USA so called golden age, ca 1945 to 70s seems a myth to me?

If you're at an uncontrolled crossing and stupid enough to try to beat the train, yes, it's a credible risk. Anyone can have a vehicle malfunction at the worst possible time.
What I’m referring to more is the likelihood of such a thing happening, from which a cursory search of the accident rate at grade-level crossings seems to have declined precipitously since the 1970’s. I wouldn’t chalk it all up to improved car reliability but I would imagine would at least be a factor. :)
 
Even odds? The thing I said?

Alright, you do you. Keep going with that whole "they're at best equally bad" thing.
Oh, they're different in the ways they suck.

That crap you quote for me? That's you putting words in my mouth. Again. Which seems to be you doing you.
 
“Mr. Phillips, Mr. Phillips!”

“Yeeeeees, Leroy?”

“This woman wants to apply for a credit card.”

“Splendid! Please show her husband into my office.”

“Uhh, sir, this woman is unaccompanied.”

“Oooooh! So he will be delayed. Very well, she may wait in the lobby until his arrival.”

“No, sir, the woman is applying herself.”

“A woman? Applying for a credit card on her own? Fetch the smelling salts, I think I need to sit down…”
 
What I’m referring to more is the likelihood of such a thing happening, from which a cursory search of the accident rate at grade-level crossings seems to have declined precipitously since the 1970’s. I wouldn’t chalk it all up to improved car reliability but I would imagine would at least be a factor. :)
Happened to a gf

She was fine car was demolished.

But to your earlier point times are definitely overall better now, but some things are worse and those worse things are impeding the rate of positive change and occasionally causing substantive negative change.

One of those bad things is the establishment of government subsidized oligarchy. There were industry favorites and various problems before, but during the “golden age” if you wanted to rule the republic from the shadows you had to haul ass. Now you just have to get enough money and the government is printing money to help you sustain your power.
 
I agree. I think there was more political violence in the '60s-early '70s than there is today. The Weather Underground disbanded in 1977, but I think you could maybe go all the way up to the MOVE bombing in 1985 as maybe the last "60s-style" act of political violence. Of course the violence around the Civil Rights movement and the Vietnam War get "above the fold" coverage whenever anyone talks about that era, but if you're queer, you might throw the Stonewall Riots and the White Night Riots after the assassination of Harvey Milk into the mix. Between JFK in 1963 and Milk in 1979, I wonder how many important social and political figures were assassinated?

(In retrospect, the Rodney King riots in 1992 feel to me more like a precursor of the George Floyd demonstrations than it does an extension of the riots of the '60s. The Oklahoma City bombing and the Unabomber feel disconnected, to me, from any larger movement or moment in history. For me, the Oklahoma City bombing was so jarring in part because it seemed to just come out of nowhere.)

Violence aside, I think the divisions around the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights movement, and 2nd-Wave Feminism in the '60s-'70s was at least as polarizing as political & social issues today. My own family had a moment of dissension before I was born - my mother and her father didn't talk for about a year, according to family lore - and I imagine a lot of other people's did, too. I remember Willie Nelson saying in an interview not too long ago, "in the '60s, the major difference between folk music and country music was how you felt about the Vietnam War." :lol:
The only jarring about the OKC bombing in 1995 was the casualty list. The context was the parallel ring rise of gun culture and the rebirth of the white nationalist movement. Three years earlier at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, where a gun nut/white nationalist refused to hand over illegal firearms. It ended after an 11-day standoff with several people died, then came Waco and the Branch Davidians, where nearly 100 people died, again to illegal firearms. Timothy McVeigh, who planted the bomb in OKC, cited both incidents as motivators t r his slaughter if 167 people, including 19 children too young for kindergarten.

All go back to the creation of the Ku Klux Klan after the Civil War and the continued genocide if tribal nation people.
 
The only jarring about the OKC bombing in 1995 was the casualty list. The context was the parallel ring rise of gun culture and the rebirth of the white nationalist movement. Three years earlier at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, where a gun nut/white nationalist refused to hand over illegal firearms. It ended after an 11-day standoff with several people died, then came Waco and the Branch Davidians, where nearly 100 people died, again to illegal firearms. Timothy McVeigh, who planted the bomb in OKC, cited both incidents as motivators t r his slaughter if 167 people, including 19 children too young for kindergarten.

All go back to the creation of the Ku Klux Klan after the Civil War and the continued genocide if tribal nation people.
In June 1990, Byerly attempted to use the sawed-off shotgun charge as leverage to get Weaver to act as an informant for his investigation into Aryan Nations.[20]: 13, 22  Weaver refused to become a "snitch", and the ATF filed the gun charges in June 1990.

at the very least, please inform yourself of relevant facts
 
Not to come off as endorsing either, but the heavy-handed tactics of the FBI at who were relatively minor nuisances certainly didn’t help quell that kind of violence and “militia” movement. Certainly could also apply to the bombing of the MOVE people in Philadelphia too.
 
