Here is a YouTube short on the topic:
https://youtube.com/shorts/JQVNLJ704Fc?feature=share
No anonymous opinions, you own what you say. And don't whine if you come here with malicious intent and get the same energy back 🤷♂️
So all the entitled and fake victims of America can get together in an echo chamber to foment more hatred and reenforce each others views.
It is clearly observable these people are literally so demented and morally bankrupt they cannot reason at all. Their mind works, yet not as a normal mind would.
Because they apparently are as racist they claim other people are?
How do you think they would react if someone were to create white-only places?
Opinion
15Opinion
This is what happens when we white washing history.
We hide the effects of segregation and separate laws for white and black people caused to America.
Guess what happens history begins to repeat itself.
Most Americans these days have very little clues of the segration laws in place all the way through the 1970's and the racial tensions caused by it because we don't want to teach it because it doesn't paint a picture that America is perfect.
America is a good country but it is not without it's historical flaws. And instead of covering them up or sugarcoating them.
They should be openly discussed or history repeats itself.
To many people are scared of full American history and deny it's seriousness by downplaying it because some of American history is ugly, so now these same people are mad that it is repeating itself but they are on the other end of it this time.
Segregation and seperating us from eachother doesn't help anything.
Last year as a teacher's assistant for a kindergarten class a white teacher teaching a black class talking about george Washington went into details about how great he was and when it came to him owning slaves.
She told the class he loved his slaves so much he hated having slaves when he died he freed them. Wasn't that nice of him?
Nice of him? When he couldn't use them as cattle anymore he freed them. Why sugar coat that make these little kids think he was such a nice guy for abusing enslaving and treating their ancestors as pets because when he couldn't use them anymore they were set free.
Instead of admitting eventhough george washington was a key part of American history he was flawed in his thinking that making other humans property was ok.
I think judging historical figures by modern day standards isn't very helpful. For the time period he was in, George Washington was pretty forward-thinking and magnanimous.
Again, for the time period he was in. If you were born in that time period you could very well have been a slave owner yourself and not have thought twice about it.
This isn't about bashing him.
It's about sugar coating it.
It was made to seem like his actions weren't bad. And people defend it all the time. When someone does wrong you don't enable them you tell them you messed up. And when historical leaders do wrong you shouldn't ignore it, and convince people it's not bad because it was acceptable back then. If you were today enslaved beaten put in terrible conditions you would not go well it's okay because the laws say it is okay. You would not suffer anyless because the laws said it was acceptable.
To own a human and cage them like animals is never something that should be downplayed. We here modern day stories of people kidnapping someone and doing the same things to their kidnappers and we all disgusted to hear this. Yet because it was legal it's not as horrible.
His actions were wrong. He knew they were wrong but continued to do it. No matter how you try to spin it.
And we should not teach our children that it was okay because the laws and the people were to ignorant to know that treating humans as animals was okay.
It doesn't mean you should dismiss what he did good for this country.
But it doesn't mean you dismiss what he did wrong for this country.
Another example for you.
My hometown. Is historically racist.
There is a man who is now maybe 80 something years old.
Back in the late 60's he helped a white woman who needed help.
He was seen by white people helping her. They tied him up. Drug him to the middle of town. Beat him spit on him.
Peed on him and removed his penis.
As a warning that black men are not allowed to talk to white women in any circumstances.
The sheriff allowed it and said this is what he gets for getting out of place.
So i ask. Because it was allowed does this make this man's pain less?
His trauma less?
His life long suffering of not having a penis and no longer being able to have a child any less?
If it was you.
Would you still defend the men who did this to you, because it was acceptable behavior at the time?
Acceptable behavior at the time does not make the acts done less horrific. Horrific is horrific no matter if it is legal or not.
They believe in retributive justice. If they facilitate the abuse of one ethnic group by another ethnic group (that was abused centuries ago) then they can make things "even." When things are even, and both groups have been abused to the same degree then people will get along- is what they believe (even if they don't say it, or if it sounds ridiculous when you spell it out).
