• 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!

Slavery Reparations

TurtleDude said:
Are you unable to admit reality?
Click to expand...

Reality is not a Right Wing talking point, dog whistle or spewing some garbage McCarthyism crap we saw back in the fifties.
 
calamity said:
Were you parents denied access to schools, places of employment, neighborhoods--did cops stop them as they drove home late at night and harass them? Were they called "niggers"?

Didn't think so.
Click to expand...

Yes....

My mom went to a Catholic school where the children were beaten for speaking French, or Choctaw.
 
calamity said:
Reality is not a Right Wing talking point, dog whistle or spewing some garbage McCarthyism crap we saw back in the fifties.
Click to expand...

MCarthyism tends to be a leftwing proclivity these days. Are leftwing speakers denied the ability to speak on college campuses? Are leftwing newspapers burned or vandalized? No, that tends to only happen to right wing advocates and published works
 
TurtleDude said:
MCarthyism tends to be a leftwing proclivity these days. Are leftwing speakers denied the ability to speak on college campuses? Are leftwing newspapers burned or vandalized? No, that tends to only happen to right wing advocates and published works
Click to expand...

The are totally ignorant of the fact that it was the Democrat-controlled House Un-American Activities Committee who committed the crimes against the First Amendment, not Senator McCarthy. The Senator kept his investigation into communism confined to the Department of State and the Department of Defense. Only the Democrats decided to violate the First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments of citizens. It was also the extremely leftist Hollywood who initiated the blacklisting of communists. That had nothing to do with government, much less Senator McCarthy.

Leftists demonstrate their abject ignorance every time they make a McCarthyism reference.
 
TurtleDude said:
MCarthyism tends to be a leftwing proclivity these days. Are leftwing speakers denied the ability to speak on college campuses? Are leftwing newspapers burned or vandalized? No, that tends to only happen to right wing advocates and published works
Click to expand...

:roll:

.
@LindseyGrahamSC
on Fox & Friends: "We all know that AOC and this crowd are a bunch of communists ... they're anti-Semitic. They're anti-America."

Aaron Rupar
Click to expand...

McCarthyism - Wikipedia

McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of subversion or treason without proper regard for evidence. The term refers to U.S. senator Joseph McCarthy and has its origins in the period in the United States known as the Second Red Scare, lasting from the late 1940s through the 1950s.
Click to expand...
 
TurtleDude said:
weak deflection. The use of the term McCarthyism now includes far more than real communists.
Click to expand...

Consider the source also. The author of that misinformed Wikipedia definition was Michael Barnes, a high school history teacher in west Michigan. I say "misinformed" because the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg case demonstrated that there was more then sufficient evidence to charge, prosecute, convict, and execute the traitors.
 
Glitch said:
Consider the source also. The author of that misinformed Wikipedia definition was Michael Barnes, a high school history teacher in west Michigan. I say "misinformed" because the Julius and Ethel Rosenberg case demonstrated that there was more then sufficient evidence to charge, prosecute, convict, and execute the traitors.
Click to expand...

after the wall came down, lots of Russian information became available. The Rosenbergs were knee deep in soviet espionage actions, though Ethel wasn't nearly as avid a commie as her husband, from what I recall. What is even more interesting is that two organizations that attacked Reagan-a group called the Christic Institute and another Called CISPES (Citizens in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador)-for his administration's actions in Central America. They even sued some Reagan operatives. Well when the wall came down-yeah, they both were KGB front groups.
 
TurtleDude said:
after the wall came down, lots of Russian information became available. The Rosenbergs were knee deep in soviet espionage actions, though Ethel wasn't nearly as avid a commie as her husband, from what I recall. What is even more interesting is that two organizations that attacked Reagan-a group called the Christic Institute and another Called CISPES (Citizens in Solidarity with the People of El Salvador)-for his administration's actions in Central America. They even sued some Reagan operatives. Well when the wall came down-yeah, they both were KGB front groups.
Click to expand...

You mean the Russians have been meddling in our politics and spying on our country for decades? Amazing.
 
Integrityrespec said:
You mean the Russians have been meddling in our politics and spying on our country for decades? Amazing.
Click to expand...

who'd have thought. The democrats only seemed to care when they tried to blame the Russians for their goddess's defeat.
 
TurtleDude said:
weak deflection. The use of the term McCarthyism now includes far more than real communists.
Click to expand...

Nah, what's weak is whining about marxism, collectivism, communism and socialism at a time when the country has turned further right than we were in 1929.
 
calamity said:
Nah, what's weak is whining about marxism, collectivism, communism and socialism at a time when the country has turned further right than we were in 1929.
Click to expand...

the Democrat party is far more left wing than it was when say Kennedy was president. Even FDR and his minions rejected claims of being socialists: half the collection of barking loons in the Democratic Party primaries, openly support socialism to some extent with at least one, claiming he is one.
 
TurtleDude said:
the Democrat party is far more left wing than it was when say Kennedy was president. Even FDR and his minions rejected claims of being socialists: half the collection of barking loons in the Democratic Party primaries, openly support socialism to some extent with at least one, claiming he is one.
Click to expand...
Nonsense.


chart-01.jpg


With numbers like those, the whine about socialism "taking over" rings hollow.
 
calamity said:
Nonsense.


chart-01.jpg


With numbers like those, the whine about socialism "taking over" rings hollow.
Click to expand...

