|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,890 Year: 4,147/9,624 Month: 1,018/974 Week: 345/286 Day: 1/65 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Conservative Racism | |||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Trump has, no doubt whatsoever, caused increasingly higher numbers of Democrats to see their own - previously held - views as racist, while they won't admit how much they held (or secretly hold) the views.
quote: I am sorry to see that Frum seems to be anti-immigration. I always thought he was pro-immigration. I just discovered his (new) position as I read this article (I have yet to read his own, but will try, if the computer loads). But, to the issue of "right" and "left". Democrats seem to be moving away from their anti-immigration past, but I wonder just how much of the pro-immigration momentum will continue when a few things chance. The first question is whether Democrats will feel so strongly about immigrant's suffering when Trump is no longer around to remind them of it (due to his mouth and style, which encourages media coverage of previously obscure border patrol/detention issues). The second issue has to do with the concern for migrant rights when the unemployment is higher than the current situation of a business cycle peak. I hope that the always-increasing percentage of minorities in the total Democratic membership might somehow lock in a pro-immigration Democratic party ("Democrat" registered minorities tend to be made up of the more pro-immigration members of the communities) , but that might not make the issue so simple if the overall country (both whites and minorities) feels strongly hurt by immigrants. Trump has made things simple (on immigration) G. W. Bush made things simple (on war). The big question is what Democrats do after the "simple" ones leave. Will they do a 180?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
Eventually, immigration policy will need to have the engagement of the population.
That includes the numbers of "legal immigrants" allowed in each year, illegal crossings (and the public policy complications), plus the citizenship issues. There will be policy and then its implementation will be seen plus the way it plays in the real world. What Democrats can simply call "racist" today (since the Republican President gets hit by the dart), will clearly not be described as such (by many of the same Democrats) when they are in charge. It probably should be called the same thing, but the problem is that Republicans will typically not call immigration laws "racist", so there won't even be a loyal opposition to Democratic laws against immigrant's ability to travel freely and to get work. The Democratic party is unique, among the two political parties, in that it's members get to decide when laws against immigrants can be called "racist" or not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: Democrats flip flop on their favorite darts. Bush 43 was endlessly called "evil" over the issue of war, but it wasn't too long until Democrats attempted to shove Hillary Clinton down the nation's throat. Clinton was way more pro-war (and in a way that was not even intelligent either; her debates with Trump saw her presenting Iran and Assad and I.S.I.S. as somehow on the same side). Now Trump is called "evil", but the nation is too used to endlessly (1 trillion times a day) hearing Democrats calling Republican Presidents "evil" and "racist". (like from 2000-2009 for example, just a little decade there) Partisan Democrats even called Ronald Reagan "racist". What happened to the "evil" war dart?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
This was part of post 255, and it was part of a reply chain that you got involved in.
quote: The only thing saving Republicans from all of the blame is that one of the Muslims (the one from the St. Paul & Minneapolis district) has been attacking Jewish folks in a really disgraceful way. It is all ugly regardless. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
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 Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: 56% of 18-34 Americans feel illegal immigration should be punished with a fine, not criminal charges. 18-34 males are 61% supportive of decriminalization (only 23% feel there should be criminal charges) https://thehill.com/...il-fines-for-illegal-border-crossings There were 250 18-34 year olds polled. 141 (or 56%) said there should only be a fine, while 61 (24%) said there should be criminal charges, and 48 (19%) were undecided. There were 260 35-49 year olds polled. 69 said fine ( 27%). 110 said it should be a crime (42%). 81 were not sure (31%). That is 510 under 50, and 210 to 171 supported decriminalization, with 129 not sure. 8% more support, among 18-49 year old Americans, for changing the current criminal status to a NON CRIME immigration offense. The younger they are, the more pro immigration they come. There were 280 50-64 year-old Americans polled, and 210 65+ year's old people polled. The 280 50 to 64 year olds were only 23% supportive of reducing the penalty to a fine, and 50% favored keeping the criminal status that is the current law. The 210 Americans over 64 were only 21% in favor of decriminalization with 48% favoring the criminal charges. Overall, there is a 41% to 32% breakdown in favor of keeping the criminal charges policy verses reducing the penalty to a fine. But 16 months from now will see the anti-immigration side loosing many of its elderly members. They will be replaced by very pro-immigration youngsters. Democrats need to take this issue to the voters. I want to see what they have to say. There might be a slight edge in favor of decriminalization if Democrats offer a choice and make the case. Never mind the age demographics bringing a different political landscape in future years.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
quote: Amazing, and not just because this guy was Italian (many folks from Italy, especially Semitic Sicily, were not seen as "white-European", but were allowed to immigrate during the "open border" times pre-1924). This was quite a whopper.
quote: Lazarus would not have been seen as quite the European, herself.
quote: The fact that everybody TODAY considers Italians (even from Sicily) & others - like Jewish folks -, with partial middle-eastern ancestry, as European, might not be the best support for saying the Statue of Liberty's poem was for "Europeans only". It is true that there was a severe crackdown against non-white migrants just before the statue was erected. But it was not just people from the continent of Europe that enjoyed the "open borders" rights. Sicilians were allowed to immigrate here like "Europeans". I know that for a fact. It was not all about the continent of Europe. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
LamarkNewAge Member Posts: 2423 Joined: Member Rating: 1.2 |
There is no comment on the part about people only being European.
The piece forgets to mention that her ancestors came from Brazil (and there is an quite an immigration story to how they got to Brazil in the first place) First the L.A. Times piece.
quote: There is more in the piece. But no mention of Brazilian ancestors. But look at why they were in Brazil. Converso - Wikipedia
quote: Lazarus was from a Western Sephardim family. That is why they were in the place they were when in Brazil. This family would be considered "Hispanic" today, especially if they remained in their "Christian" state.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024