Conservatives are more likely to be friends with liberals than vice versa

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

4 hours ago, MissKombucha said:

1) please research the terms fascist and dictator - usually throughout history said rulers didn’t want the public to maintain their inalienable rights of free speech and the right to bear arms. The Democratic Party seems to be the ones with those issues ..

2) points 1-3 are correct. Doesn’t make anything less palatable but there’s a lot of research to confirm those points 

Irish people were indentured servants who did manual labor as punishment for crimes or debts to be repaid. They still had legal rights both in the UK and in the U.S. and were not subject to brutal torture on a daily basis nor generations of rape and murder... Their children were not forced into slavery by proxy of their parents being indentured servants, let alone their progeny for generations and generations. Hell, some of them paid off their debts and went on to own black slaves   

They were arguing that because Irish people had to do forced labor as well, they had it just as bad as black africans in the atlantic slave trade, which were subject to hereditary chattel slavery, and therefore white slave holders should be cut some slack, because what they did wasn't so much racist as just anti-humanist   Also pointed out the idea that since Irish people received slurs, that it meant they were racist against Irish people, but I pointed out the slur they were talking to was actually saying "You're not as BAD as actual black people"  

#2 is absolutely false. White people ARE responsible for slavery, the existence of Irish indentured servants, slaves, w.e doesnt mean "oh, white people get a pass because they aren't the only ones who did it!"  

#3 is also gross   You weren't here for this conversation, but as I explained then, race is a social construct and has historical origins in studies of different subsects of human class like Mongoloid, Negroid, and Caucasoid. The people most often referenced in this "people in africa enslaved other africans" are actually not what we would call "Black", because "black" literally began as a reference to dark skinned "negroids" from Africa around the time of this slave trade and was created as a way to refer to slaves, not just anyone with dark skin. That's why middle eastern people arent necessarily "black" and Irish, Italian, etc.  people weren't "white" for a long time. 

These Africans were barbary pirates who were ottomans and turkish mostly. They weren't "negroids" and are not black people, so the conflation of "africans enslaved africans" when some africans are WHITE and some are BLACK is a deceptive argument that relies on people assuming "All Africans are the equivalent of African American Black people" which was even LESS true during the actual slave trade. To this day, there are Afro-Turkish people who would be "black" colloquially because they are descendents of this slave trade and racial mixing. Their enslavers were not people who looked like them, just like white people did not look like their slaves.

The power of research!

[MissKombucha 308]

37 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Irish people were indentured servants who did manual labor as punishment for crimes or debts to be repaid. They still had legal rights both in the UK and in the U.S. and were not subject to brutal torture on a daily basis nor generations of rape and murder... Their children were not forced into slavery by proxy of their parents being indentured servants, let alone their progeny for generations and generations. Hell, some of them paid off their debts and went on to own black slaves   

They were arguing that because Irish people had to do forced labor as well, they had it just as bad as black africans in the atlantic slave trade, which were subject to hereditary chattel slavery, and therefore white slave holders should be cut some slack, because what they did wasn't so much racist as just anti-humanist   Also pointed out the idea that since Irish people received slurs, that it meant they were racist against Irish people, but I pointed out the slur they were talking to was actually saying "You're not as BAD as actual black people"  

#2 is absolutely false. White people ARE responsible for slavery, the existence of Irish indentured servants, slaves, w.e doesnt mean "oh, white people get a pass because they aren't the only ones who did it!"  

#3 is also gross   You weren't here for this conversation, but as I explained then, race is a social construct and has historical origins in studies of different subsects of human class like Mongoloid, Negroid, and Caucasoid. The people most often referenced in this "people in africa enslaved other africans" are actually not what we would call "Black", because "black" literally began as a reference to dark skinned "negroids" from Africa around the time of this slave trade and was created as a way to refer to slaves, not just anyone with dark skin. That's why middle eastern people arent necessarily "black" and Irish, Italian, etc.  people weren't "white" for a long time. 

These Africans were barbary pirates who were ottomans and turkish mostly. They weren't "negroids" and are not black people, so the conflation of "africans enslaved africans" when some africans are WHITE and some are BLACK is a deceptive argument that relies on people assuming "All Africans are the equivalent of African American Black people" which was even LESS true during the actual slave trade. To this day, there are Afro-Turkish people who would be "black" colloquially because they are descendents of this slave trade and racial mixing. Their enslavers were not people who looked like them, just like white people did not look like their slaves.

The power of research!

1) I don’t know why it’s an Olympic battle to see who had it worse but .. Irish slaves were considered far more disposable than African slaves. 1) they were far less equipped to handle outdoor labor conditions due to their lack of melanin and genetically propensity to fight off malaria, so outdoor labor was usually an absolutely death sentence. The return on the investment of an Irish “laborer” (worth 5 Sterling) was far lower than the return granted by an African “laborer” (worth 50 Sterling) A big part of the issue was that it was perceived that Africans were not tainted with the hater stain of Catholic theology. Now we can choose to dissect terms like indentured servitude and slavery but the reality is that although one was “contractually based” terms of the contracts were often neglected - as there are records of “indentured servants” forced into the contract as opposed to autonomously providing their services. A spade is a spade and the abuse of power was still a factor in the relationship between those who utilized Irish service. The legacy and affects of such practices may have differed greatly but the reality is - a group of humans thought another unequal and utilized and abused them for their services. If we’d like to go on about a history of slavery affecting Europeans , maybe examine the Slavic trade by Spanish Muslims during the 9th century, and how that actually tied into the development of the word SLAVE.

 

the last sentence ties into the accuracy of all races holding some responsibility for the uses of “human cattle”. To credit WHITES as responsible for slavery is inaccurate as 1) not all Europeans engaged or profited from slavery (point the finger at the Dutch, French, Portuguese, Spanish, English) 2) I don’t know if you were trying to blame Europeans for the development of slavery but that’s GROSSLY inaccurate since the behavior existed before the establishment of lost European identities as was established in several cultures globally pre-European contact

slavery in Africa existed beyond whah is being discussed as the African slave trade. Although the treatment and reason of/for slavery differed cross-culturally on the continent , the practice existed in most of the major kingdoms particularly along the coasts. The Ethiopians, Afars, Somalians, it existed in Ghana, Mali, Senegal etc etc 

 

You’re championing research but omitting specific points of these tales to benefit your argument and your political affiliation. Bust honestly .. screw the past and focus on the future. I don’t see how this has anything to do with the main conservation held .. because at the end of the day does a conversation of the past even matter because we’ve become so divided that even liberals and conservatives argue about the past when the focus should be on the future .. but whatever it all falls on deaf ears

[ItsTommyBitch 12,640]

1 minute ago, MissKombucha said:

1) I don’t know why it’s an Olympic battle to see who had it worse but .. Irish slaves were considered far more disposable than African slaves. 1) they were far less equipped to handle outdoor labor conditions due to their lack of melanin and genetically propensity to fight off malaria, so outdoor labor was usually an absolutely death sentence. The return on the investment of an Irish “laborer” (worth 5 Sterling) was far lower than the return granted by an African “laborer” (worth 50 Sterling) A big part of the issue was that it was perceived that Africans were not tainted with the hater stain of Catholic theology. Now we can choose to dissect terms like indentured servitude and slavery but the reality is that although one was “contractually based” terms of the contracts were often neglected - as there are records of “indentured servants” forced into the contract as opposed to autonomously providing their services. A spade is a spade and the abuse of power was still a factor in the relationship between those who utilized Irish service. The legacy and affects of such practices may have differed greatly but the reality is - a group of humans thought another unequal and utilized and abused them for their services. If we’d like to go on about a history of slavery affecting Europeans , maybe examine the Slavic trade by Spanish Muslims during the 9th century, and how that actually tied into the development of the word SLAVE.

 

the last sentence ties into the accuracy of all races holding some responsibility for the uses of “human cattle”. To credit WHITES as responsible for slavery is inaccurate as 1) not all Europeans engaged or profited from slavery (point the finger at the Dutch, French, Portuguese, Spanish, English) 2) I don’t know if you were trying to blame Europeans for the development of slavery but that’s GROSSLY inaccurate since the behavior existed before the establishment of lost European identities as was established in several cultures globally pre-European contact

slavery in Africa existed beyond whah is being discussed as the African slave trade. Although the treatment and reason of/for slavery differed cross-culturally on the continent , the practice existed in most of the major kingdoms particularly along the coasts. The Ethiopians, Afars, Somalians, it existed in Ghana, Mali, Senegal etc etc 

 

You’re championing research but omitting specific points of these tales to benefit your argument and your political affiliation. Bust honestly .. screw the past and focus on the future. I don’t see how this has anything to do with the main conservation held .. because at the end of the day does a conversation of the past even matter because we’ve become so divided that even liberals and conservatives argue about the past when the focus should be on the future .. but whatever it all falls on deaf ears

Whiteness is a social construct that is especially important in understanding how America specifically was built. The entire concept of "whiteness" and "blackness" revolves around racism and class disparity between slaves and slave owners itself, so yes by definition "white people" are responsible for the slavery perpetuated by "white people" against "black people", that's the origin of the term and the conceptualization. The terms are intrinsically related to each other and can't be dismissed so easily. 

Dutch people, French people, Portuguese people, Spanish people, Italian people, Irish people, etc. were NOT considered white people, they identified as Dutch, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, etc. for hundreds of years, and it wasn't until around the 19th and 20th century that a blanket "all europeans are white" mentality swept popular understanding, though the term had existed for hundreds of years at that time. To this day, many people still identify as that before "white" even though many western audiences would label all Europeans as "white" on first glance.

Pointing out "not all european born people were responsible for the atlantic slave trade, but many non white people participated in other slave trades" does not mean "Modern White people are not responsible for the Atlantic Slave Trade" - that is the point the user was making, and it's wrong. The Atlantic Slave trade was especially impactful in the Americas, but it affected the UK, Portugal, etc. and every place in the world has lasting effects from that institution that all of them must make amends for.The UK doesn't get a pass just because it wasn't America. Just in 2018 Portugal decided it wanted to create a memorial for its part in the slave trade, its an ongoing process that a multitude of people under the "white" umbrella colloquially have work to do to repair. So, I wholly reject a sort of "wasnt slavery just bad in America? I'm british and racism doesn't seem to be as big of a problem here!" mentality (and yes, this user has made this argument before We've been having these discussions for like 7 years, I kid you not.)

The idea behind "yes white people are responsible for slavery" isn't that all slavery everywhere in history has only been perpetuated by white people against brown and black people, that's obviously not true and race is too messy and contrived to make such a claim,  it's that the specific effects of lingering racism against who we would call "black people" as well as  "african-americans" are related to especially the Atlantic Slave Trade in the West. If you want to argue that "slavery" as its used as a shorthand today should instead always be specific and all conversations must be "Historically White Americans, British people, French people, Portuguese people, and Spanish people who specifically participated in the Atlantic Slave Trade are responsible for the effects of that slave trade and no others" that's fine, but it still concedes that they are responsible And you must realize that those people would all be identifiable arguably as "white" in our modern understanding of race so its a moot clarification in terms of a discussion.

If you want to suggest that Spanish Muslims who perpetuated slavery on the slavs (who weren't considered white either btw, even hundreds of years later  ) should give reparations to modern slavic people, I say power to you! I'm not making exceptions on who slavery has hurt and who it has benefitted. 

And no, Europe didn't invent slavery (though again Europe =/= whiteness inherently), I never claimed that, nor am I blaming them for anything.

