|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Conservative Racism | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Because you replied to the message where I raised the point even quoting relevant text. If you join a conversation the preceding posts don’t just go away. I'm not Sarah... I'm not Faith... I have my own mind and my own beliefs. My objections were written for my post. They're adults and can defend their own positions. I'll defend my own. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
Your tradition disagrees with Him as often as not - e.g. the "Fall". Tradition gets it from Him. My tradition anyway.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2
|
quote: I didn’t say that you were. But if you are going to reply to a point you might as well actually address it.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Yeah, you love Catholics and Muslims and Episcopalians and liberals.
Nothing to say? I understand.
Oh, wait... You abhor them.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
My tradition disagrees with YOUR miserable mistreatment of Him.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Yeah, you love Catholics and Muslims and Episcopalians and liberals. Oh, wait... You abhor them. You left out gays, and yes although I have sometimes said I hate the Leftists here it's really the ideology I hate and i shouldn't personalize it. As for the rest yes I do love them as human beings who in most cases need to be saved because they are victims of false teachings, and it's the teachings I hate, AND I have been VERY clear about all that, I've taken extreme pains in some places to be clear about how it's the IDEOLOGY or the INSTITUTION that I hate, so you have no excuse to accuse me as you are doing. You are slandering me.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 412 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined: |
Faith writes:
I'm only going by what He is supposed to have said in the Bible. I know you disagree with the Bible. My tradition disagrees with YOUR miserable mistreatment of Him.All that are in Hell, choose it. -- CS Lewis That's just egregiously stupid. -- ringo
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
quote: I don't want to talk about Middle East politics, and it is pretty irrelevant to more problematic part of the Minnesota congresswomen's comments (though the Israel comments were quite bad too, and calling the comments bad says nothing about the caller's views on Middle East politics or mindset toward Arabs and Israelis). I doubt many people here get into the conversations with real people that I do. I am regularly told (by people who don't even know who any of these Muslim congresspeople are, and have little care about politics to the level of knowing about congresspeople) how "powerful" Jewish people are (as opposed to the powerless individuals they actually are), and it was last night actually. The issue of "Zionism" and "banking" comes up as reasons why Jewish people are so evil, and all the persecution comes from there (and the actual persecution is always mentioned with a side note that "Jews make up stories of persecution" and "Jews seed false media stories about hatred" "they haven't been as hated as they say, but all the 'dislike' - not 'hate' - has been from their own evils", which are "banking" and "Zionism"). "Powerful" and a "force" seem to be buzzwords about "The Jews". I hear them all the time. I HARDLY KNOW WHERE TO START. I used a phone last night to demonstrate hatred directed against Jewish people comes from pre-Zionism and decided to go to the KARAITES Wikipedia article, for starters (this is a tiny minority sect of Jews that are distinct from Rabbinical Jews and have a 1000-2000 year history of existence). Russian Karaites, about 125 years ago, got the idea to "prove" to the Russian Empire that they were in Crimea before Jesus was born, so they could escape the Blood Guilt the Empire officially saw Jews to have. The bogus historical evidence - making Karaites seem to be residents of Crimea for 2000 years - actually was accepted in courts, but the Russian authorities told them they were still living under the Blood Guilt that all Jews were under. The fact is that it doesn't take much for many people to bring up their hatred of Jewish people. They will then say they don't hate Jewish people. They just hate the "hateful things" the "powerful people do". "I hate Zionism". The ironic thing is the blood guilt idea was defended by these same bigots once I told them what the Gospel of John said ("The Jews somehow killed all the Prophets" according to the Gospel of John). I always get comments that there is still "love" (or at least no "hate" for individuals). (There is so much more crap to the typical accusations, often Jewish people get accused of controlling the media and then "The evil media Jews" actually get blamed for "dividing people". I have been told multiple times - by ethnic Mexicans - that Jewish people are actually responsible for anti-immigration policy and Donald Trump. Really! And these are people who otherwise are nice.) (It should be pointed out that many ethnic Mexicans are actually Pro Trump, and even those folks are often anti-Semitic. I hate to make too much of the ethnic issue because many don't care about the fact that they are Hispanic or ethnic-Mexican. Many are born American and don't know Spanish, and don't care one bit, but it is amazing how much they care about Jewish issues. It is a wake up call when you see people you think aren't racist show different colors when it comes to Jewish issues.) Here are the troubling comments about the supposed Jewish "POWER" by the congresswomen:
quote: quote: quote: quote: All "about the Benjamins" reminds me of the really tired and lackluster response a guy (descended of Polish Jews who escaped in the 1930s, though he himself is not Jewish) gave to an aggressive anti-Semite who said the "Jews have been hated for their banking and money" claim (plus Zionism). I was aggressively arguing against the tropes & canards, but the part-Polish guy was speaking about academic studies on anti-Semitism and essentially conceded the points to the attacker. The attacker started asking which type of Jew people were. His point was that he hates Zionist Jews but respects Orthodox Jews (he presented those 2 as the only options). Then he said he hates nobody anyway. I brought up the Blood Guilt issue and then talked about the Gospels - especially the Gospel of John. I talked about the Russian Empire, but then told how the Gospel of John was not written by John, nor was it called "The Gospel of John until about 200 A.D. It wasn't written until after 100, or quoted till 150. I even mentioned how the "beloved" Apostle might not have been talking about "John". I even explained how King James himself thought John and Jesus had homosexual sex based on the identification of John with "the beloved". Then he (a Hispanic) - and the other attackers (non Hispanic whites who bought into his crap) - ended up giving evangelical arguments on Christianity and how "we serve the same God", as if he was debating Jewish folks (neither me nor the other guy who opposed him were Jewish, but I was the only actual debating opponent - the other guy on my side was worthless). I was friends with all of them. We hang out. The vocal anti-Semite is also a 9/11 Truther. He attacks me for watching CNN. The media is all controlled by the Illuminati and the "Jews" who run it all. He just can't understand how people - like me - see Jews are the least powerful people on Earth. He feels I am brainwashed. He said they (Jews) were "Powerful" beyond all others before I said they are not. He probably does not know who 3 of the 4 "Squad" members are. I assume he knows who AOC is, but he might not. She is an amazing celebrity to pro-immigration ethnic Mexicans (they know she is Puerto Rican), but he is more of an anti-immigration type though he says he "loves all people". He and my super-liberal part-Polish friend (descended of Jewish folks who fled during the turmoil of the 1930s) are always fighting on politics, though he feels everybody politician is part of some evil conspiracy and he hates politics. He cares almost nothing of his grandparents Mexican ethnicity though (both his parents are "100%" Hispanic and essentially both ethnic-Mexican). He did not sound racist at all until he starts talking about Jewish people (I heard hints of this anti-Semitic stuff for a while from him, but it got lost in all the conspiracy theory talk and joking). He concluded by saying Jews are under a blood guilt but he hates no person regardless. "Jews" are "POWERFUL" is indeed anti-Semitic. Jewish "big bucks baby" is ALL ABOUT THE BANKER CONSPIRACY THEORIES. (Jewish communities often were expelled from entire countries when people did not want to pay their debts - often war debts - so they blamed those evil bankers WHO ALSO HAPPENED TO BE THE SAME PEOPLE WHOSE MONEY JESUS KICKED OVER, before "those evil Jews murdered him") This stuff is all about attacks on the Jewish people. (and attacking Jewish people is THE POPULAR POSITION in the world!) Israel is not the actual issue. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NosyNed Member Posts: 8996 From: Canada Joined: |
I don't have time right now to look up the actual context of your quotes. Which is what I asked for and you avoided.
But "It's all about the Benjamins baby." seems to not be about the usual screeds about Jewish money but rather the lobbying done on behalf of and by Israel. She has apologized for her remarks but I haven't found anything yet that is worse than careless wording. It seems she is suggesting that Israel carries some of the blame for the state of affairs in the middle east. If she is saying it is completely to blame then I disagree with her but carry some blame it does. If this is the quality of your agrument I'm not impressed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member
|
Sorry for the delayed response.
I think you're misunderstanding what I was trying to point out. That is probably true. My point is that no intelligent conversation can use "Pelosi" and "far left" in the same sentence, except perhaps to mock the delusions of the current US right.
That even as somebody as far to the Left as she can be challenged is a sign of the times. And this is what I mean. Pelosi isn't all that far left. Compared to the political establishment, she's a centrist. I would label her as"center-left", although others on this board have called her "center-right". Which might be more accurate, since polls consistently show that the opinions of the people on the ground are far closer to "the Squad" on most issues than they are to the Establishment Liberals. At any rate, Pelosi and the rest of the Liberal Establishment have always been challenged by the Left. I actually read the left wing press (hint: that doesn't include The New York Times or CNN), and criticism of the centrism of Pelosi, Obama, and the Clintons have been a long staple.
...The Left is eating itself... I disagree here, although I admit we may have to wait until the screaming stops and the dust settles before we can look back to see whether I'm right. We have to remember that we don't have political parties in the US in the same sense as they exist in, say, Europe. Because of the extremely decentralized way the parties here are run (literally anyone can register for one the parties and then run in that party's primaries) and the effects of single-member-first-past-the-post districts, the party organizations are unable to effectively maintain any kind of consistent ideological discipline. As a result, the Democratic Party is a coalition of different groups (undoubtably with a lot of overlap of members) with different agendas. In most ways the different goals can complement each other, and sometimes some groups actually share the same goals. But sometimes goals can oppose one another. As a result, the Democrats "program", as far as there is one, is a consensus based on compromises each faction makes in order to be able to work together to achieve at least some of the common goals. What is happening is that the coalition has changed. The progressive, social justice left has much more power in the coalition than the did before 2016 (in my opinion, this more accurately reflects the composition of the Democrats' base). This gives them a lot more influence on the actual policy positions of the party. As a result, a new consensus is being formed as the various factions have to grapple with new compromises, especially the center-left Establishment Liberals. What makes this so messy, of course, is that I doubt most of the participants consciously realize this is what they are doing. And, of course, even in deliberate negotiations each side is going to resist making more concessions than they have to. To make it more complicated, there's the pragmatic politics aspect. The establishment center is terrified that the Left's radicalism is going to turn off voters and cost them elections. At the same time, the Left is terrified that the center's "same old, same old, nothing ever changes" approach will turn away voters and cost them elections. That's the way I've been seeing this since 2016, anyway. However, I do worry that if this internal fight carries on too long, it will hurt the Democrats in 2020. Edited by Chiroptera, : Changed subtitle. Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn't know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member
|
My mistake. Lewis was so close to Tolkien that I just assumed he'd be Catholic too.
It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn't know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
quote: The context was "the Jews" are a power (capitol P?) to be stood up to. Power needs truth told to. Stand up to the powerful villains
quote: It was about taking on Jews, the powerful powerhouses that need to finally be stood up to. She feels it should be considered courageous, so she said it with heat.
quote: I'm sure this "I am not anti-Semitic, I am just anti-Zionist" will be the excuse that never will concede the obviousness of its blatant lie.
quote: I know what people say about the Jewish people. I know what she was saying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member (Idle past 738 days) Posts: 2236 Joined: |
quote: A lot of the "usual screeds" are actually far more innocent (almost cartoonish). This was not some simple-minded "a few rich people are Jewish and run a masonic lodge (or the 'Illuminati')" type of stuff. This was vile anti-Semitism of the most dangerous sort. Not an attack on a small number of "Jewish bankers", but an attack that comes from the thought strain that hates the Jewish people to the point that even 0.2% of the world being Jewish is just too many Jews. I am not saying she wants people murdered, but she clearly does not like the idea of Jewish people having any real "power" to deal with their endless problems. She sees a lot about Jewish existence as the problem, no doubt. I am sure she sees the ADL as some sort of overly-powerful group. I think the ADL lacks power in this world, and that is the truth. I support free speech 100%, but Jewish people have gotten some bad PR for a long time, and it is still pretty bad in the 21st century. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
From the New York Times:
‘The Squad’ Rankles, but Pelosi and Ocasio-Cortez Make Peace for Now Despite the headline, the article has very little to say about the current rapprochement between the Establishmen Liberal and Social Justice Progressive wings. It appears to be mostly background about the spotlight being shone on Ocasio- Cortez, Pressley, Omar, and Tlaib. Enjoy.It says something about the qualities of our current president that the best argument anyone has made in his defense is that he didn't know what he was talking about. -- Paul Krugman |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Trump blistered for bigoted attack on Elijah Cummings: ‘It’s not even veiled racism’
quote:
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024