Frokane's Mildly Politcal Hangout Thread

[SleepingSilence]

@Dynamo Frokane You can't pretend that picture was anything but inflammatory. I mean seriously, the helk does "Never had sex" picture correlate in any way to "reads and agrees with Hitler* (*screams from the heavens that Hitler was from the left* ) then that tying into someone who just looks a right wing web site. <.< So yes, I know it wasn't an attack, but don't try to make it seem like anything other than a joke. So yes "I disagree with you, so you never had sex. And are riddled with acne." seems pretty intellectually bankrupt to me.

[Dolerman]

@Dynamo Frokane
Genetic and ingrained differences in IQ, anatomy, behaviour, etc. Basically, evolution on a human scale. Whenever someone expresses the slightest belief in it or even interest in researching it they get "called out" as racists.

@Andreyich

I dont think anyone calls IQ and genetics racist, I think its trying to tie the two to an unscientific concept such 'race' (which even by today's standards is ridiculously poorly defined). There are no 'races' there is a human race and thats it, skin colour and hair texture, minor facial features might seem like a big deal to us because of how we've learned to views race in society but genetically its almost like saying a tabby cat and a ginger cat are different races.

And I dont think researching it paints you as a racist, I think its the result of some of the conclusions people come to about society, race mixing, modern tribalism and ethno states that put people in the racist camp.

[Dolerman]

@Dynamo Frokane You can't pretend that picture was anything but inflammatory. I mean seriously, the helk does "Never had sex" picture correlate in any way to "reads and agrees with Hitler* (*screams from the heavens that Hitler was from the left* then that tying into someone who just looks a right wing web site. <.< So yes, I know it wasn't an attack, but don't try to make it seem like anything other than a joke. So yes "I disagree with you, so you never had sex. And are riddled with acne." seems pretty intellectually bankrupt to me.

@SleepingSilence

Of course it was inflammatory, its a fucking starterpack meme that makes fun of stereotypes. But those stereotypes do exist, so it isnt a strawman. As far as the virgin thing, its crudely making a point that some internet dwelling losers spend more time attaching themselves to fringe 'edgy' theories than going out, socialising and getting laid, for fuck sake man, LIGHTEN UP.

[Andreyich]

@Dynamo Frokane
But the concept most certainly is scientific, there most certainly are differences between different racial groups and to deny so is to deny evolution really. There are most certainly differences in IQ for one thing. Asians are generally smarter than whites, does that make them superior to me? Not really no, just as saying white has higher IQs than blacks is not a sign of hate of blacks. This can be continued by saying whites are pound for pound stronger than blacks but blacks are significantly faster, particularly in bursts of speed and are significantly thicker boned as well as better jumpers. Surely, it is noticeable that most basketball players are black, and that weightlifting champions are largely white, whilst the person helping you with math homework is - chances are - Asian? Does that make any of them better than the other? Not really no, nor does it mean any of them hate each other, though recognition of this does help people work on both strengths and weaknesses and be overall better parts of society.

I also don't really see how the majority of the stuff you mentioned is racist either. I'm Belarusian, and we have a pretty small population, which is fine but I do not want to become a minority in my own country. I have the right to want to preserve my people and their culture and furthermore I don't really have to justify this; life, particularly the natural kind is about making you and your family unit survive and this keeps on going for every scale of existence, I wan't that which is dear to me to exist. Just because my dad loved me more than the other kids in school that does not mean he hated the others, does it?

[Penny]

For interested parties, the American Journal of Physical Anthropology has an excellent symposium issue called Race Reconciled on this (May 2009).

It gets kind of deep in the weeds but it covers the discussion between forensic anthropologists (who make racial identification of remains) and biological anthropologists (who concern themselves with more general questions) on the topic quite well.

Essentially most professionals agree that race isn't a particularly useful classification scheme and that it is a cultural construct rather than a biological one.

[Andreyich]

archive.is/LRe05

>inb4 Andrey you're literally a nazi

yeah yeah yeah

My Hider

some of those aren't pertinent but I'm at most a MAGA-fag

Go under the heading of "validity of race," and the one just called "race." Just because a few people say race isn't valid that does not mean it is not; I mean, race and reason was banned from several Universities in Canada and America and when it was asked of the professors who voted on this who read the book only a handful raised their hands. It's not hard to do X when you silence all opinion contrary to X.

[Penny]

Yeah I think I'm going to stick with the anthropologists on this one.

[SleepingSilence]

@Dynamo Frokane But you're the one that took offense that I called it a strawman...you cant have it both ways...

Either meaningless and knowingly untrue shit post. Or biting statement that's suppose to be true that you'd stand behind. Wouldn't have to explain it, if you didn't call it into question.

[Andreyich]

That's perfectly fine, I just don't get demonization of those who think otherwise by every aspect of society.

[Dolerman]

@Dynamo Frokane
But the concept most certainly is scientific, there most certainly are differences between different racial groups and to deny so is to deny evolution really. There are most certainly differences in IQ for one thing. Asians are generally smarter than whites, does that make them superior to me? Not really no, just as saying white has higher IQs than blacks is not a sign of hate of blacks. This can be continued by saying whites are pound for pound stronger than blacks but blacks are significantly faster, particularly in bursts of speed and are significantly thicker boned as well as better jumpers. Surely, it is noticeable that most basketball players are black, and that weightlifting champions are largely white, whilst the person helping you with math homework is - chances are - Asian? Does that make any of them better than the other? Not really no, nor does it mean any of them hate each other, though recognition of this does help people work on both strengths and weaknesses and be overall better parts of society.

@Andreyich

Alright see youve jumped ahead, 'blacks' 'whites' 'Asians' are all social grouping terms weve given to large swaths of people in continental landmasses. Now a lot of the things you are saying on an extremely broad scale in some parts of the world are true. But there are many inherent problems which make whole theory unscientific.

Just to throw out a few, when you say 'blacks' are you talking about people of west african descent who are in western countries, because a good majority of them are the ancestors of slaves who were literally bred to be big, strong and hardy, and to lesser extent, culturally enforced to be somewhate primitive acting and simplistic.

And the whole asian are smart thing, seems to overlook east asian countries such as mongolia, phllipens and thailand were educational standards and arent actually very high at all, and when they are, they are directly ripped from the chinese model.

When you group these people together, a lot of it is done by self ("I look a bit brown, I'm probably hispanic!) and 2nd hand reporting ("You're olive skin, so Italian confirmed"). This isnt thorough. And obviously these statements dont control for geographical and socio-economic factors which have been attributed to each of these 'races'. But to be clear, science does not recognize race. The conclusions of racial attributes is undermined by the starting point of there being races in the first place.

I also don't really see how the majority of the stuff you mentioned is racist either. I'm Belarusian, and we have a pretty small population, which is fine but I do not want to become a minority in my own country. I have the right to want to preserve my people and their culture and furthermore I don't really have to justify this; life, particularly the natural kind is about making you and your family unit survive and this keeps on going for every scale of existence, I wan't that which is dear to me to exist. Just because my dad loved me more than the other kids in school that does not mean he hated the others, does it?

@Andreyich

Well one, in terms of race (social term or 'genetic') Belarusian isnt a race, its European nationality. So you have to clarify what you mean by becoming a minority. Do you mean literal Belarusian natives who can trace their lineage 12 generations back to the country, or do you mean anyone born in the country who is technically a citizen? Or do you just mean people from that part of europe who might look similar enough to you racially (like a lithuanian for example maybe) but not from your country that would make you a minority?

Because bringing in someones race into question when making any sort of judgement based only on their race is by definition racist. If I wanted 'less brown people' in my neighborhood because I didnt want to be the only non brown person there is racist because the only thing in question is the race, I'm not looking at my neighborhood as a collection of individuals.

[Dolerman]

@Dynamo Frokane But you're the one that took offense that I called it a strawman...you cant have it both ways...

Either meaningless and knowingly untrue shit post. Or biting statement that's suppose to be true that you'd stand behind. Wouldn't have to explain it, if you didn't call it into question.

@SleepingSilence

Ummm no, it isnt a strawman just because it insults a stereotype.

I dont care if you think its meaningless, it was a jokey meme poking fun at a small fringe internet subcutlure and you took offense, which is stupid because you obviously dont represent the things in that meme. Ive got plenty of starterpacks making fun of fringe groups on the left, that ive posted in this very thread, I can post a couple more if itll make you feel better.

[Dolerman]

@Dinh AaronMk cmon get in here and say something you borscht-eating communist fuck.

[Penny]

Tragically more people don't go in for the lucrative field of anthropology, maybe they can't handle money or the glamorous lifestyle :P

I think given the turbulent and problematic history of race based discrimination in our societies, it isn't a big leap from the connection of macro traits like: some races are smarter than others, more prone to crime than others, or whatever, to a dark undercurrent of the sort of racism that leads to ideas like eugenics. Historically those sort of rationalizations are the building blocks of just such ideas.

It might be unfair that people jump to that conclusion of course, but the impulse itself is understandable.