Finally, I'm not defending indentured servitude or its conditions or lessening how dehumanizing it was, it is a form of slavery afterall and is recognized as such. I am objecting to the suggestion that its existence means that all forms of slavery have had the same effects in modern society and thus rather than hold anyone to account, we should just all pat ourselves on the back, forget it and move on  

Modern Human Trafficking is a huge issue even in 2020. It is a form of slavery for sure.

But it isn't typically the kind of slavery that results in hundreds of years of institutional oppression, economic disparity, racial aggression and hostility, discrimination, and persisting violence. Similarly, Irish indentured servants, horrific treatment and all, do not have Irish descendants in America due to hundreds of years of rape and slavery who today are seen as sub human or lesser citizens by a percentage of the population, who cannot get jobs because people look down on them and see them as dangerous and untrustworthy, who live in ghettos due to forced segregation and tribalism, having an absolute less chance of success in this country because of it.

THAT is the implication of the "irish people were slaves too, why do we only care about black slaves in the West!" mindset - that their situations were comparable then and are comparable now.They are not.

We can't create a good future without cleaning up the mistakes of the past to your second point. That is evident in the existing racial hostility in many places in the world especially America. Black people can't just be expected to be second class citizens because of historical and continuing oppression and say "hey maybe it'll get better in the future" without actually fighting to make things better

[MissKombucha 308]

21 minutes ago, ItsTommyBitch said:

Whiteness is a social construct that is especially important in understanding how America specifically was built. The entire concept of "whiteness" and "blackness" revolves around racism and class disparity between slaves and slave owners itself, so yes by definition "white people" are responsible for the slavery perpetuated by "white people" against "black people", that's the origin of the term and the conceptualization. The terms are intrinsically related to each other and can't be dismissed so easily. 

Dutch people, French people, Portuguese people, Spanish people, Italian people, Irish people, etc. were NOT considered white people, they identified as Dutch, French, Portuguese, Spanish, Italian, etc. for hundreds of years, and it wasn't until around the 19th and 20th century that a blanket "all europeans are white" mentality swept popular understanding, though the term had existed for hundreds of years at that time. To this day, many people still identify as that before "white" even though many western audiences would label all Europeans as "white" on first glance.

Pointing out "not all european born people were responsible for the atlantic slave trade, but many non white people participated in other slave trades" does not mean "Modern White people are not responsible for the Atlantic Slave Trade" - that is the point the user was making, and it's wrong. The Atlantic Slave trade was especially impactful in the Americas, but it affected the UK, Portugal, etc. and every place in the world has lasting effects from that institution that all of them must make amends for.The UK doesn't get a pass just because it wasn't America. Just in 2018 Portugal decided it wanted to create a memorial for its part in the slave trade, its an ongoing process that a multitude of people under the "white" umbrella colloquially have work to do to repair. So, I wholly reject a sort of "wasnt slavery just bad in America? I'm british and racism doesn't seem to be as big of a problem here!" mentality (and yes, this user has made this argument before We've been having these discussions for like 7 years, I kid you not.)

The idea behind "yes white people are responsible for slavery" isn't that all slavery everywhere in history has only been perpetuated by white people against brown and black people, that's obviously not true and race is too messy and contrived to make such a claim,  it's that the specific effects of lingering racism against who we would call "black people" as well as  "african-americans" are related to especially the Atlantic Slave Trade in the West. If you want to argue that "slavery" as its used as a shorthand today should instead always be specific and all conversations must be "Historically White Americans, British people, French people, Portuguese people, and Spanish people who specifically participated in the Atlantic Slave Trade are responsible for the effects of that slave trade and no others" that's fine, but it still concedes that they are responsible And you must realize that those people would all be identifiable arguably as "white" in our modern understanding of race so its a moot clarification in terms of a discussion.

If you want to suggest that Spanish Muslims who perpetuated slavery on the slavs (who weren't considered white either btw, even hundreds of years later  ) should give reparations to modern slavic people, I say power to you! I'm not making exceptions on who slavery has hurt and who it has benefitted. 

And no, Europe didn't invent slavery (though again Europe =/= whiteness inherently), I never claimed that, nor am I blaming them for anything.

Finally, I'm not defending indentured servitude or its conditions or lessening how dehumanizing it was, it is a form of slavery afterall and is recognized as such. I am objecting to the suggestion that its existence means that all forms of slavery have had the same effects in modern society and thus rather than hold anyone to account, we should just all pat ourselves on the back, forget it and move on  

Modern Human Trafficking is a huge issue even in 2020. It is a form of slavery for sure.

But it isn't typically the kind of slavery that results in hundreds of years of institutional oppression, economic disparity, racial aggression and hostility, discrimination, and persisting violence. Similarly, Irish indentured servants, horrific treatment and all, do not have Irish descendants in America due to hundreds of years of rape and slavery who today are seen as sub human or lesser citizens by a percentage of the population, who cannot get jobs because people look down on them and see them as dangerous and untrustworthy, who live in ghettos due to forced segregation and tribalism, having an absolute less chance of success in this country because of it.

THAT is the implication of the "irish people were slaves too, why do we only care about black slaves in the West!" mindset - that their situations were comparable then and are comparable now.They are not.

We can't create a good future without cleaning up the mistakes of the past to your second point. That is evident in the existing racial hostility in many places in the world especially America. Black people can't just be expected to be second class citizens because of historical and continuing oppression and say "hey maybe it'll get better in the future" without actually fighting to make things better

Why couldn’t your original argument be as sophisticated as the one you just brought now ?! 😭👌🏽 I have an issue with the blanket terms and statements because they disregard complex human histories and do not capture the nuances of what reality is. 
I’ll say I’ll disagree with your last point about cleaning the messes of the past to create a brighter future - because at that point with the predation so many human cultures causes to others almost all human societies would be caught in a loop of repetitions and it could be a greater negative if some old wounds are reopened and salted ...

[POKERPOP 45]

The pole lives up to the two different sides perfectly.

Conservatives lay low. 

Liberals run their rampant mouths. 

Politics 101,, okehh 

[StrawberryBlond 15,555]

@ItsTommyBitch

I notice you just focus on irrelevant arguments on how white is a social construct when every normal person calls race on skin colour and genetics. We're not here to discuss technicalities and semantics, that solves nothing. It's crazy talk to me when people start bringing up race being a social construct, it's akin to flat earth theory in my mind. It wasn't about white being a social construct back then, it was about seeing another group of people as being inferior in some way. People can get discriminated and exploited for all different reasons, race is just one of many. Plus, it's not even remotely relevant to what's happening now with race. Talk about the present situation, not slavery from hundreds of years ago. It doesn't matter if it had reverberations, let's just talk about dealing with those reverberations in the present day but less focus on the past. It's easy to criticise the past because you can't change it. I'm a feminist and you don't see me going on and on about how women couldn't vote years ago. We've got the vote now, so let's move on and address issues affecting women in the present day. Why can't you do the same for race?

I also notice that you've stopped replying to me. It's always as I hit my stride with my best arguments that my detractors pull away. It's always the same. I at least hope my heartfelt confession had its desired effect even if you won't acknowledge it.

[Economy 52,842]

1 hour ago, StrawberryBlond said:

@ItsTommyBitch

I notice you just focus on irrelevant arguments on how white is a social construct when every normal person calls race on skin colour and genetics. We're not here to discuss technicalities and semantics, that solves nothing. It's crazy talk to me when people start bringing up race being a social construct, it's akin to flat earth theory in my mind. It wasn't about white being a social construct back then, it was about seeing another group of people as being inferior in some way. People can get discriminated and exploited for all different reasons, race is just one of many. Plus, it's not even remotely relevant to what's happening now with race. Talk about the present situation, not slavery from hundreds of years ago. It doesn't matter if it had reverberations, let's just talk about dealing with those reverberations in the present day but less focus on the past. It's easy to criticise the past because you can't change it. I'm a feminist and you don't see me going on and on about how women couldn't vote years ago. We've got the vote now, so let's move on and address issues affecting women in the present day. Why can't you do the same for race?

