"Why It Won’t Stop With Statues." Article on why it can be expected that the mayhem will get worse

  • Thread starter Thread starter mdgspencer
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
VonDerTann said:
–But as Jesus said, the poor you’ll always have with you.
Click to expand...
So we accept poverty as inevitable?
Anything other the no is incorrect.
VonDerTann said:
–Besides, if this is your goal, fine. Give away every penny you’ve ever made…just don’t give away what I earned, OK?
Click to expand...
Who said anything about your money at any point. This whole argument has been you cramming words in my mouth like:
VonDerTann said:
–OK, people get the treatment they earn. Act responsible and law abiding? Great. Act like a thug, and throw a molotov cocktail at police? Expect to get shot.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t the point.
VonDerTann said:
–This is an argument for communism: If someone is not oppressed (and maybe hasn’t been for decades), we still have to…what? Give them free stuff? Sounds like that’s what you’re suggesting.
Click to expand...
No it’s an argument; if your families poor odds are you will be too.
 
Last edited:
Now, you’re totally moving the goal posts.

Your’re also displaying…systemic racism!

How? Well, for one, you’re assuming that if you’re black you’re also poor, and you’ll always be poor! Sheesh, talk about racism!

See, this was about race, and now you’re trying to make it about money.

Now, to have a meaningful discussion, please stay on topic and advise: If slavery ended in the US in 1865 (155 years ago!), exactly what has to be done, and how, in your opinion, to mark this alleged debt to blacks “paid in full?” Have reparations? Preferences in employment, education, etc., in perpetuity?
 
Last edited:
VonDerTann said:
Now, you’re totally moving the goal posts.
Click to expand...
No, I’m correcting what you thought I meant.
VonDerTann said:
Now, to have a meaningful discussion, please stay on topic and advise: If slavery ended in the US in 1865 (155 years ago!), exactly what has to be done, and how, in your opinion, to mark this alleged debt to blacks “paid in full?” Have reparations? Preferences in employment, education, etc., in perpetuity?
Click to expand...
Fact: you brought up reparations, I didn’t.
Fact: I said eradicate poverty

Anything else is arguing in bad faith.
 
Well, sorry, Anrakyr, if the best you can come up with is, “we need to eradicate poverty!,” with nothing further, no one will really argue - but only because you’re also not actually saying anything.

It’s akin to saying, “save the whales!”: No one will really argue, but their response will be the same to “let’s eradicate poverty”. They’ll say, “OK…so?”.
 
VonDerTann said:
Well, sorry, Anrakyr, if the best you can come up with is, “we need to eradicate poverty!,” with nothing further, no one will really argue - but only because you’re also not actually saying anything.
Click to expand...
The amount of back tracking I have to do to keep you on point is getting exhausting.

Here is my point, try to reply to it not what you think I’m saying:

Black communities were marginalized the moment they were set free. They lived in slums. Slums don’t pay great property tax, tax that funds the schools. This problem has been kicked like a can down the road over and over no matter how “woke” people become.

No we are here and you say racism doesn’t exist.
It exist because we never fixed the hurt caused leaving people behind the social curve for a century.

That’s the point. Racism isn’t just dropping the n-bomb or funneling blacks out of white opportunity. It’s doing nothing about what has been done both passively AND actively.
 
Last edited:
I know exactly what you’re saying now…

…because what you’re “saying” changes with every post.

Racism does exist, nor I have claimed otherwise. What I’ve said is that there is no “systemic” anti-black racism in the USA. Racism certainly exists in some fashion: Not only does it exist, but you’re committing it, by saying that if you’re black you’ll always be poor.

Now, your position is blacks have always experienced racism because “we never fixed the hurt.” The last is your own words. OK, let’s go a step further. If you’re correct…how do we fix it now? Reparations? Permanent affirmative action in employment? In education? Do we take from the whites and give to the blacks (like in South Africa)? I know, you keep saying, “I never said reparations!” Well, then how do you propose to “fix the hurt?” Because without a solution, all you’re really saying is the race equivalent of saying “save the whales!,” i.e., a nice-sounding statement with zero meaning behind it.
 
Last edited:
See edited post. Racism is real. “Systemic” anti-black racism is a myth.

What I asked was this:

“Now, to have a meaningful discussion, please stay on topic and advise: If slavery ended in the US in 1865 (155 years ago!), exactly what has to be done, and how, in your opinion, to mark this alleged debt to blacks “paid in full?” Have reparations? Preferences in employment, education, etc., in perpetuity?”

–If you have no answer, just say so, and yes, we can move on.
 
Last edited:
VonDerTann said:
See edited post. Racism is real. “Systemic” anti-black racism is a myth.
Click to expand...
Then we can’t move on because that’s the point I wanted to make.
VonDerTann said:
What I asked was this:
Click to expand...
I don’t care what you asked, it’s immaterial if we can’t agree what caused it how can we agree on the solution.

