Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2018 American Political Scene

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Again, it's only in white stick up for themselves it's racist. I don't expect a leftist or a non-white to understand...
    yup, racist. bye.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

    Comment


    • Originally posted by astralis View Post
      GVChamp,





      i don't think that he was saying "race is totally ineffective in modern politics".



      he's saying that the GOP didn't need to be explicitly racist anymore because explicit racism wasn't a political winner given that the new generation in the South could tolerate stuff like the Voting Rights Act.

      that's why he said that Reagan's economic platform could appeal to both See/Hear-no-evil moderates as well as the old George Wallace voters, because "subconsciously maybe that [blacks getting hurt economically worse than whites] is part of it".

      Atwater's main delusion here is thinking that just because Reagan is dog-whistling quietly instead of dog-whistling loudly (Nixon) or being outright racist (Wallace)-- "But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract and that coded, that we're doing away with the racial problem one way or the other."-- that means racism "coming on the back burner".

      ===

      so the reason why i brought this interview up was to address your point here:



      i agree. but as with most things this is not an "either-or" statement; people can hold racist views of differing degrees of extremity ("model minority" vs "black savage rapists"), and while the GOP is not wholly back to a Nixonian Southern Strategy, it's hard not to argue that Trump has considerably louder dog-whistles than GOP candidates of the last decade or two past. i mean, the whole campaign against the kneeling NFL players, or the Mexican rapists, or threatening military action in regards to the Honduran migrant caravan-- he's essentially one step away from saying ******, ******, ******...which he may possibly have done anyways, to the fear of Trump officialdom, lol.
      First, I think it's important to divorce Trump from the interview. This interview is in the early 80s in a totally different time period, and I think this guy is trying to paint an unrealistic picture. While the GOP elite and a majority of the GOP base is race-tolerant, there are a LOT of GOP racists. Both actual racists and the sort of softer "race realists" that are going to be painted as Nazis by Left-Twitter. I know them because I see them.

      That aside, I still don't see how you are getting this from the interview. He goes to great lengths to explain how people are not explicitly racist (and I think he's too generous). To the extent there is "dog-whistling" the interview characterizes it as accidental and appealing to voters who themselves are not overtly racist in the 1960s segregationist sense. Again, I think he's too generous, but this is just not the condemnation of GOP racial politics that you seem to be characterizing it as. I don't see exactly what you see, not sure where your interpretation is coming from. I obviously think you're a smart, respectable guy, but in this case I just don't see what you are seeing (and again need to emphasize that I still think this interview paints too rosy a picture, as evidenced by Trump's election).

      Originally posted by DOR View Post
      Read something (this; https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5...=NEWSSTAND0001 , or anything with the name Kris Kobach) about ALEC and the Koch Brothers / GOP voter suppression campaign. Democrats are not the ones who mistrust Democracy; we’re the one’s suing for the right to vote
      You're misunderstanding the point. Advocacy of majoritarian rule is tangential to understanding and accepting the ideology of the other people who inhabit the same nation as you. Particularly when you advocate changing the rules of the game whenever something goes against you and decrying your opponent as illegitimate when they win according to the pre-determined rules of the game.
      "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

      Comment


      • I love people who go on about how bad it is that the % of white people in America has dropped, constantly attack 'the left', and then talk about 'identity politics' in the third person. Epic fail.
        sigpic

        Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

        Comment


        • Originally posted by astralis View Post
          yup, racist. bye.
          Good riddance. He was running out of dog whistles anyway.
          “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

          Comment


          • I wanted to ask a question, but since InfiniteDreams is gone, I will just post my thoughts.

            If whites are 70% of the population, how are they a minority. How will whites be a minority when they're 50% of the population after 2 decades. This is exactly the issue that right-wing Hindus espouse against other minorities in India. Make more babies then. Problem solved.

            As about immigration, close your borders and see America give up its #1 position to China in 2 decades. Talented people all over the world want to migrate to US and make a life there. There are plenty of examples of immigrants building niche companies, creating thousands of jobs, and paying taxes. If someone thinks immigration is broken, then ask your lawmakers to fix that. President Trump cannot solve immigration, if there is no incentive to stop that. People will risk life and limb to cross over. If you don't want Mexicans, then you also need to know that those people do jobs many of you don't want to do. If there is a requirement, somebody will fill that gap. Instead, why not issue short-term work permits for those hard working people to come and work, make some money, and then go back. Problem solved.

            People say immigrant Mexicans are criminals. Really? All mexicans rape, all mexicans murder people, or steal? None of you guys ever met an honest mexican that made your life better and simple? If someone is breaking the law, call police, file a case, and send him to jail. This administration is a trainwreck, and by the time they're gone and the next one is in, China would have probably stolen a march in some other field. Stop fighting, don't create a divide between camps, try to keep your country multicultural as is it now. It has worked well for you all.
            Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles! || Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain! || I am a far left millennial!

            Comment


            • He was running out of dog whistles anyway.
              yeah, dog-whistles at least means they're trying to hide it. he didn't bother. he went right past Tucker Carlson into StormFront territory.
              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                I love people who go on about how bad it is that the % of white people in America has dropped, constantly attack 'the left', and then talk about 'identity politics' in the third person. Epic fail.
                Listening to him I was beginning to feel ashamed being as how I married a South Pacific Islander (Flipina) with son, my brother a Filipina with son, and my sister an African-American with a son and daughter. Not!

                I do like Long Island Ice Tea quite a bit.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
                  Listening to him I was beginning to feel ashamed being as how I married a South Pacific Islander (Flipina) with son, my brother a Filipina with son, and my sister an African-American with a son and daughter. Not!

                  I do like Long Island Ice Tea quite a bit.
                  Are Filipinos Sth Pacific Islanders? I thought they were more or less Malay - like Indonesians & Malaysians. Most Sth Pacific Islanders I've met are literally twice the size of the average Filipino. :) Certainly not white, however. Not sure your family would be allowed into his white ethno state.

                  I was hoping to ask him a few questions about definitions, white man to white man. I am curious about just how 'white' a person has to be to count as 'white' for him. Back in the good old days it used to be Northern Europe only....and even then Eastern Europeans were a bit suspect. And then there is the vexed question of miscegenation. How much 'white' does a feller need.

                  So many questions....
                  sigpic

                  Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Oracle View Post
                    I wanted to ask a question, but since InfiniteDreams is gone, I will just post my thoughts.

                    If whites are 70% of the population, how are they a minority. How will whites be a minority when they're 50% of the population after 2 decades. This is exactly the issue that right-wing Hindus espouse against other minorities in India. Make more babies then. Problem solved.

                    As about immigration, close your borders and see America give up its #1 position to China in 2 decades. Talented people all over the world want to migrate to US and make a life there. There are plenty of examples of immigrants building niche companies, creating thousands of jobs, and paying taxes. If someone thinks immigration is broken, then ask your lawmakers to fix that. President Trump cannot solve immigration, if there is no incentive to stop that. People will risk life and limb to cross over. If you don't want Mexicans, then you also need to know that those people do jobs many of you don't want to do. If there is a requirement, somebody will fill that gap. Instead, why not issue short-term work permits for those hard working people to come and work, make some money, and then go back. Problem solved.

                    People say immigrant Mexicans are criminals. Really? All mexicans rape, all mexicans murder people, or steal? None of you guys ever met an honest mexican that made your life better and simple? If someone is breaking the law, call police, file a case, and send him to jail. This administration is a trainwreck, and by the time they're gone and the next one is in, China would have probably stolen a march in some other field. Stop fighting, don't create a divide between camps, try to keep your country multicultural as is it now. It has worked well for you all.
                    The US had effectively closed borders for several decades. That's the America most people recognize: it's the one that fought WWII, the Cold War, and put a man on the Moon. We steadily opened up immigration starting in the 1960s, but a decline in the "white" share of the population doesn't become apparent until the end of the Cold War, and starts exploding relatively recently. Multi-cultural America is part of post-industrial, New World Order America, and most Americans think that model as a whole has been unsuccessful, for reasons as varied as the stars in the sky.

                    The West had an actual multi-cultural state. It was the Austrian Empire and it was a total disaster once industrialization and mass media came along. The United States has historically been more of a melting pot and for reasons of historical and geographic accident has integrated immigrants much better than other nations. American Exceptionalism is a real thing. However, it's best not to believe in fairy tales. "American values" are what Americans believe. If we all wake up tomorrow and decide the sky is purple, that will be an American value. These values have changed substantially from our founding and will continue to change We tend to have certain ideals about rights, but if we actually believed in these all the time, we wouldn't need a Constitution, Bill of Rights, or Supreme Court to tame the people.

                    Other nations have deliberately tried to homogenize throughout most of the modern era.

                    Because America is large and powerful, America will last a long time, and will eventually be ruled by an ideology that condemns us all as misguided heretics. England, France, Italy, Spain, none of these nations resemble at all what they were in centuries past, and neither will America. Our values will die, and it's best not to ponder the death of these values for the same reason it's best not to ponder our own physical deaths too much: nihilism is a corrosive philosophy.

