Best Way To Defeat the Right?

[gay_Aleks]

If a certain nation is depriving a population (not a species: what the hell are you talking about?) of certain rights that it asserts to be universal [c.f the Bill of Rights], how else would you describe it, if not undemocratic? "Business as usual"? Does this mean that colonial atrocities were also justified, because they were the "rules of the land"?

 

[Birdjaguar]

Why are you putting dogs in the same list as slaves and women? Like…what on Earth are you trying to posit here?

This level of moral relativism is absurd. Slavery is a horrific evil and any society that practices it ought to be condemned, historical or extant.

Currently dogs do not have the right to vote, but as one looks at the ever increasing importance of dogs to Americans, I expect that within your life time, the issue will come up.

Humans have been cruel and oppressive to other humans (and dogs) throughout history. It has been and still in our nature. What we think today does not apply 100, 200, 500, or more years ago except in your judgmental mind. You can condemn the past all you want and hate on everyone who ever thought differently than you do now. To what end? They lived their lives as they thought best or as best they could.

 

[gay_Aleks]

I can't believe I'm talked down by a goddamn CFC moderator that is comparing the historical oppression of women and African Americans to dogs? What kind of mindset is this? Who in the world compares these things in this relation? What's going on in your head? What?

Humans have been cruel and oppressive to other humans (and dogs) throughout history. It has been and still in our nature. What we think today does not apply 100, 200, 500, or more years ago except in your judgmental mind. You can condemn the past all you want and hate on everyone who ever thought differently than you do now. To what end? They lived their lives as they thought best or as best they could.

This is obscenely wrong if you consider history for a moment (which, unsurprisingly, you do not, and really, all of you centrists seem to live in some other world - however I live in the real world), as there have been examples in the last two hundred years that show people who were not interested in perpetuating oppression - the U.S, for an example, has people like Nat Turner, Frederick Douglass, John Brown, etc, who have fought and died for their liberty. Do they only exist in my '"judgmental mind"? Before making grand claims about "human nature" (not a thing! apart from relieving the tiresome burden of using your head), I advise you to read some actual history. Come on, dude, you're forty years older than me. This is embarrassing, frankly.

 

[Birdjaguar]

If a certain nation is depriving a population (not a species: what the hell are you talking about?) of certain rights that it asserts to be universal [c.f the Bill of Rights], how else would you describe it, if not undemocratic? "Business as usual"? Does this mean that colonial atrocities were also justified, because they were the "rules of the land"?

If the founders had intended women and slaves to vote, why didn't they include them in the elections of George Washington? that would have been the perfect time to make voting universal. But they didn't.

By 1860 times had changed and attitudes were different. A war was fought and the notion of who could vote changed to include black men. After another 60 years. More changes to how people thought changed and democracy was expanded to include the other half of the population. In the constitution, each state is given the power to determine who gets to vote. The various amendments further clarified who could not be excluded.

 

[gay_Aleks]

damn man it's almost as if the Founders were a bunch of slave-owning misogynists. that'd be crazy

 

[Birdjaguar]

I can't believe I'm talked down by a goddamn CFC moderator that is comparing the historical oppression of women and African Americans to dogs? What kind of mindset is this? Who in the world compares these things in this relation? What's going on in your head? What?

Read the post above yours. while my inclusion was to add a humorous note to the discussion, I do think that dogs are well on their way to a new higher status. I the past they were pretty much limited to homes, yards and streets, we now grant them special status to ride first class on planes, come to the office or restaurants. The end is not yet in sight.

 

[amadeus]

Why do some ideological camps get to claim an infinite number of mulligans, and others, not?

 

[NinjaCow64]

@Birdjaguar I am going to say this as nicely as I can to someone who I mostly get along with this - if you were not a Super Moderator I would have reported those posts for racism. Please consider how the African American and female users of this forum will view one of the highest ranking moderators on this site implicitly comparing them to dogs in a subject as highly charged as racism and then please reconsider your posts.

 

[Birdjaguar]

People have wanted more rights and less oppression for 6000 years. That is irrelevant to the question of whether the US was undemocratic in 1850. The rules of US democracy in 1850 were known and did not include voting rights for slaves, women Indians or dogs.

...This is obscenely wrong if you consider history for a moment (which, unsurprisingly, you do not, and really, all of you centrists seem to live in some other world - however I live in the real world), as there have been examples in the last two hundred years that show people who were not interested in perpetuating oppression - the U.S, for an example, has people like Nat Turner, Frederick Douglass, John Brown, etc, who have fought and died for their liberty. Do they only exist in my '"judgmental mind"? Before making grand claims about "human nature" (not a thing! apart from relieving the tiresome burden of using your head), I advise you to read some actual history. Come on, dude, you're forty years older than me. This is embarrassing, frankly.

This set of exchanges started when you posted that the US was undemocratic in 1850. I merely pointed out that under the rules of democracy in 1850, it was not. You were wrong. You want to make current democratic principles we try to adhere to now retro active. Seems silly to me. With your thinking Classical Athens was undemocratic too as were every government in the past that claimed to be so.

 

[NinjaCow64]

Why do some ideological camps get to claim an infinite number of mulligans, and others, not?

yeah it is stupid how capitalists can go “oh thats crony capitalism” when their bad system inevitably starts to fail every single time

 

[gay_Aleks]

This set of exchanges stated when you posted that the US was undemocratic in 1850. I merely pointed out that under the rules of democracy in 1850, it was not. You were wrong. You want to make current democratic principles we try to adhere to now retro active. Seems silly to me. With your thinking Classical Athens was undemocratic too as were every government in the past that claimed to be so.

Yeah, Classical Athens was undemocratic because only citizens got voting rights. That's an obvious statement to make.

 

[Birdjaguar]

@Birdjaguar I am going to say this as nicely as I can to someone who I mostly get along with this - if you were not a Super Moderator I would have reported those posts for racism. Please consider how the African American and female users of this forum will view one of the highest ranking moderators on this site implicitly comparing them to dogs in a subject as highly charged as racism and then please reconsider your posts.

Thanks. my moderator hat is off when I post in threads. I have done my best to to explain my inclusion of dogs and equivalency to slaves or women was not intended. Your interpretation is your business. I certainly would not be offended if you feel the need to report me.

 

[Akka]

It's nearly like a number of people are trying very hard to illustrate my previous post.
I'd say "thanks", but actually it's more frightening and worrying than funny.

Added irony for it being in a thread about finding way to fight the right. The right must be laughing its arse off at this display.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Yeah, Classical Athens was undemocratic because only citizens got voting rights. That's an obvious statement to make.

Women and slaves could not vote. I'm sure some women were miffed.

 

[Senethro]

I think its unfair to identify the very worst people in previous centuries, and excuse them as "Men of their times". They were hated and reviled in their own time as well. Why are we giving them a free pass?

 

[Narz]

We can't defeat defeat the right cuz we're arguing over dogs from 200 years ago?

 

[Birdjaguar]

I think its unfair to identify the very worst people in previous centuries, and excuse them as "Men of their times". They were hated and reviled in their own time as well. Why are we giving them a free pass?

We are all "men of our times" and women too. Who are you saying were hated and reviled and by whom?

 

[NinjaCow64]

It's nearly like a number of people are trying very hard to illustrate my previous post.
I'd say "thanks", but actually it's more frightening and worrying than funny.

Added irony for it being in a thread about finding way to fight the right. The right must be laughing its arse off at this display.

Yeah its a real shame that the winner of this thread will determine the next united states president, a real bummer that we couldn’t get our act together, fellow Leftist.

I assume you are a Leftist also, da? Certainly you’re not doing that tedious thing where you give advice to your opponents that you hate. That would be silly and a waste of everyone’s time.

 

[gay_Aleks]

We are all "men of our times" and women too. Who are you saying were hated and reviled and by whom?

Take your time, but here's some reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lloyd_Garrison#Controversy

Garrison became famous as one of the most articulate, as well as most radical, opponents of slavery. His approach to emancipation stressed "moral suasion," non-violence, and passive resistance. While some other abolitionists of the time favored gradual emancipation, Garrison argued for the "immediate and complete emancipation of all slaves." On July 4, 1854, he publicly burned a copy of the Constitution, condemning it as "a Covenant with Death, an Agreement with Hell," referring to the compromise that had written slavery into the Constitution.[26]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)

Brown was the leading exponent of violence in the American abolitionist movement:[6]: 426  he believed that violence was necessary to end American slavery, since decades of peaceful efforts had failed.[3][4][7] Brown said repeatedly that in working to free the enslaved he was following the Golden Rule,[8][9] as well as the U.S. Declaration of Independence, which states that "all men are created equal".[10][11][12][13]: 721 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Tubman

 

[Birdjaguar]

Take your time, but here's some reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Lloyd_Garrison#Controversy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Brown_(abolitionist)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Tubman

Thanks. You seem to think that I ignore that there was an anti slavery movement in the US or that I am ignorant of it. Not at all on ether. Discontent over existing governmental or economic systems can be found everywhere all through time. How does this discontent and hatred of the system by some/many/most change the fact that in 1850 by law, neither slaves nor women could vote?