That is one of the most amusing, but idiotic, attempts to rebut something you essentially conceded.
 
TurtleDude said:
That is one of the most amusing, but idiotic, attempts to rebut something you essentially conceded.
Click to expand...

False. It proves that the country is going in the exact opposite direction of Marxist, collectivist, Communist socialism, and it has been since 1981. :roll:

In other words, your argument has been destroyed. :)
 
calamity said:
False. It proves that the country is going in the exact opposite direction of Marxist, collectivist, Communist socialism, and it has been since 1981. :roll:

In other words, your argument has been destroyed. :)
Click to expand...

so you think that socialist or communist nations don't have rich elites? OMG that is funny. You think that socialist authoritarians actually want and establish an egalitarian society? Like Russia?
 
TurtleDude said:
so you think that socialist or communist nations don't have rich elites? OMG that is funny. You think that socialist authoritarians actually want and establish an egalitarian society? Like Russia?
Click to expand...

Are you now arguing our income disparity, which has reached 1929 levels, is socialist? Really?

Support that.
 
calamity said:
Are you now arguing our income disparity, which has reached 1929 levels, is socialist? Really?

Support that.
Click to expand...

you clearly don't read what I have written. You also make the assumption that the socialist wing of the democrat party, has been able to install its collectivist agenda upon our society completely
 
TurtleDude said:
you clearly don't read what I have written.
Click to expand...
You've complained about "collectivists" for years. I just proved to you that the opposite is happening, hence making your argument fake news.

You also make the assumption that the socialist wing of the democrat party, has been able to install its collectivist agenda upon our society completely
Click to expand...

That makes no sense. I proved the opposite is true, hence the immense disparity in income, driving it back to levels seen in 1929.
 
calamity said:
You've complained about "collectivists" for years. I just proved to you that the opposite is happening, hence making your argument fake news.



That makes no sense. I proved the opposite is true, hence the immense disparity in income, driving it back to levels seen in 1929.
Click to expand...

saying a PARTY has become socialist is not the same as saying the laws of the land are socialist

try again
 
TurtleDude said:
saying a PARTY has become socialist is not the same as saying the laws of the land are socialist

try again
Click to expand...

No Party in the USA has become socialist. You have the Fascists and moderates...and, one idiot named Bernie.
 
calamity said:
No Party in the USA has become socialist. You have the Fascists and moderates...and, one idiot named Bernie.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't call the lefties fascists though they have much in common with the Italian Fascist model. Collectivist reactionary statists is a better description.
 
TurtleDude said:
I wouldn't call the lefties fascists though they have much in common with the Italian Fascist model. Collectivist reactionary statists is a better description.
Click to expand...

Like I said, your obsession with collectivism is very 1950's. Try the 21st Century out for size. It's kind of cool. We have these little computers now that they call phones. Neat stuff.
 
calamity said:
Like I said, your obsession with collectivism is very 1950's. Try the 21st Century out for size. It's kind of cool. We have these little computers now that they call phones. Neat stuff.
Click to expand...

This sort of arrogance is misplaced given how wrong you have been over the current philosophy of the Democrat party. That party once stood for comforting the afflicted-now its about rich elites trying to afflict the conservatives
 
calamity said:
I grew up white and male. Not for one second do I ever believe the lies that this is not a huge advantage and was not the primary reason for my success, over those of similar background and other attributes not white or male. I see evidence of it every day...and, I have seen it for each of them for the past 50 years.
Click to expand...

My point was that establishing causal effects in social phenomena is hard because we almost always lack the capacity to engage in the appropriate experiment. This is not specific to discrimination, though discrimination is one of many mechanisms for which we can imagine taking measurements and producing estimates. There is a caveat, however: it is possible that your first-hand experience provided you with damning evidence that nobody will ever get out of surveys, or other normal sources of data.

For example, if you run into employers who hold very negative views of some ethnic groups, that would be extremely damning evidence. It's also very high-quality data that nobody could ever get without spying on employers. The same applies for other people in a position to make decisions and, as I pointed out earlier, you do have a logical case to make that, in spite of competition, "stupidity" can survive in the long run. The only thing you don't know is how to generalize from your limited hands-on experience to all other cases and we all have a tendency to over-react to such information (e.g., Kahneman and Tversky's 1972 paper representativeness heuristic).

You can hold whatever view you please, but I would advise against discrediting all views to the contrary as "lies" or other disparaging qualifiers. People who disagree with you are precisely the kind of people you need to suitably scrutinize your own point of view and the quality of your evidence because we are all subject to the confirmation bias. While it would be dubious that discrimination never plays a role in what happens, there are some good reasons to disagree about how much of a role it actually plays and not everybody who holds those views happens to be conveniently dishonest, evil or ignorant. My suspicion is that, if we did have the right data, we would find the effects to be highly heterogeneous across types of people, activities, goals, etc. for the simple reason that this is what we find almost everywhere in socio-economic data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom