Trump Uses Mount Rushmore Speech to Deliver Divisive Culture War Message

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nepperhan
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nepperhan

Guest
In a time of great stress as to social divisions, we need a uniter to lead the country. Instead, we get this:

"Standing in a packed amphitheater in front of Mount Rushmore for an Independence Day celebration, President Trump delivered a dark and divisive speech on Friday that cast his struggling effort to win a second term as a battle against a “new far-left fascism” seeking to wipe out the nation’s values and history.

With the coronavirus pandemic raging and his campaign faltering in the polls, his appearance amounted to a fiery reboot of his re-election effort, using the holiday and an official presidential address to mount a full-on culture war against a straw-man version of the left that he portrayed as inciting mayhem and moving the country toward totalitarianism."

 
Nepperhan said:
In a time of great stress as to social divisions, we need a uniter to lead the country. Instead, we get this:

"Standing in a packed amphitheater in front of Mount Rushmore for an Independence Day celebration, President Trump delivered a dark and divisive speech on Friday that cast his struggling effort to win a second term as a battle against a “new far-left fascism” seeking to wipe out the nation’s values and history.
Click to expand...
Instead of actually reading, or quoting, from the Presidents speech you quote an opinion from the NYT.

That is actually what youve got here.

Opinion, from someone who hates Trump.
 
Do you have a nationality? When you were young did your family follow certain customs that their ancestors followed? Many families from certain countries still follow many customs their ancestors followed. Do you know how long slavery has been around on this planet? Since around 3500 BCE. Many laws from previous civilizations addressed slavery (serfdom, indentured labor). It was a part of common life. So people who had slaves in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries were just going along with a custom that was accepted for thousands of years. Alot of these people were not evil people or mistreated their slaves. Slaves were just a part of their lives like food and water. These people saw this a way of life. Then all of a sudden history started questioning this way of life. Of course, some people realized that slavery is wrong, others were questionable, while others fought it (and those who fought it, fought it because they believed they were right or they fought because they felt that the slaves were not fully human).

Now speed ahead today, and we know that slavery is wrong and that slaves (of any nationality) are all truly 100% human and are all God’s children. So these statues that are being torn down are common things in the life of a southerner. Their ancestors fought to keep the status quo. They want to remember their loved ones who fought in a deadly war. Give them the dignity to move the statues to a museum or something if possible. Its was and is part of their everyday life.

And African Americans should have statues recognizing their sufferings throughout our history which is one of the biggest pains (along with the taking of the land from our American Natives) and saddest times.

Lets start respecting one another’s lives and histories instead of destroying one another.
 
Boatswain2PA said:
Instead of actually reading, or quoting, from the Presidents speech you quote an opinion from the NYT.
Click to expand...
That’s a news article, not an opinion column. Did you read the article?

Nice ad hominem, though.
 
I stopped after the first paragraph you posted. Dark and divisive huh…yeah, thats an opinion piece.

I actually read the speech. Did you? If so, what parts, exactly, are “dark and divisive”?
 
more opinion from the article

"using ominous language and imagery, he railed against what he described as a dangerous "

The scene at Mount Rushmore was the latest sign of how Mr. Trump appears, by design or default, increasingly disconnected from the intense concern among Americans about the health crisis gripping the country. More than just a partisan rally, it underscored the extent to which Mr. Trump is appealing to a subset of Americans to carry him to a second term by changing the subject and appealing to fear and division.
 
Well, one would have to prove that.

Trump mentioning violence and a push by a powerful movement to cancel dissenting opinion is pretty near factual. It’s happening.

I think the NYT simply agrees with violence and canceling people in the name of their own perspective, but would denounce it if people they disagreed with did the same thing.

Basically, the message is only “divisive” to those who might think they are justified in invading protected civil rights. They can feel offended, but… being offended isn’t virtuous. It’s interesting how some opinions that offend large groups of people are fine (ones that come from the left), but those who might dare offend from the right are “Divisive”, “hateful”, or some negative buzzword.

How about all declarations should be treated the same, and not spun to craft a narrative. People just need to get thicker skin.
 
So what do you call the people who are calling the entire system of American government and culture, along with the white race, as evil people?

Are they “uniting”? For someone to rebuke the violence and attempts to silence dissenting opinion isn’t “divisive”, it’s in the Constitution. The only way it’s “divisive” is if you oppose the Constitution. And that’s fine, you’re free to do that, but America has no obligation to cater to your opinions and feelings. The Constitution is a moral document based on Judeo-Christian Western philosophic morals and values.

If one hates something, and that thing doesn’t cater to their demands… that thing isn’t evil. It’s holding its standards and allowing you to choose to partake in them or not.
 
Violence, and not protecting innocent civilians, is certainly dangerous.

Allowing major companies to demonitize and cancel opinions is also setting the stage for dangerous standards.

The left can view it as 'ominous"… I’d expect them to. They support violence and silencing, provided it’s in support of their agenda. I don’t think Right or Leftwing should use such tactics.
 
Mister_Friscus said:
I think the NYT simply agrees with violence and canceling people in the name of their own perspective, but would denounce it if people they disagreed with did the same thing.
Click to expand...
I think you post silliness.
Mister_Friscus said:
So what do you call the people who are calling the entire system of American government and culture, along with the white race, as evil people?
Click to expand...
If we have systemic racism in the US, the first thing to do is acknowledge it and then fix it. Instead, some choose to kill the messenger.

Y’all are missing the point: Times of tribal divisions call for a leader who can unite folks as to their common interest. We don’t have such a leader in Trump.
 
Last edited:
Boatswain2PA said:
more opinion from the article

"using ominous language and imagery, he railed against what he described as a dangerous "
Click to expand...
Trump’s speech:
This attack on our liberty, our magnificent liberty must be stopped and it will be stopped very quickly. We will expose this dangerous movement, protect our nation’s children from this radical assault, and preserve our beloved American way of life. In our schools, our newsrooms, even our corporate boardrooms, there is a new far-left fascism that demands absolute allegiance.
Click to expand...
So… looks to me like it was a completely accurate assessment.
 
Nepperhan said:
Standing in a packed amphitheater in front of Mount Rushmore for an Independence Day celebration, President Trump delivered a dark and divisive speech on Friday that cast his struggling effort to win a second term as a battle against a “new far-left fascism” seeking to wipe out the nation’s values and history.
Click to expand...
From the most despicable excuse for a newspaper in America.
I’ve read the speech. It is excellent. Even by the desperately low standard of the New York Times, this is pathetically dishonest.

On the other hand, all Americans should condemn the violent groups that truly fit the label far left fascists.
 
Last edited:
F_Marturana said:
Far left fascism. Far right communism.

How about far right socialistic oligarchical benevolent dictatorship.
Click to expand...
Contradiction in terms. As socialism is government ownership or strict control of the means of production, and dictatorship is strict government control at the expense of individual rights, neither can be to the right.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
They are anti-Constitution.

They are anti-history.

They have the freedom to say that.

The very freedom they do not want us to have.

They are anti-First Amendment.

They are anti-Second Amendment.

They are anti-God and anti-Jesus.

They are anti-small businesses.

They are anti-blacks.

Those who will not condemn “cancel culture” are part of the problem.

They have the freedom to say all that.

The very freedom they do not want us to have.

The very freedom they did not want us to celebrate today.

Happy Independence Day!
 
Nepperhan said:
But it is not uniting, which is what we need in these times.
Click to expand...
It unites all Americans who do not believe the nation should be torn down.
I think the Emancipation Monument should stand as a tribute to the event that moved us closer to our basic foundation of individual rights.
I believe statues of Washington, Jefferson, Grant should stand as these are great men in our nation’s history.
I believe our basic institutions are not systematically racist.
I believe the American people are not inherently racist.
I see no common ground to be had with those who disagree.
Do you?
 
Last edited:
JonNC said:
neither can be to the right.
Click to expand...
Your graph is an accurate representation of where different ideologies fall on the “authoritarianism” spectrum, but not so much in identifying them with left/right ideologies. Conservatism is ultimately about conserving something, and in the political world that something is social order and hierarchy. As Chesterton puts it:
The whole modern world has divided itself into Conservatives and Progressives. The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.
Click to expand...
Communism is a liberal ideology because it is an overthrow of the existing social order. Fascism is conservative because it involves rigid enforcement of existing social order (i.e. extreme nationalism) typically advertised as a return to traditional values.

On the extreme anti-government end of the spectra, the left/right distinction is basically invisible because there is no government to describe. Liberals are attracted to anarchy because it represents an abolition of social hierarchies and structure. Conservatives (at least in the US) believe we would be returning to the nation’s earlier ideals of self-rule/extreme preservation of individual liberty.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top