The only jarring about the OKC bombing in 1995 was the casualty list. The context was the parallel ring rise of gun culture and the rebirth of the white nationalist movement. Three years earlier at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, where a gun nut/white nationalist refused to hand over illegal firearms. It ended after an 11-day standoff with several people died, then came Waco and the Branch Davidians, where nearly 100 people died, again to illegal firearms. Timothy McVeigh, who planted the bomb in OKC, cited both incidents as motivators t r his slaughter if 167 people, including 19 children too young for kindergarten.

All go back to the creation of the Ku Klux Klan after the Civil War and the continued genocide if tribal nation people.
Ruby Ridge was an entrapment job and assassination of "a little mountain racist's" son, friend, and wife.

It was a goddamned travesty of justice perpetrated by killboners and evil men. But we choose who deserves that sort of thing, often enough. Look at the Floyd memes. Same people today as then. Just a slightly different sample, I guess. But the sample is everything to them.
 
I’ll give you the intersectional argument to victims of the killbonerans but the groups who populate them and the groups who are their targets isn’t so fluid.

Obviously no one deserves to be assassinated like that, “not even” a white supremacist dealing in illegal arms and especially not his friend and family. (And dog?) but social-koolaid drinker anti government white nationalists dealing in illegal arms to more committed koolaidaholic white nationalists are part of the entire problem and, themselves, a root source of race-based killboner-Americans as police.
 
That is how I would start to build the argument of deserving it.

The groups are not fluid. They're rigid*. But they're the same damned type of person in both.

*ha! oh... ew. But yea. The dog, too. That's also a within context thing.
 
Ha! I would argue the same about a social-koolaid drinker anti government marxist professor :lol:
 
That is how I would start to build the argument of deserving it.

The groups are not fluid. They're rigid. But they're the same damned type of person in both.
Type of person being victim or type of person being “hey I can join this group and get away with murder” or type of person who gets so carried away with their paranoid vision of protecting society but are protected from their crimes of murder, anyway?

Don’t you dare answer “yes” ; )
 
Ok, then: ...and more? The silently approving. "The White Moderate" echoes.
 
Oh, they're different in the ways they suck.

That crap you quote for me? That's you putting words in my mouth. Again. Which seems to be you doing you.
i don't see any words but your own being put anywhere.

you wrote you believe both parties are bad. both obstruct, both are corrupt, both are misrepresented by the other aisle. making an equivalency, if not materially, but in regards to value.

gorbles questions whether republicans are being misrepresented, and made a note about it. (they conduct policy & vote for the things liberals are criticizing; eg abortion stuff).

you didn't elaborate.

so he had to go by what you had written. he correctly rephrased what you wrote. you confirmed it was what you meant.

if you think moderate republicans are being misrepresented, present what they are. if you think you are being misquoted, present what you mean.

like, ok, you feel this happens often. but you have a tendency to write evasively, so people have to go by your concrete beliefs, when you present them. here you presented something concrete, neat (even with the weird tv stuff), and then immediately went evasive when prompted. idk about gorbles' specific word-putting, but "it's not what i mean, and i won't tell you!" is not a reason to be frustrated with people not knowing what you mean.

i often don't know what you mean. had to read "Right, right. Those people, I'm sure!" like four times before it got clear you were mocking people/gorbles for not substantiating while making it impossible for people/gorbles to substantiate.
 
Last edited:
Evasively. You're calling my posts on this page... evasive?

Edit: Maybe over years of repetition, certain conversations are pretty pointless to source for. But here, for you, I'll waste my time. Top page of CNN yesterday. Welcome to Illinois. All the time, but especially election season.
 
Last edited:
Ha! I would argue the same about a social-koolaid drinker anti government marxist professor :lol:
That guy will continue to take an endowment sponsored paycheck and give his best students Bs for A work when he feels threatened intellectually. But ultimately he will only support the system in its current form.
 
Edit: Maybe over years of repetition, certain conversations are pretty pointless to source for. But here, for you, I'll waste my time. Top page of CNN yesterday. Welcome to Illinois. All the time, but especially election season.
Thanks for this, really kinda helps nail the whole repetition:
The article said:
Democrats have spent weeks attacking Republican midterm candidates with television ads about abortion. Some of the ads have been misleading.

Many of the Democratic ads accurately describe their Republican targets’ strict anti-abortion positions.
 
Read something about inflation today.

1946 year after the war real wages went up 20% apparently outstripping inflation.

From memory wages also doubled in the war years. Other reason was tax rates which hit 94% on income over 200k in 1944.
 
It's more of a real phenomenon if one was used to a party being legislatively dominant, like most of the period in question for this thread. If never felt so good if your community wasn't part of the in. Such as if it were a draft board magnet

Don't mistake me, I do not lament the end of midcentury bipartisanship, which was built among other things around a consensus of excluding black people from the political system.

I'm just saying it is a real way in which polarization has risen.
 
Is that something we think about as a really credible risk today?

This still happens all the time today lol. Just recently a cop left a woman handcuffed in a car and left it on the tracks to be hit by a train.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom