You got it.
That’s true. It would be a fallacy to assume the outcome either way.
Whichever one you want. But right now you are still straddling.
I said the theories behind them. Like the theory that the economic disparities are caused by racism today, or that we can fix them by welfare, or by affirmative action, or by reparations.
This is how you decipher those “code words” is it? Yes, if you get to ascribe to others whatever evil you choose it is no wonder you find evil things in them, but that evil is entirely in your imagination, in the way you twist reasonable comments into base and ignoble sentiments. It is all about “Yes, he said A, but he really meant B”.
A small minority of Southerners owned slaves, and I suspect it was a small minority that fought to continue the institution of slavery. Most fought for their states, which is why Robert E. Lee joined the Confederacy. Not only did he not own slaves, he freed those that came with his wife’s estate, and referred to it as a “damnable institution”, but he was a Virginian…
That’s very true, so I have to concede that systemic racism does exist, but not without pointing out that without exception it exists in institutions controlled by the left. The typical complaint about racism is that it stems from the right, and that was what I was objecting to, but that overlooked the fact that the actual examples of racism are initiated, maintained, and fostered by the left. So, if you’re serious about eliminating systemic racism you need to work to deny the left the power to sustain it.
Not from me. I am happy if you admit it exists. That is much more important to me than defending every Democrat who has ever lived. But from what I have heard from conservatives there is very little that sounds effective to address this issue.
This is much like the complaints about Republicans not doing anything about ending abortion. They take a bigger hit for being unable to counter Democrat initiatives than the Democrats do for initiating them. Let’s look at specific examples of systemic racism and note that where it exists it does so over the (ineffectual) objections of the right. Quota systems, such as exist in college admissions, business hiring and promotion practices are products of leftist thinking. The right universally supports merit based practices.
You know that Philipines is a Catholic country. I don’t know about Tunisia, but I’m pretty sure it was when it was a colony. Muslims have a circumspect attitude towards slavery.
No. Republicans haven’t changed ( except to become slightly more liberal). Same party. Same philosophy today as then.JonNC:
That’s true. It would be a fallacy to assume the outcome either way.
My view? Systemic racism is illegal and does not exon America. Progressives who run the large cities Sidestep those systemic rules, and the result is George Floyd
Yes. Neither party has changed. Republicans have always been the race neutral party and the Dems have always appealed to race loyalty.
I think we are talking about two very different kinds of system racism. You are talking about racism that hurts whites and I am talking about racism that hurts blacks. Perhaps you think that what racism there is is of the former kind?LeafByNiggle:
This is much like the complaints about Republicans not doing anything about ending abortion. They take a bigger hit for being unable to counter Democrat initiatives than the Democrats do for initiating them. Let’s look at specific examples of systemic racism and note that where it exists it does so over the (ineffectual) objections of the right. Quota systems, such as exist in college admissions, business hiring and promotion practices are products of leftist thinking. The right universally supports merit based practices.
Typically the right supports equality of opportunity while the left pushes for equality of outcomes, and the only effective way to address the issue is to reduce the power the left possesses to institute such practices. It is not Republicans who are at fault for lacking the power to thwart Democrat initiatives, the fault lies with those who enable the Democrats in the first place.
Republicans have indeed changed. Only the name survives. Same with Democrats. There is very little in the 1860 platforms that continue to 2020. In 1860 the Republicans were the progressives. It was a very progressive thing to abolish slavery. They also stood for full rights to all immigrant citizens and freedom of immigration into the United States. On the other hand the Democrats, representing mostly the South, wan’t to conserve the system they had and what was benefiting. They were not progressive. They didn’t want any changes to slavery, and opposed any attack on the Fugative Slave Act. Republicans in the 19th century were for expanding voting rights for African Americans. The Democrats were not. The Democrats were strongly identified with rural conservative values of the time. The Republicans represented big city life. It was not until the end of the 19th century that the Democrats began to develop a progressive wing (mostly northern Democrats). As you can see, the characteristics of the people that called themselves Democrat or Republican bear almost no relation to the characteristics of the people who go by those names today. It is better to classify all these groups as merely “progressives” and “conservatives” with the understanding that the nominal party to which those people belong changes over time.LeafByNiggle:
No. Republicans haven’t changed ( except to become slightly more liberal). Same party. Same philosophy today as then.JonNC:
That’s true. It would be a fallacy to assume the outcome either way.
That is not very clear. You say systemic racism is illegal. But it is not. Only certain specific racist actions are illegal, but when someone invents a new way to produce a racist outcome, that action is legal until the government figures out how to make it illegal. We have a good many of those holes plugged now, thanks to years and years of civil rights legislation (thank you, Republicans of 1960). But people are clever and keep finding new ways to exercise their racism.LeafByNiggle:
My view? Systemic racism is illegal and does not exon America. Progressives who run the large cities Sidestep those systemic rules, and the result is George Floyd
Depends on how you view the term progressive. Progressives view government power as primary over individual rights. You yourself has expressed that if I understood you.
And Republicans still to. Again, a conservative principle of individual rights. Of course, we are talking about immigrants, not foreign nationals here illegally.
Absolutely false. Just as Democrats of that time held identity as foundational to their political view then, they do now. Conservatives never have, and still don’t.
That’s your role. I don’t believe that any systemic racism is legal. To the extent that racism exists in our institutions, it is actions of individuals.
That is a very modern right wing interpretation. Here is an academic’s explanation, and it agrees with mine.
study.com
And so do Democrats now, even if they didn’t then.
The term "identity politics " is a modern right-wing denigration of progressives. It has no meaning in 1860 politics, and very little meaning today, except as a bad name that conservatives can call their opponents.
When a sufficient number of individuals act in a similar way, they effectively form a system. It is not a codified system in law, but it is still a system. As a hypothetical, suppose all the whites in a town got together privately and agreed to boycott a certain black-owned business because the owner was black.That would qualify as systemic racism, and it would be perfectly legal. I’m not saying that happens anymore, but it does illustrate what is possible.