasperL said:
Fine, then you believe blacks are too stupid to know that party they support and run under is the real racist party. I don't think that works as a theory, but it's what you have to work with....
Click to expand...

No, I think they vote Democrat because they are promised free stuff.
 
Condor060 said:
JasperL said:
....Fine, then you believe blacks are too stupid to know that party they support and run under is the real racist party. I don't think that works as a theory, but it's what you have to work with....
Click to expand...
No, I think they vote Democrat because they are promised free stuff.
Click to expand...

Is that because you believe blacks are lazy, shiftless and good-fur-nuthin's who are always sucking on the gubimint tit?
 
Royal PITA said:
Is that because you believe blacks are lazy, shiftless and good-fur-nuthin's who are always sucking on the gubimint tit?
Click to expand...

I suspect more democrat leaders believe that than you would admit
 
Condor060 said:
No, I think they vote Democrat because they are promised free stuff.
Click to expand...

Democratic.... It's the Democratic party.

And of course you ignored the rest of my comment, because it doesn't fit with the narrative. It's especially....inconvenient that 100% of southern white republicans opposed the CRA, and that outside the South, virtually all Democrats voted for it. :confused:
 
Royal PITA said:
If one makes the same remark, I'd be happy to call them on it. Do you believe the same as Condor?
Click to expand...

no but this is what I believe

some black leaders scream racism to hide failures in their own leadership and communities.

some white lefties truly believe that blacks are not able to succeed on their own and need the beneficent guidance of white liberals

people who have bad lots in life are more willing to believe it is the fault of others-and those who tell them that-than blaming themselves for their own or some of their own, failures.
 
TurtleDude said:
no but this is what I believe

some black leaders scream racism to hide failures in their own leadership and communities.

some white lefties truly believe that blacks are not able to succeed on their own and need the beneficent guidance of white liberals

people who have bad lots in life are more willing to believe it is the fault of others-and those who tell them that-than blaming themselves for their own or some of their own, failures.
Click to expand...

I agree with those comments although I think #3 is is more about "some people who have bad lots..."
 
TurtleDude said:
many "civil rights" leaders benefit from the institutionalized racism of the DNC
Click to expand...

Unfortunately too true. There's a motivation for some people to keep their jobs by keeping a "cause" alive. While racism still exists around the world, including the US, there's a point where "civil rights" movement is more about perpetuating racism than solving it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom