Politics

Hogpatrol said:

View attachment 353291

Click to expand...

I remember, but the difference is he didn't have to provide entertainment 24/7 like the clowns who play "journalists" on TV today. I think it all started to change when CBS pretty much forced him to resign in favor of "I make the news" Dan Rather. For those who don't know, Cronkite was an embedded reporter in the European theater during WWII.

1dirthawker said:

ray B,

man, that is a stupid idea. give money to everyone over age 18, hmmmm, who is gonna pay for that?

Click to expand...

No

I posted a long response to dirthaker but for some reason it didn't post. I explained how it was the welfare system that allowed the most personal freedom and was the cheapest of the "safety nets". It didn't post, but then it's likely that those that choose not to see are the most blind.

Interesting article on slavery and it's past and present. It's been part of peoples culture since the earliest times...

https://caldronpool.com/there-are-m...ives-matter-only-when-the-oppressor-is-white/

Speaking of slavery in the US, it's too bad that the fanatics on both sides pushed the issue to the war. given another decade or so and market forces would have ended slavery in the US. The slave economy is not significantly different from what the left-wing of the DemonRat party is currently proposing. the slave owner had an investment in each slave and it was in the best/business interests of the owner to keep each slave as highly valued as possible. the stories about mistreatment were mostly in the imagination and dreams of New England preacher's children who then wrote books about their visions. There were also regulations prohibiting the separation of families, particularly children from their parents. The slave provided labor for the owner and in return the owner provided everything that was deemed necessary to maintain the value, health and productivity of the slave. This included not only food, clothing, housing and medical care but also the security of home and community.

The reason slavery would have ended was two fold. First the southern states prior to 1850 were the "rich" states compared to the northern ones. Up until 1850 the worlds economy was agricultural and the South was much better suited for crops than the rocky and cold North. But along came the industrial revolution and the North eclipsed the South in wealth, thus changing the South from a position of economic leader to straggler. Secondly, the North had learned that there was plenty of people willing to work for a wage that was far less than the purchase and upkeep costs of slaves. Even a plantation owners were seeing that it would be cheaper for them to hire "migrants" at various times of the year, pay them a wage based on supply and demand rather than union contracts, and save all of the money previously spent on maintaining the slaves. The only problem was that they HAD the slaves and the investment in them. It wasn't that they could sell them and get their money back. Large scale slavery had virtually ended everywhere else and the South was behind the curve on learning it.


It is my opinion that if the firebrands and do-gooders had taken a tranquilizer and let things process normally, slavery in the US would have ended on its own no later than 1880. the plantations would have hired the former slaves for wages and the former slaves could have then paid for their needs without the paternalistic owners. there would have been no Civil War, the Blacks could have gotten off of the lowest rung of the economic ladder and by now they would be considered no different than any other ethnicity.

So compare the platform of the DemonRat party with the former Plantation owner and voters, then look at how the Plantation owner and descendants of the slaves. I think that both, given a choice would pick a different ending.

spike.t said:

And @tigris115 as you believe no slaves were involved in building the pyramids... the Romans definitely had plenty ....so I hope these piss takes are ok

Click to expand...

Of for sure, dw. If you really want to demolish anything related to racism and slavery, there would be nothing left, especially because like it or not, people in the past had different perspectives.

Take the Equestrian Statue of Theodore Roosevelt for instance. Back in the mid-late 2010s, you had people calling for it to be removed on accounts of it displaying an African & Native American in a manner that glorified racial hierarchy.

The museum's response was actually pretty mature, they didn't remove the statue, but let it be and provided extra context for the artist's direction and the history of Theodore Roosevelt and the museum's race relations in a new exhibition and on the AMNH website which you can access here. They're really open about the racial views of both Theodore Roosevelt, the country at the time, especially our romanticized view of the Native Americans whom we bought low, and the AMNH(Hell, they had a literal eugenics exhibition).

