Nearly Half of Young Americans Believe US Is Racist and Not 'Greatest' Country, Survey Finds

[Gaugingcatenate]

ROFL! Now you're going with "I'm rubber, you're glue..."?

Oh god, how old are you? Fess up now, have I been having a conversation with a 7 year old?

Sorry no... but it sounds like I have been.

 

[Bodi]

Before you can translate anything you have to be able to formulate coherent sentences in English. Then you need to learn about the Constitution if you wish to stay on topic.

Is this another way of saying that you surrender.?

 

[Bodi]

ROFL! Now you're going with "I'm rubber, you're glue..."?

Oh god, how old are you? Fess up now, have I been having a conversation with a 7 year old?

Yes. The "rubber/glue" tactic is one of his most formidable attacks...

 

[Conservative]

From FOX News

Nearly Half of Young Americans Believe US Is Racist and Not 'Greatest' Country, Survey Finds
​

An alarming new online survey found that national pride is falling among the next generation.

The survey, conducted by polling firm YouGov, reveals that many members of the younger generation (under 38 -- Generation Z and millennials) do not identify with patriotism or American exceptionalism.

The Foundation for Liberty and American Greatness, which sponsored the survey, highlighted some key findings, including that 46 percent of respondents do not agree that America is the greatest country in the world, half believe the country is sexist (50 percent) and racist (49 percent), and 47 percent say America's future should be driven by socialism over capitalism.

Other findings include:

COMMENT:-

Just two minor points before everyone flies into a flap over the results:

1. "On-line polls" are notoriously inaccurate because they have a marked tendency to use a "self-selected population"; and
2. the number of people that it requires to obtain statistically reliable results (+/- 3.5%) 95% of the time if the "population" is around 13,500,000 is around 400. The population of 14 to 17 year olds in the US is around 13,500,000. The number of responses for that demographic in this survey was 100. Using only a sample size of 100 produces a "confidence interval" of +/- 50%. [What that means is that, with the surveyed population in this survey, if the recorded result was 50%, then the actual result could be someplace between a low of 0.00% and a high of 100%.

PS - If you take a look at the actual survey questions asked, you will also see that they are incredibly sloppily worded and use terms that are so subjective that it is impossible to tell if one person giving an answer is actually responding to the same OBJECTIVE question that another person who gives the same answer is.
​

Just goes to show how history, civics, and economics are being ignored in this country. Looks like that European Utopia isn't what it is cracked up to be so what is the alternative?

https://www.foxnews.com/world/frenc...-in-violent-clashes-with-riot-police-in-paris

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Knock knock, knock ... anybody home?

Already explained it to you at least once... I was on that other side, I stand alongside those wanting to preserve the monuments. Thats it, stops at the monument preservation.

You know what's scary, I think that we might actually be in agreement - PROVIDED that the preservation include some greatly expanded "Historical Background" information being made available where the monuments (BOTH "Union" and "Confederate") are located.

For example, "Sherman's March" should be explained for what it actually was, a campaign of terrorism deliberately aimed at the civilian population.

For another example, monuments to "soldiers" (on both sides) should give some indication why "the soldiers fought" and not concentrate on "why the leaders wanted the war".

PS - You might find Michael Lee Lanning's "Inside the VC and the NVA: The Real Story of North Vietnam's Armed Forces" - Texas A&M University Press; 1st Texas A&M University Press Ed edition (July 23, 2008)
[ISBN-10: 1603440593 / ISBN-13: 978-1603440592] interesting as an analogous study. [SPOILER - The demographics of the VC/NVA and the US military forces in Vietnam were almost identical with one exception, the VC/NVA were fighting for what they considered to be THEIR country and the US military forces weren't.]

Scapegoat then label all those who do not believe exactly as you do, demonize them out of existence, refuse them their rights of freedom of expression? Use continued violence if necessary?

Where is that allowed under our Constitution?

It isn't prohibited (as long as you are not "Congress") either - is it?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

This made me chuckle. I was born in 1983, so the first president I remember who served in my lifetime is Bush 41. Then there was Clinton, of course. Bush 43 earned some ire from me for his ineloquence. I'm sure you remember "nucular". Obama is, of course, a brilliant and articulate orator. Now we have this stumbling ignoramus who can't even form a sentence. Your meme is perfect. When students and other people try to read the text of his speech now and in the future, they will have no idea what he meant because he is utterly incomprehensible. When I read what just about every other president said and wrote during their own terms, I imagine them rolling in their graves because the current one can neither speak (at all, ever) nor write (except in tweets replete with incomplete sentences, wrong spelling, improper punctuation, and schizophrenic capitalization). How any educated American does not consider that a pity and an embarassment is beyond me.

The first President that I remember is Gen. Eisenhower.

In retrospect there has been a steady decline (yes, the line wavers, but the trend line is the trend line) in the quality of the people who were "serious contenders" for the office of President and an even steeper decline in the quality of the people who were actually elected.

My own personal opinion is that the 2016 election is the first in American history when BOTH of the "serious contenders" for the office of President should have LOST. Of Ms. Clinton (even if she had been male), Messrs. Bush (GW), Obama, and Trump, probably not one of them (Mr. Bush (GW) would have been REALLY close) would have been elected by the Electors of the Electoral College had the Electoral College been functioning as "Originally Intended".

Why not scare the hell out of BOTH the Republicans and the Democrats and start a campaign to ensure that the ONLY thing that the Electors are "pledged" to do is to select the BEST qualified person (regardless of political party affiliation and/or backing) to be the President of the United States of America?

It won't work, but it will be fun.

 

[prometeus]

Is this another way of saying that you surrender.?

No, it was a rather simple way to tell you that you can't make a coherent sentence and are clueless about the Constitution. Clearly even that was way over your head and your desperation is showing.

 

[prometeus]

But

Vide. Americanae Somnium bona cuncta retro. Quod ego dico tibi. Erant redigit eam. Bene? Et intelligo dicere quod petis. Et multi de populo ut illam. "Est Americanae Somnium mortuis?". Et postulantes es mihi quaestio "est Americanae Somnium mortuis?". Et factum est in American Somnium tribulationis. Quod possum tibi. Bene? Est in tribulationis. Sed erant 'iens impetro realis jobs eam et alii. Quam pulchra rubeum hat ut homo? Consurge! Consurge! Quid sit hat!
​

sounds much better in Latin.

Keep in mind that we all dream a little differently so the American dream can and does mean many things to many people.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

You know what's scary, I think that we might actually be in agreement - PROVIDED that the preservation include some greatly expanded "Historical Background" information being made available where the monuments (BOTH "Union" and "Confederate") are located.

For example, "Sherman's March" should be explained for what it actually was, a campaign of terrorism deliberately aimed at the civilian population.

For another example, monuments to "soldiers" (on both sides) should give some indication why "the soldiers fought" and not concentrate on "why the leaders wanted the war".

PS - You might find Michael Lee Lanning's "Inside the VC and the NVA: The Real Story of North Vietnam's Armed Forces" - Texas A&M University Press; 1st Texas A&M University Press Ed edition (July 23, 2008)
[ISBN-10: 1603440593 / ISBN-13: 978-1603440592] interesting as an analogous study. [SPOILER - The demographics of the VC/NVA and the US military forces in Vietnam were almost identical with one exception, the VC/NVA were fighting for what they considered to be THEIR country and the US military forces weren't.]



It isn't prohibited (as long as you are not "Congress") either - is it?

We are in general agreement, sentiments wise. Not total, but it could rarely be total in any event.

It should be completely up to the majority of the citizens in the area with control over the statues... at least in my opinion. There should not be any force used... and the statues should be protected throughout, before, during and after. Future generations may have a completely different, possibly diametrically opposite, opinion after learning more facts or thinking in a different manner, from a different perspective...

Which, of course, is allowed in a free nation. And the majority rules, the people get the ultimate decision.

Besides, it would be impossible to give every soldiers viewpoint... and so then you have people, people who weren't involved, possibly with their own agendas, might have a currently trendy but skewed or completely uninformed view when making decisions about what should be considered the "soldiers" view of why they fought.

Curtailing reasonable speech is prohibited in the Constitution, yes.

We have what are know as minority rights in the USA. Contrary to what some lazily believe, that's not just a color based consideration... it means any group, not just those in the majority, has the right to fight for representation, to use their voice and words to fight to gain power, to place themselves in a position to make the decisions about the things in their interests...

And one of the means to fight for that is by having the freedom of speech/expression so as to persuade as many folks to your side as is possible.

For instance contrast the opposing views espoused by the two original Lincoln Douglas Debaters. Douglas ended up with the majority in favor of his views...and so Lincoln lost that Senate race. But in just two years Lincoln was, through able use of his freedom to express and his abilities in this area of expertise, to change minds, to win the majority of the Electoral College vote and thus the former minority became the majority.

