What's new
Frozen in Carbonite

Welcome to FiC! Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why the Left Loses

The argument that Democrats are the real racists stems from racial policy generally coming from their side, like affirmative action, as well as the progressives, who've been dominating the vocal demographics, being largely racially motivated. Also, the Dixiecrats in Congress never left, they just stopped talking about Jim Crow. You've also got Verified Hate, which is a hashtag, and an obsessive Trump supporter (the latter of which is what I linked, because that particular Gab account is pretty much solely the relevant content), that cover verified Twitter users spewing racist horseshit.
I'm not talking about the "anti-white" accusations. I'm talking about the "yes most of the dixiecrats are Republicans now but trust us, the Democrats are still the party of Jim Crow, just ignore everything we say and do"
 
I'm not talking about the "anti-white" accusations. I'm talking about the "yes most of the dixiecrats are Republicans now but trust us, the Democrats are still the party of Jim Crow, just ignore everything we say and do"
Very few are making that arguement. That's an ideologue defense. That's a fringe argument. You're strawmanning by implying the only reason the claim is made is a critical misunderstanding of the way parties shifted. The "Democrats are the real racists" argument is largely what I've brought up, the fact that they keep trying to ram through racially targeted poverty corrections and their vocal constituency is covered in bigotry and racial obsession. You're going for the weakest version of the argument, which is only made by a small fringe because of how transparently wrong it is.

Only 3 dixiecrats ever became Republicans.
Three in office Dixiecrats, and they stayed in office a long time. The constituency went on to doubtlessly comprise a full generation of Southern Republicans.
 
Only 3 dixiecrats ever became Republicans.
But everyone who shares their beliefs votes Republican now. Intentionally. They set out to make it that way

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Atwater: Y'all don't quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, "Nigger, nigger, nigger." By 1968 you can't say "nigger" — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites. And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, "We want to cut this," is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than "Nigger, nigger."

And it worked.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/04/24/us/politics/trump-economic-anxiety.amp.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/static.theintercept.com/amp/2016-election-race-class-trump.html

https://www.google.com/amp/s/thehil...oters-say-trump-has-emboldened-racists-to?amp
 
You've also got Verified Hate, which is a hashtag, and an obsessive Trump supporter (the latter of which is what I linked, because that particular Gab account is pretty much solely the relevant content), that cover verified Twitter users spewing racist horseshit.

I still absolutely adore that they reposted a Twitter funnyman making a joke.

No fun allowed, that's racist!
 
I still absolutely adore that they reposted a Twitter funnyman making a joke.

No fun allowed, that's racist!
The thing is that they're doing it for jokes of significantly more direct racist content than what people have been jailed for (to await sentencing) and fined for. Count Dankula's literally got a criminal record and his life was put in shambles for half a year for vastly more mild things than what these people do as jokes. And you have a considerable amount of people doing this with no indication of sarcasm or humorous intent.
 
The thing is that they're doing it for jokes of significantly more direct racist content than what people have been jailed for (to await sentencing) and fined for. Count Dankula's literally got a criminal record and his life was put in shambles for half a year for vastly more mild things than what these people do as jokes. And you have a considerable amount of people doing this with no indication of sarcasm or humorous intent.
Okay, so: the issue here is that after the release of the Stormfront strategy document, authorities have little choice but to assume that all racist and/or antisemitic edgelord humor is genuine racism. Because the racists themselves have said that they will be using edgelord humor as a cover and recruitment tool.

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5a2ece19e4b0ce3b344492f2
https://img.huffingtonpost.com/asset/5a3013991600004700c4f84f.png?ops=scalefit_630_noupscale
 
They put the vatican under military siege! People can claim shit all they want, doesn't mean they aren't fuckin lying.
It's what they get their supporters to believe that matters. The Prosperity Gospel is the single biggest heresy in modern Christianity, but the parishioners certainly believe their pastors are on God's side.
 
It's what they get their supporters to believe that matters.

Literally none of their supporters think that.

Like, they burnt down churches and sent people to camps because they were christian. At a far lower rate than the jewish sure, but it was done and done often. You have to know nothing about the time period to think anything you are spewing right now.
 
Literally none of their supporters think that.

Like, they burnt down churches and sent people to camps because they were christian. At a far lower rate than the jewish sure, but it was done and done often. You have to know nothing about the time period to think anything you are spewing right now.
They sent them to camps and burned their churches because they dared to speak out against them. Not because they were Christians. Christians who shut their mouths and toed the party line didn't have that happen.

Edit: here

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_Christianity

2nd edit, from an explicitly christian site:
https://www.publicchristianity.org/the-church-under-nazi-rule/

Oh, almost forgot: the Catholic Church was also very supportive of the Spanish fascists under Franco. They even recruited foreign troops for him in Ireland.
 
Last edited:
Literally none of their supporters think that.

Like, they burnt down churches and sent people to camps because they were christian. At a far lower rate than the jewish sure, but it was done and done often. You have to know nothing about the time period to think anything you are spewing right now.

So, you'd then agree that the soviets weren't socialist, as they sent socialists to camps and burnt down buildings probably?
 
So, you'd then agree that the soviets weren't socialist, as they sent socialists to camps and burnt down buildings probably?
Not "Probably".

Old soviet joke. Three inmates meet in a gulag. One of them asks the time old question "What are you in for?"

"Well" Says one "I'm here for supporting Grekovitch"

"Strange coincidence" Says the next "I'm here for speaking against Grekovitch."

"You think that's an odd coincidence?" The third asks. "I'm Grekovitch."
 
The ultimate goal of the nazi higher ups was the complete eradication of any religious institution not directly controlled by the state.

Claiming the nazis were Christian is technically correct, as a majority of the rank and file could be said to be Christian, but the nazi leaders would have eventually torn out the heart and soul of Christianity and rewritten it to agree with whatever they wanted.

It would have maintained some of the ritual, but the nazi church would have been nothing but a meat puppet for the leadership to control the sheep. It also likely would have been phased out eventually, as the nazis could ill tolerate people having devotion to anything other than the state and its leadership.

So again, technically correct but missing a lot of nuance and explanation.
 
Claiming the nazis were Christian is technically correct, as a majority of the rank and file could be said to be Christian, but the nazi leaders would have eventually torn out the heart and soul of Christianity and rewritten it to agree with whatever they wanted.
ok 2 things.
1. You say that like the Christian Church has a heart and soul. It does not. It's a beurocratic institution.

local churches can have a heart and soul, but the heart and soul is flavored and shaped by the parishioners at that local church. You will never find another church like the one you get grew up with , for example.

2. You say that like it's something new to the Christian institution instead of a regular and periodic part of the regular operation of The Church.

For another example compare American church now vs 20 years ago, especially with the rise of the prosperity gospel.

Also compare early Lutheran with the version that was eventually accepted by the government, the Anglican Heresy, the and... Well, it happened often is my point. I mean, fuck, the origin of the Roman Christian Church was an early Christian Church with the heart and soul hollowed out and run by the Roman government like a meat puppet.
 
Back
Top Bottom