Now the reason I bring up this specific statue was that while shooting the shit with some amigos on Discord, one of them shared a tweet of some absolute clown (not gonna share it here, I consider that bad behavior) saying that we should replace that statue with one of ANMH 5027, the museum's flagship Tyrannosaurus specimen. We all thought it was dumb as hell since, despite the statue being a display of antiquated philosophies, the man was, among other things...
1. The founding father of America's National Parks, designating over 230 million acres of American land as protected areas.
2. One of the founding fathers of the modern conservation movement. Founder of both the Boone and Crocket Club and the New York Zoological Society (now the WCS).
3. One of the great figureheads of the AMNH (His father was on the committee that founded the damned thing)
4. A totally unapologetic progressive who put the American people first and stood up to big business because he knew it was right
5. One of (not 100% sure if THE first) American Presidents to invite a black man to the White House to dine with him as an equal.
6. A pretty major supporter of women's suffrage in the 1910s.

Honestly, if the NYC Parks Department really had to or wanted to replace the statue, I'd move the current one inside to be the centerpiece of that new hall they made and put a new statue that looks like this \/.

I'm very happy with the AMNH not just trying to appease the uneducated clowns of Twitter and I applaud them for not just trying to sweep everything under the rug. It requires hella stones to be this open about who you are and I wish more institutions would do this as, even if it was likely mandated, it feels genuine.

Also, on a side note, considering the T. rex in their new exhibition, if they had a T. rex statue at the same place, it would look Godawful by all standards. I'm sorry but I know at least 10 randos online who could make a better dinosaur in their sleep than whoever birthed this abomination.

Wonder who will take on the roll of Robespierre.



https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/12/us/minneapolis-city-council-resolution-police-reform/index.html

Minneapolis City Council takes another step to 'end the current policing system'
By Aaron Cooper, Melissa Alonso and Jason Hanna, CNN



Updated 1:46 PM ET, Fri June 12, 2020

Wheels said:

Wonder who will take on the roll of Robespierre.

Click to expand...

Can Grigori Rasputin be far behind?

jeanes said:

I remember, but the difference is he didn't have to provide entertainment 24/7 like the clowns who play "journalists" on TV today. I think it all started to change when CBS pretty much forced him to resign in favor of "I make the news" Dan Rather. For those who don't know, Cronkite was an embedded reporter in the European theater during WWII.

Click to expand...

Walter's big error was in making the claim that the Vietnam conflict was lost and that we should seek diplomatic closure.

Wheels said:

Wonder who will take on the roll of Robespierre.

Click to expand...

Raz!

Décio said:

Raz!

Click to expand...

I figured he would want to be the guillotine operator

I do not get all of the hand wringing going on right now over how different cities/states are choosing to handle the riots. States are the "laboratories of democracy." Regardless of whether we support how it is being handled, it is ultimately a local decision that should be made by local governments, free from overreach by the federal government.

I wouldn't consider anyone's retail business that was burned down or destroyed, a "Laboratory of Democracy"

The destruction of a person's life and livelihood, is not acceptable, simply because a mayor, or, Governor, is a spineless Liberal going along with the crowd.

Herd mentality of the Liberal leaders.

Saul said:

I do not get all of the hand wringing going on right now over how different cities/states are choosing to handle the riots. States are the "laboratories of democracy." Regardless of whether we support how it is being handled, it is ultimately a local decision that should be made by local governments, free from overreach by the federal government.

Click to expand...

Brent in Az said:

I wouldn't consider anyone's retail business that was burned down or destroyed, a "Laboratory of Democracy"

The destruction of a person's life and livelihood, is not acceptable, simply because a mayor, or, Governor, is a spineless Liberal going along with the crowd.

Herd mentality of the Liberal leaders.

Click to expand...

If they dislike how their elected officials handle a situation, they can vote them out or move to a different state. I would rather have some businesses burned then to have the federal government exert even more influence over the states.

It would be wrong for just one agency to get all of the blame.

Brent in Az said:

I wouldn't consider anyone's retail business that was burned down or destroyed, a "Laboratory of Democracy"

The destruction of a person's life and livelihood, is not acceptable, simply because a mayor, or, Governor, is a spineless Liberal going along with the crowd.

Herd mentality of the Liberal leaders.

Click to expand...

That's the trouble with the lawlessness. Nobody is held responsible. Maybe if the politicians that run these cities were held personally liable, they'd be more inclined to enforce the laws.