Thanks for the recommendation but I've got so so many books in my libraries that I have yet to read... and as of this juncture, for some reason unknown to me, the VN conflict has not drawn me in... not to a real interest in the topic... I generally need to be attracted like I am when deciding where to travel, something has to grab me, intrigue and interest me...

So I have a much better than basic knowledge of VN, but not overly detailed... but, again, that is because my interests almost immediately wane...

It will eventually come around I am sure. My huge libraries of hard backed, electronic and audible books are a part of my ultimate retirement plan... when I become less ambulatory, less flexible, weaker ... I can at least keep my mind agile.

Gotta nice cool breezed front porch with a beautiful mountain view, sit and read til my hearts content.

 

[JustHanging]

Just goes to show how history, civics, and economics are being ignored in this country. Looks like that European Utopia isn't what it is cracked up to be so what is the alternative?

https://www.foxnews.com/world/frenc...-in-violent-clashes-with-riot-police-in-paris

No, it just goes to show that the kids are smarter than their parents, and recognize that the POTUS is a blatant racist. Hint: He led the racist Birther Movement.

And that a lot of Americans support this racist.

 

[ajn678]

This is de jure versus de facto.

De jure = In law.
De facto = In practice.

It's like dismissing the reality behind the Civil Rights Marches because the Declaration and the Constitution said all is well. One of the reasons the U.S. "goes as far" is that it is trying to overcome the base instincts of racism, bigotry, and sexism that deep-rooted religion and centuries of institutional slavery created.

Yea, while many countries, especially in Europe are just open and up front about their racism. I heard the Middle East is a bastion for women's freedoms as well.

 

[ryzorsden]

All Trump did was allow racists to come out of the closet. Now that they are out of the closet, it's pretty clear how people think and they're willing to act on it.

However, I will say that Obama's election also allowed racists to come out of the closet. Most white-supremacist groups agree that Obama was the greatest recruitment tool they ever had.

 

[Conservative]

No, it just goes to show that the kids are smarter than their parents, and recognize that the POTUS is a blatant racist. Hint: He led the racist Birther Movement.

And that a lot of Americans support this racist.

You have offered nothing to support your claim, do so or join the leftwing ignore list

 

[sanman]

What's happening is similar to the Occupy movement. Young people who don't have the same economic prospects as the previous generations are then declaring the nation to be fundamentally unjust, with a ruling order that needs to be overthrown. The allegations of racism, etc are just the pretext of convenience.

 

[PTF]

Having or giving these surveys and polls are just there to read or giving out online discounts for taking them. The results depends on who's taking them,their financial status and locations. When the pollsters say results vary,they do. As for racism I think young people knows how to deal with it and decide it's not the way to go.Young Americans are smarter these days. The real problem is trying to update the computer for the latest applications.

 

[JustHanging]

You have offered nothing to support your claim, do so or join the leftwing ignore list

LOL, I've gotten a warning that I'm only allowed to put my links in once a thread, so you would have to read the whole discussion.

Of course, you could have asked that I provide the links, which I always do when requested, but then you have had to hear something from outside the bubble, outside of what Hannity and Trump want you to hear, and apparently you can't bring yourself to do that. I feel sorry for you.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

We are in general agreement, sentiments wise. Not total, but it could rarely be total in any event.

When you read the journals that were written by the actual line soldiers on BOTH sides, you realize that you could substitute "Union" for "Confederate" and vice versa almost routinely.

There were anti-abolitionists in the Union Army and there were pro-abolitionists in the Confederate Army.

Hell, even Jefferson Davis gave serious thought to abolishing slavery (in a process very similar to the one whereby it had been abolished in the Northern states [which granted manumission after a period, prohibited children being "born into" slavery, and gave compensation to the slave owners who were losing their workforce]). Unfortunately, the Southern plantation owners who had the greatest vested financial interest in the "slave-powered" economy overruled him.

[ASIDE - The Southern plantation owners would have been financially further ahead if they had simply freed the slaves and operated their plantations on a "sharecropper" basis - but that is only clear in retrospect.]

I agree, with a bit of trepidation, with your "And one of the means to fight for that is by having the freedom of speech/expression so as to persuade as many folks to your side as is possible." and point out that the NSDAP was quite successful in using the freedom of speech/expression to persuade a great many Germans to its side.

The actual number probably ranges from 0.0001% (the estimate from the "Oh I was never a supporter of Hitler and I never knew any Nazis personally." crowd) to 99.9999% (the estimate from the "We are JEWS give us everything we demand because you, personally, are guilty of killing us US and no one but US. Don't talk about anyone but the JEWS because we own the subject of being killed." crowd).
​

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Yea, while many countries, especially in Europe are just open and up front about their racism. I heard the Middle East is a bastion for women's freedoms as well.

Have you ever stopped to consider that NO problem is ever fixed unless it is first admitted to be a problem?

The US has one of the best records of admitting that its society has a problem. That means that the US has one of the best records of addressing and fixing the problems of its society.

That "best record" is likely to continue PROVIDED that the US continues to identify and recognize the problems that its society faces.

If the US stops recognizing the problems that its society faces (read as "starts pretending that they problems don't exist") then that "best record" isn't likely to endure.

PS - You might want to consider the fact that regardless of whether you are in S*** up to your armpits or you are in S*** up to your waist, you are STILL in S*** - even though being is S*** up to your waist IS better than being in S*** up to your armpits.

PPS - That's an analogy, son, an ANALOGY I say.

 

[j-mac]

That does not change that it was not.

That is true. Now why don't you tell me why is it that in the eyes of some he can not do anything wrong and when he behaves like an asshole, which he does a lot, he id defended by people like you.


That is also true, just like no one says that you have to excuse lies upon lies upon lies, yet you do.

Half the country? How did you come up with that number? The morons are the ones who elected a man that lacks in every possible way and make excuses for him.

No, I hold disdain for the morons who are ruining it.

Freedom is a wonderful thing, you can tell anyone anything. That however does not mean it makes sense or it is valid.

That is what we should be doing yet Trump does the exact opposite.

It is not the difference in seeing things, it is the absence of intellect, decency and integrity that I attack.

All of that is subjective and your opinion...While I fully understand your anger, I think you'd make much more ground explaining your ideas, rather than vitriol and hatred...that's all.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

 

[Conservative]

LOL, I've gotten a warning that I'm only allowed to put my links in once a thread, so you would have to read the whole discussion.

Of course, you could have asked that I provide the links, which I always do when requested, but then you have had to hear something from outside the bubble, outside of what Hannity and Trump want you to hear, and apparently you can't bring yourself to do that. I feel sorry for you.

Your links provide no context whereas bls.gov and bea.gov do which of course don't fit the liberal narrative. Congratulations, you definitely made the ignore list. Hopefully I will be around when you realize you have been screwed by the left and they have made a fool out of you

 

[Bodi]

No, it was a rather simple way to tell you that you can't make a coherent sentence and are clueless about the Constitution. Clearly even that was way over your head and your desperation is showing.

Explain what a coherent sentence is then...

 

[mrdeltoid]

What gibberish. You want to know what started the country to disbelieve their own government? Start with the Vietnam War, then the Pentagon Papers, then Nixon...by the late 70s, nothing was left of the confidence the nation once had in its leaders and government. The icing on the cake is Trump. Now the rest of the world knows we are a nation filled with morons.

The threads topic is todays young Americans believe our country is racist and do not believe it is the greatest country in the world. I've presented three of the most influential sources of information, which lean liberal, that holds sway over our younger citizens and affect their perspective. Try to stay on topic, or start a thread on what "started the country to disbelieve their government."

 

[mrdeltoid]

There is shame in every country that has done great things. To my knowledge there is no country that has only engaged morally and humanely throughout it's history while accomplishing anything close to what the US has. The US has saved the world IMO. Not many countries can make that claim. Despite our flaws America is a country to be proud of.

However America today is an embarrassment. America is the sum of it's people and the American people are a disgrace.

You're not American?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The threads topic is todays young Americans believe our country is racist and do not believe it is the greatest country in the world. I've presented three of the most influential sources of information, which lean liberal, that holds sway over our younger citizens and affect their perspective. Try to stay on topic, or start a thread on what "started the country to disbelieve their government."

Actually the "topic" of the thread ORIGINALLY was "crappy polls and those who use them to prove what they want proved", but thread drift does happen.

If you are using the originally linked article to prove your thesis that "today's young Americans believe our country is racist and do not believe it is the greatest country in the world" then I would refer you back to the ORIGINAL "topic" which was, again, "crappy polls and those who use them to prove what they want proved".

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

You're not American?

Interesting question.

Do you mean to imply that no one other than an American is capable of rational thought or intelligent analysis of data?

Or do you mean to imply that NO American would ever come to the conclusion "However America today is an embarrassment. America is the sum of it's people and the American people are a disgrace.".

Or are you simply a raving xenophobe?