The problem with this is that it will stoke deep animosity, lead to ethnic nationalism, and likely lead to genocide. I'm fine with this- let's have white people return to the old versions of themselves (the ones who conquered the world).
That's a good thing. Minority groups have greater cohesion, and group consciousness. I'd also pit a minority of white people against any other ethnic group, and expect us to come out ahead. We didn't conquer the world because there were more of us, we did so because we're smarter, and masters of warfare.
No, that's a myth. The curse of geography doesn't hold up to any comprehensive analysis. No specific geographic setting/ resource base has been a consistent contributor to human thriving, while the lack thereof led to "being screwed." Human groups have thrived in every type of environment, and these same groups when moved to a different environment STILL do well. Europeans in Sub-Saharan Africa developed functioning societies. Chinese people transferred across the ocean still do extremely well. The setting matters nothing next to who it is that's living there.
"Going down the road?" I've been a devout white supremacist for a decade- and I have a few glorified pieces of paper that says I'm right (i. e. graduate degrees). So, I believe your warning is a bit late.
The primary resource is people's ability to use their mind. Sub-Saharan Africa is rich with resources, and arable land. Yet, they didn't have shi for agriculture, and it was only outside people's that made use of these resources after they'd build up their own native areas.
You can put 100 white or Asian people nearly anywhere and within a generation you'll have a thriving town. You can't do that with black people.
They are Exceptions to the rule that are the natural outcome of normal IQ distribution (around a mean that is a standard deviation below ours). Of course there will be an upper echelon of black people who are fairly smart, but who are the smartest people who've ever existed? Who invented nearly every major feat? Who can be credited with mankind going from riding around on horses in dirt roads to flying across the ocean in mere hours, or going to space? We can fit an entire Library into something that can fit in your palm, and black people contributed NOTHING to this.
So, no, I don't care about the handful who have degrees, or even the remarkable figures such as Thomas Sowell, because I know that as a whole they're a failed branch of humanity only kept alive by the altruism and technology of white people.
Communist thrive on segregation and in-fighting. Where do you think the hyphenated names Identifiers are from. USA Democratic Socialist party of Biden, as did Mao and Stalin, rest upon plotting Categories and Classifications against one another.
We will never have to fire a bullet. We will take the Lady down on the backs of the Blacks and Slavery. Josef Stalin.
I wouldn't call it segregation in the same way I say it when I'm talking about the olden days.
It could for sure lead to some bad things in the future but I think the idea of the cafes might now be so bad. It's a place where speech can be a little more free for a specific reason.
I think the bigger problem here is speech which in our country is very problematic. We don't have much of a culture here at the moment so nobody can agree in what is and isn't appropriate. Breaking up into smaller groups might be the answer if everyone can learn to respect eachother.
I think college students are so removed from the real world that they build their own fantasy world. Its only when they go out into the real world that they drop all that nonsense and grow up.
Maybe some. I think as they get older and start to realise that everything has to be paid for and all those social programmes they were in favour for comes out of taxes they pay.
https://youtu.be/-lt8lzLhVJo
@US
But do they drop their nonsense and grow up?
@Exterminatore they often have too.
What @uslegionary said is right. I went to University and both the students and the faculties seemed to pretty much live in their own world - although thankfully, despite there being some Stalinist oddballs there were never the levels of lunacy teached in the US - people were focused on studying and actual research.
One could argue that there are different races
different races in their purest forms have differences
differences that having them or not might better enable one race to survive a natural or unnatural disaster more so than some or all other races
So in that sense there does seem to be advantages to having some of the world population retain their individual race's distinctiveness
In consideration of al that... having some people be descendant from different combinations of races might also prove advantageous
Although arguably if everyone was of mixed race racism would naturally cease to exist. The main difference then remaining would probably be religions and degrees of fanaticism for those
You need to learn the meaning of words and are being a facetious jackass to boot.
You sound like the sort of prick that would argue female domestic or rape victim shelters are "segregation".
POC being given a bit of a safe space does not entail segregation - the opposite, in fact.