                    It's also foolish to try to plan for events centuries in the future. We need to respond now with information currently available, with our current values. I am more of the opinion that we should welcome immigration, particularly of the high-skilled sort, but this might not be a sustainable model. If China eats our lunch this century, it means this pro-immigration, atomistic model of the West was a failure, the same way communism was a failure.
                    Last edited by GVChamp; 21 Oct 18,, 11:53.
                    "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                      Are Filipinos Sth Pacific Islanders? I thought they were more or less Malay - like Indonesians & Malaysians. Most Sth Pacific Islanders I've met are literally twice the size of the average Filipino. :) Certainly not white, however. Not sure your family would be allowed into his white ethno state.
                      I thought Pacific Islanders are considered Caucasians?

                      Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                      I was hoping to ask him a few questions about definitions, white man to white man. I am curious about just how 'white' a person has to be to count as 'white' for him. Back in the good old days it used to be Northern Europe only....and even then Eastern Europeans were a bit suspect. And then there is the vexed question of miscegenation. How much 'white' does a feller need.
                      I don't think the Irish felt they were white (read English) enough. Then it was the Italians turn.

                      Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                      So many questions....
                      I rolled my eyes with his posts. I just didn't care for his attitude. He asked when did a "white" population voted themselves into a minority. Easy. The Brits. When they voted to keep and at times to expand the British Empire.

                      Oh, for the Stormfront guys reading this, Mexicans are white.
                      Chimo

                      Comment


                      • Yes,but the Brits did not let the subjects rule themselves.

                        Question: is love racist?
                        Those who know don't speak
                        He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                          Yes,but the Brits did not let the subjects rule themselves.
                          Top guys are all from Britain but middle mangement was always local.
                          Chimo

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                            Top guys are all from Britain but middle mangement was always local.
                            Yes,Sir,but the Governors,administrators,constables and officers obeyed HM Government in London.Who more or less got voted by the British people.Hence,the ultimate power was held by the electorate,although in practice things were a bit nuanced.Which was a fair and balanced system for all involved.But it was a not about natives of Lucknow deciding the mayor of London or the Prime Minister.Or getting a World War.
                            Those who know don't speak
                            He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                              Yes,Sir,but the Governors,administrators,constables and officers obeyed HM Government in London.Who more or less got voted by the British people.Hence,the ultimate power was held by the electorate,although in practice things were a bit nuanced.Which was a fair and balanced system for all involved.But it was a not about natives of Lucknow deciding the mayor of London or the Prime Minister.Or getting a World War.
                              Ehh, yes, we do. Ottawa and Sydney could not use London's Laws for conscription. They had to pass laws of their own to conscript troops. And the British Indian Army was always a volunteer force. So, it was always local decisions to get a World War.

                              Do note it was Ottawa and Sydney who stated that Edward VII was never going to be their king.
                              Chimo

                              Comment


                              • Filipnios and Malaysians are both part of the same family as Polynesians, but Polynesians are a bit more removed. They definitely aren't white. You could argue Latin America as "white" because there was a lot of inter-mixing with the Spanish, but that never happened with the Phillipines. The Phillipines is still pretty diverse with a bunch of different languages, whereas everyone in Spanish Latin America basically speaks Spanish. The most "native" population is probably Peru.

                                However, the politics of Latin America are shit and have always been shit. None of the Latin American nations had any experience with self-government prior to independence and were all heavily racialized systems. American colonists pushed out all the Native Americans and practiced self-government that really helped independence. Mexico in particular was totally dysfunctional and never integrated in any real way prior to independence. For instance, Mexico City is deep inland with major elevation changes, which really complicates transit, whereas the US was mostly sea-faring at the time of independence. Our most inland city was, like, Philly, right along the Delaware River. Mexico was a silver colony, whereas the US was commercial (especially in the north).

                                Whether the Irish are white depends on how expansive your definition of "white" is. Old-school White, IIRC, is basically Charlegmane's empire plus England, Denmark, and Sweden. IMO Ireland should be considered traditional white if you consider Norway white: both were marginal regions dominated by more powerful European nation and produced large migrations to the US because they were dirt-poor. The difference is that the Norwegians settled largely unsettled regions in the Upper Midwest, and the Irish settled in established cities. If you settle in established cities, people hate you. No one cared about the Norwegians. Fun story, my wife's grandfather spoke Norwegian and served as a translator because there were still a shit-ton of people who only speak Norwegian in upper Wisconsin as of the early and mid 1940s.


                                I'm a big fan of the melting pot of American culture, but it really functions better as a commercial melting pot. You should be going to Church and watching football today, and going to your job tomorrow morning.

                                This has a lot of side-effects that you can't disentangle, like our preference for suburban sprawl, building massive shopping malls for no earthly reason, and the general right-ward tilt of the country in comparison to other nations. Other anglophone nations are similar...however, the US obviously does it better. Canada and Australia are clearly pale imitators ;)
                                "The great questions of the day will not be settled by means of speeches and majority decisions but by iron and blood"-Otto Von Bismarck

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X