I also notice that you've stopped replying to me. It's always as I hit my stride with my best arguments that my detractors pull away. It's always the same. I at least hope my heartfelt confession had its desired effect even if you won't acknowledge it.

I always say this regardless of what problem were discussing. What matters is now not the issues ppl who aren't around anymore caused or went thru

 

This is why when issues like black reperations come up I prefer to support ideas to uplift poor communities (which are disproportionately more black many of which have had poverty pass down generation by generation) that specifically help the individuals still feeling generational affects the most 

 

I don't support direct cash payments because since slavery happened generations ago no one alive today actually went thru it so it's irrelevant now... The issue NOW is the effects that passed down and that's what needs to be dealt with (which varies from family to family so u can't even calculate a standard direct payment that would be fair to everyone). A family may have succeeded at breaking the poverty cycle. So do they need cash payments for something they ancestors went thru they themselves didn't???

 

That's just one example. I think focusing on the past whatever it may be can make one lose perspective on the present

 

Your example of women and voting is perfect. It should never have been that way but it was... But now it's irrelevant what matters now is dealing with whatever gaps still exist in equality

 

[uo111 5,282]

13 hours ago, MissKombucha said:

 

Most of these things weren’t policies or even legitimate issues - rather trump not providing special treatment to the LGBTQ. It’s an issue that he attacked Don Lemon (who’s known to go out of his way to attack this administration) and it’s an issue he didnt want to maintain LGBTQ specific sidewalks ? Sure I’ll give you the issues regarding workplace protections but as of now nor ever have their been federal mandates that prevent workplace discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. 

I have to say I’m not sure why people are wasting their time conversing with you. You are completely ignoring the degradation of human rights to talk about side walks and reporters.

And people wonder why liberals hate conservatives.

[MissKombucha 308]

1 hour ago, uo111 said:

I have to say I’m not sure why people are wasting their time conversing with you. You are completely ignoring the degradation of human rights to talk about side walks and reporters.

And people wonder why liberals hate conservatives.

Sorry I’m a gay man who doesn’t see not celebrating LGBT themed sidewalks as an issue - if you do , my my my ... and people wonder why conservatives scoff at liberals 

*and nice job ignoring the portion where I stated a fact concerning existing federal law  *

[HiWayUniCorn 64]

I really wish I could convince ever Republican to be a Democrat but I don't think its possible.  What makes you Republican?  Are you a millionaire since Reagan cause that's the only people Republicans in power care about. The federeal minimum  in 1974 was $2.00 Today $5.15. If it had risen with inflation it should be over $10.

I used to be a moderate fiscal Republican sociallya Democrat. But as I get older Republicans have pushed me more liberal. It's okay to blow up our national debt on wars but not humanity? 

Like Jesus Christ would be I am socialist. I believe life isn't fair not everyone is well of.  Not being able to afford to go to a doctor gets OTHERS sick and effects quality of life.

[Economy 52,842]

@ltlmnstr troll 

 

Fine LMAO everything rude sir. I'm gonna try out the block feature for the first time now

 

It's ppl like u that are annoying AF on GGD when I disagree with an opinion and can't even be bothered to say anything and just laugh at ppl with that annoying use for a reaction

 

Bye

 

[ltlmnstr 2,771]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

@ltlmnstr troll 

 

Fine LMAO everything rude sir. I'm gonna try out the block feature for the first time now

 

It's ppl like u that are annoying AF on GGD when I disagree with an opinion and can't even be bothered to say anything and just laugh at ppl with that annoying use for a reaction

 

Bye

 

You wrote an entire essay on leaving GGD. Then leave and stop posting about your personal problems on here like a freaking diary. 
 

And also you’re a freaking transphobe for misgendering me