You also seem ill informed about left and right. The right try look for answers in the past - usually around the Jim Crow or Nazi era. The left try and bring people together to find some sort of common ground. But have no Karen filter.
These are woke college students were talking about, not rape victims or veterans. What are you even thinking about this? That black people and so on are traumatized because they are minorities?
No, we are adults and we need to fucking act like it. Infantilizing adults is only going to help the oligarchy conquer us.
The sooner you figure out that China is behind all the craziness, the sooner this will all make sense to you. Name ONE thing Biden has done that doesn't benefit China.
The short answer is because they're totalitarians. And they want to do more than merely segregate the people they hate.
They’re not, because if they were they would also push for white-only spaces. They are in favor of institutional discrimination against whites and men.
The reality is that what we are seeing is a classic high&low vs. middle alignment of power. The middle is always a threat to those in power. The backbone of the middle in the case of the US is white, so racial animus and discriminatory laws are enacted to weaken the middle’s ability to organize or effect change in government.
Yeah, I can see why right wingers would want to spin it that way, but in real life the intent of things like this is to provide a safe space that allows people's confidence to grow. I understand how infuriating it is to right wingers when anyone other than straight white men have confidence, but that anger only nderscores the need for a safe space, rather than contradicting it. Yes, you made the case for the people you're mad at just by asking the question 🤭
The only thing we find infuriating are double-standards and racial segregation.
Liberals such as yourself don’t. Because you’re racists.
If you found double standards infuriating you couldn't vote for the party that routinely rants about spending bills but then shows up to the ribbon cutting ceremonies of the projects they fund to get their picture taken and credit given for it. And if you found segregation infuriating you would still be raging against the banks for redlining practices they are still getting away with.
But it doesn't actually infuriate you people. What infuriates you is whatever right wing misinformation tells you to be infuriated by. Because you're brainwashed 🤷
Wokeism is repugnant and anti-American. We shouldn't abide by these weird identity politics and segregate. We're supposed to be color blind right? The very concept of race is cultural and biologically it doesn't hold up to anything.
Also, "safe spaces" are part of the infantilization of adults. Get a grip or go to therapy, but keep that shit out of universities. It's pathetic and the rest of us can see how the establishment wants to weaken us and get us to hate resilience.. freedom.. it's evil!
Asking this question is valid and you're proving my point. You would have the minority hide from the majority out of fear when we should cooperate together.
There isn't any "wokeism." It's a construct of the far right misinformation machine to keep stupid people mad. Sucks that it works but there's nothing I can do about it.
Anyway, if you just want the freedom to abuse strangers, you're simply a piece of shit. Not illegal, but we're going to have to agree to disagree that's okay to be a piece of shit 🤷
Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom of reach. If you want to go to places where people are vulnerable just so you can shit on them, that's just the sort of thing only shitty people will make you mad about anyone trying to block it.
As for the far right's obsession with kids' genitalia, I don't know what to tell you. Maybe look around and see you are the only people who are shartmouthing about it, and put down the hate pipe? There's nothing I can do to get through to an addict in real life , let alone over the internet..
@normalice, you wrote: " but in real life the intent of things like this is to provide a safe space that allows people's confidence to grow."
It doesn't matter what intentions are. What matters is what the affect is. If I say it's my intention to improve your health by cutting off your fingers... why is my intention more important than the outcome? History is FULL of instances where people had good intentions but the results were the opposite of what they claimed to want to do. Liberals are known for having lots of good intentions and VERY FEW GOOD RESULTS TO SHOW FOR IT. There's a reason why liberal cities in the U. S. have soaring crime rates right now. It's not because they didn't get to experiment and push all of their good intentions. It's the opposite.
If you lack confidence (being around people from a different background) you would not even be able to function in a university to begin with. You would run out of there on day #1.
@normalice Sabotage what exactly? An idea? An experiment? The schools aren't segregated. The liberal argument for decades was that conservatives didn't want schools to be mixed. Now it is that conservatives are keeping them from being segregated?
You also said in your first post, "I understand how infuriating it is to right wingers when anyone other than straight white men have confidence"
The vast majority of conservatives want people to have confidence which is exactly why they don't support the victim mentality. Life is competitive. There's always winners & losers. For some reason, the people who liberals claim to be helping & who believe in those liberals are the most likely to never become the master of their own lives. Probably because those liberals are actually just looking to control a lot of suckers and tell those suckers what they want to hear.. or should I say, what is EASIEST to hear.
Sabotage the healing process, like we were discussing. Why pretend you didn't understand that? Is it because you're trying to act like all of this talk of sabotage is completely new to you and not the entire point of the right?
And life doesn't need to be competitive. We have the technology to make it cooperative. Luxury can and should be competitive, but not life. And right wingers seem only to want anyone to have confidence if they are subscribing to right wing mythology. Otherwise they shoot up your church or whatever. Or, let me guess "buT aNtiFa lit a dUmPStER on FiRe," yes yes. Its not the same. False equivalence only ever helps the worst element. Which is why you people use it constantly.
As for not supporting the victim mentality, that's just a straight up lie. And not just any lie, thats a lie that is the opposite of the very foundation of right wing messaging. Tell me you haven't heard right wing media claim it is the underdog despite 90% of thenmedia being owned by right wing entities. Tell me you haven't heard right wing politicians claim they are the victim of witch hunts every time they get caught committing crimes. Tell me you haven't seen whole elections thrown into chaos because republicans claim to be the victim of election fraud. Tell me these things so I can you a damn liar.
Sabotaging the “healing process?” OMFG how gay are you? 🤦♂️ 😆
"Sabotage the healing process... Why pretend you didn't understand that?" - It's the first time you've used that phrase. And, no I do not understand how someone who thinks being isolated gives them healing can go to a school that is all about not being isolated for 4 years and then claim that they need 30-60 minutes of isolation at an official school event to "heal". It's like someone who has high levels of skin cancer going to sunbathe at the beach or the tanning salon every day for years and then claiming that if I don't let them have a brief meeting in a tent, I am harming their ability to heal and fix their skin, blah, blah, blah. Sounds like they need to be put in a mental institution to me.
"And life doesn't need to be competitive" - Only in a 1st world country that was built by very competitive people... on mountains of bones from less competitive people, can you think that. Life isn't fair. There's winners & losers. People can choose which one they are with their ACTIONS. And you claim that 'luxury' has to be competitive but not life in general... Dude, to most of the world everybody in a 1st world country is living in luxury. Even the people we think of as homeless. Of course liberals want to spin a communist friendly idea that everyone is entitled to a level of luxury where they don't feel that they have to work harder or be competitive. Strange thing is that I have never seen liberals pick a random person at the bottom of the social ladder and promote him/her to high levels in the liberal political framework. When they could if they really believe life shouldn't be competitive. That would mean that who runs a political party shouldn't be competitive based on social status either.
You say 90% of the media is owned by "right wing entities". Prove it.
"Tell me you haven't seen whole elections thrown into chaos because republicans claim to be the victim of election fraud." You mean like when liberal Al Gore challenged the presidential election and held up the normal way power is handed over for months based on lies about voting in Florida? Or do you mean how every single person arrested for election fraud for years has been a liberal/democrat?
"As for not supporting the victim mentality, that's just a straight up lie. And not just any lie, thats a lie that is the opposite of the very foundation of right wing messaging." -- I never claimed that conservatives don't have some victim messages too but that wasn't very relative to this discussion since conservatives generally don't support the huge, wide range of FAKE solutions that liberals do and conservative solutions tend to, coincidentally, actually solve problems unlike liberal "solutions". I guess that's because conservative ideas tend to be traditional ideas and traditional ideas tend to have been proven in reality while liberal ideas tend to be hopes/dreams based on nothing but "good intentions".
@Juxtapose, you wrote: "Also, "safe spaces" are part of the infantilization of adults."
Absolutely correct. I remember when people had thicker skin. And back then people were also MORE respectful to strangers. Yes, people had thick skin but everyone knew you could get punched in the face for talking like a retard too. Zero doubt about it. There were boundaries. Now people say & do whatever and run to the cops or call the media any time their feelings get hurt or they're worried that their feelings might get hurt.
@Juxtapose, Hell, they even try to get men fired from a job because his wife said/did something.
@Juxtapose I don't expect him to prove it, I just saw that he made the claim, didn't back it up and then claim he is constrained to facts. He might as well show people were he got the idea from even if I can't say I belive that number myself.
That was an estimate, of course, but before I engage in any such venture I'll need to know what qualifies as proof to you. The "prove it" thing is notoriously absurd to attempt over the internet. Especially among right wingers who accept anything they want to believe as already proven while anything they don't want to believe as requiring at least three signs from God before they'll consider it. For example, I didn't really read anything from hahahmm, just skimmed it, but it stuck out when he said something along the lines of everyone who committed voter fraud was a democrat. That is the sort of lie that's so easy to disprove one would actually have to set out determined to believe it. So he either did exactly that, or he's lying. I gave him the benefit of the doubt, but I'd be willing to bet that I could spend days of my time accumulating republicans caught committing voter fraud and he still wouldn't be convinced. And if I asked him to start providing proof on his end, he'd deflect and, at best, provide some far right blog or whatever. The point is, in the end, he would go on believing it no matter the proof.
And this isn't a dig on him. This is everyone on the far right I've ever had to deal with. And now that includes you. So I engage in no "proof" until you can prove to me that we have some common definition of what proof even is and what it does.
Like I said, I'm not going to get into it unless you can first prove to me that proof is something that even affects you, but I will say that to cable cable news the entire media is silly. Sinclair, a far right entity, owns a hefty chunk of local rural broadcasts, for example. Rural radio stations are dominated by right wing infotainment. And then there is the internet. Not just things like Twitter (recently purchased by a far right winger) but also troll farms that have been shown as far back as when Ron Paul was popular to create a huge difference in perception between online popularity and real world polling numbers - there is no example I'm aware of of such troll farms doing anything to help democrats.
The thing it, the foundation of the entire right is built on a lie. That lie is that trickle down economics works. After over 40 years of it we have proven that it was a scam from the start, but the people who made all the money from that scam still want to keep doing it. Any media that isn't constantly calling this out is entertaining the lie that it can work. How much lying is allowed before we call them a liar? MSNBC seems to call it out somewhat regularly, but I can't find any other example in cable news. Everyone else, at best, engages is bothsidesism as a rule - you can make any extreeme position look normal by cramming it into a bothsides framework (cont..)
And that's how nearly all of the media treats republicans. It doesn't matter that they have not explained a single solution to the things they complain about, that they politicize absolutely everything until we're all brimming in toxic snark and rage, or that they, by the way, tried to end democracy and ousted members of their party who called them out for it - as long as the media treats them like they are merely the other side, people will continue to think of them that way. And the media will continue to do just that as long as the people in charge continue to tell the journalists to do so. There is no other way for any objective analysis to include republicans in a bothsides framework. The will to end democracy is not "the other side" of capping insulin at $35, for example.
Anyway, as i said I don't want to get into it. I will say one thing MSNBC fails to do is call out the citizens united ruling. The partisan Supreme Court ruling that allowed for unlimited untraceable money to be dumped into the political messaging apparatus, predictably, has made media companies a lot richer around election season. And, as one would expect, the billionaires of the world favor the party that agrees to cut their taxes and consolidate their power.
@normalice, I hope you're wearing your covid-19 mask and are getting a jab every 2-3 months as the liberal media tells you you should.
All this does is create more animosity and division. Racial discrimination is racial discrimination.
Because they're a bunch of immature racists and wannabe Hitlers.
Simples...
They don't smoke good weed at the white graduation.
Industrial society and its future explains everything
They’re the true racists.
You can also add your opinion below!
Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Most Helpful Opinions