Any other discourse is moot.
If we can’t agree how we got here any solution we discuss won’t address the cause which leads us right back.

So stay on point; how is what I presented insufficient to convince you how racism is systematic? I walked you through how what happened then baked in a steeper curve for minorities. As such it’s systematic.
 
Anrakyr said:
how is what I presented insufficient to convince you how racism is systematic? I walked you through how what happened then baked in a steeper curve for minorities. As such it’s systematic.
Click to expand...
You failed to give any specifics; spoke merely in very broad generalities belied by the examples I gave you; moved the goal posts when challenged; and refused to respond to any questions put to you; you gave platitudes (“let’s eradicate poverty!”) with no substance behind them.

So, no, you proved nothing (other than that you don’t like answering inconvenient questions).
 
VonDerTann said:
So, no, you proved nothing (other than that you don’t like answering inconvenient questions).
Click to expand...
I can’t answer the question till we agree how we got there. I’m not moving the goalpost, I’m holding you to task.
 
You’re not “holding” me to anything - just hijacking the thread at this point.You certainly aren’t offering anything that can be responded to substantively, nor are you responding to anything I’ve asked you.
 
VonDerTann said:
You’re not “holding” me to anything - just hijacking the thread at this point.You certainly aren’t offering anything that can be responded to substantively, nor are you responding to anything I’ve asked you.
Click to expand...
So if we can’t agree on the source how can we find an answer?
 
Anrakyr said:
Then we can’t move on because that’s the point I wanted to make.
Click to expand...
Their poverty is the effects of a dead racism, if they aren’t helped it is because the government is either powerless or indifferent not racist.
 
Last edited:
Actually, Vanitas, we can’t conclusively say that what Derek Chauvin was wrong - yet.

Was it wrong? Probably. But please consider the following facts:
  1. George Floyd had a long criminal past with several arrests and hard time served. He was a large man, hard to subdue.
  2. Critically, before he was taken down he was banging his head against the side of the police cruiser - the exact same behavior Freddy Gray engaged in, in Baltimore, before he died.
  3. He had drugs in his system when he died.
  4. He also had COVID (which affects respiration) - but that wasn’t known to anyone.
  5. The Minneapolis PD expressly allowed the “knee to neck” tactic. Some departments didn’t but MPD did. Hence, Derek Chauvin was in fact acting in a method expressly allowed by his training.
My suspicion - and I’d certainly consider this angle were I defense counsel - is that Chauvin was actually trying to essentially render Mr. Floyd unconscious as means of protecting Mr. Floyd from himself. Did it go too far? Well, he died - but he had COVID too, and that coudn’t have helped. Do I think Chauvin meant to kill him (1st degree murder, as he’s now charged with)? Absolutely not. Do I think he acted with a depraved heart (3rd degree murder under MN law)? I do not. Based on what I know, I surmise he’s guilty of manslaughter, i.e. negligently accidental death.

So Floyd’s death, while tragic, cannot immediately be condemned as excessive, until we know the facts. It’s “wrong,” but then again every accidental death is wrong at some level. Everyone is rushing to conclude they know what happened. They don’t.
 
Last edited:
VonDerTann said:
So Floyd’s death, while tragic, cannot immediately be condemned as excessive, until we know the facts. It’s “wrong,” but then again every accidental death is wrong at some level. Everyone is rushing to conclude they know what happened. They don’t.
Click to expand...
That’s good to know.
 
Last edited:
I’m kinda shocked - we often disagree, yet you gave me a like! Thank you!

And BTW, you’re probably right – Chauvin probably did act excessively. That’s the beauty of the jury system - to paraphrase Lt. Gerard (wonderfully played by Barry Morse) from the old 1960s Fugitive, Chauvin did whatever the jury concludes he did. In reality only God knows, but barring something totally unexpected (like a confession!) we’ll have to live with what the jury finds.
 
Today’s reading had me realizing why Israel persecuted the prophets so often.

They too had their identity politics to deal with. Both conservatives and liberals hated the truth when presented to them by the prophets.

Of course Jesus Christ was put to death.

So it is no different today. Those who speak the truth on what is taking place, will be persecuted, by both sides of radical political ideologies.

But we must speak the truth, even when it’s not popular to do so.
 
You’re mixing apples and oranges.

Great Britain was a foreign power for the colonists who were ruled by a monarchy. They didn’t have free elections or a democratic process. In fact, King George ruled that the Continental Congress be abolished and the British General would rule the colonies under the eye of the King.

This is not the case today. We are all Americans with elected American leaders who can be replaced in the next election if the people desire to do so.

We also have the power to put laws in place through the legislative process. This is being ignored by the protesters who draw in the rioters and anarchist.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top