[Dinh AaronMk]

@Dinh AaronMk
I'm not absolutely stating that person's intentions, though I highly doubt someone could say that without some hedonistic angle to it, especially since he was often a liar, though I am with many of the other people that have said similar things that are completely glossed over. Just noting I already posted a video about this, but the parties didn't switch ideologies or sides. Maybe you just mean people can change their opinion and you're implying that's what he did. And I agree with that sentiment, but in this day of irrational political belief, you cannot change yourself or the evils of racism. (As I had already discussed once before.)

Also now suddenly people are actually siting sources for things while talking? Better late than never...

@SleepingSilence

No, parties can and do change. It's in the historical record that the Democratic part was - at least in the South - the party of slavery, where as the Republican Party was what would be today's civil rights party. But since Kennedy and the alienation of southern voters via the Civil Rights act the South switched to the Republican party and picked up the mannerisms and coarse of action of the old-party Democratic conservatives in the regions.

The whole dichotomy is easily visually expressed in comparative ads.

1860's Democrats:



1960's Democrats:



In the space of a century the party changed considerably in a north-lead re-alignment and in a matter of speaking became what the Republican Party under Lincoln and Grant.

[SleepingSilence]

@Dynamo Frokane Nope. Not what happened at all. All pictures here have been equally intellectual and don't offend me in the slightest. Maybe mildly depressing anyone genuinely believes them. But another thing entirely. You got "offended" (or played the fool.) that your message was legit. I corrected you. (either because I totally take this seriously, or am bored and give about as much shit as the next guy.) No reason to conflate what happened.

It fits the straw-man argument because it claims those who are racist, make the same arguments as those figures you displayed. It even has "this is stereotype quote" here. Those themselves are straw-man arguments presented in the picture itself. It overall may be closer to an ad hominem. But it's still a fallacy. See you made me dismantle a meme. Also all memes are meaningless. There's only so far I can suspend my disbelief on Poe's Law.

[Penny]

@Dinh AaronMk I'd just like to say that I love A Softer World!

[SleepingSilence]

@Dinh AaronMk So they got better with pandering in ads. I suppose I agree that's a thing. xP

I don't mean to go in such divisive things. But since I know about it, I feel like I have to bring it up. Because it's important to me to note it.

Another video.

https://pjmedia.com/michaelwalsh/2013/3/29/history-lesson/

https://soapboxie.com/us-politics/Debunking-the-Myth-GOP-and-Democrats-Switched-Positions-on-Race

Written by Francis Rice-"Contains things, for sensitive eyes to not read'

From the time of its inception in 1854 as the anti-slavery party, the Republican Party has always been the party of freedom and equality for blacks. The Democratic Party is the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. Democrats have been running black communities for the past 50+ years, and the socialist policies of the Democrats have turned those communities into economic and social wastelands. Democrats first used brutality and discriminatory laws to stop blacks from voting for Republicans. Democrats now use deception and government handouts to keep blacks from voting for Republicans. In his book, "Dreams From My Father," Obama described what he and other Democrats do to poor blacks as "plantation politics."

The racist Democrats of the 1950's and 1960's that Republicans were fighting died Democrats. One racist Democrat who survived until 2010 was US Senator Robert Byrd, a former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan. Notably, the Ku Klux Klan was started by Democrats in 1866 and became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party for the purpose of terrorizing and lynching Republicans—black and white. Byrd became a prominent leader in the Democrat-controlled Congress where he was honored by his fellow Democrats as the "conscience of the Senate."

Byrd, Hillary Clinton's "Mentor", was a fierce opponent of desegregating the military and complained in one letter: "I would rather die a thousand times and see old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen of the wilds."

Democrats denounced US Senator Trent Lott for his remarks about US Senator Strom Thurmond. However, there was silence when Democrat US Senator Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment." Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and, after he became a Republican, Thurmond defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats.

While turning a blind eye to how the Democratic Party embraced Byrd until his death, Democrats regularly lambaste the Republican Party about David Duke, a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

Ignored are the facts that the Republican Party never embraced Duke and when he ran for the Republican Party presidential nomination in 1992, Republican Party officials tried to block his participation.

President Lyndon Johnson feared that the racist Democrats would again form a third party, such as the short-lived States Rights Democratic Party. In fact, Alabama's Democrat Governor George C. Wallace in 1968 started the American Independent Party that attracted other racist candidates, including Democrat Governor Lester Maddox.

Behind closed doors, Johnson said: "These *******, they're getting uppity these days. That's a problem for us, since they got something now they never had before. The political pull to back up their upityness. Now, we've got to do something about this. We've got to give them a little something. Just enough to quiet them down, but not enough to make a difference. If we don't move at all, their allies will line up against us. And there'll be no way to stop them. It'll be Reconstruction all over again."

Little known by many today is the fact that it was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Johnson, who pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In fact, Dirksen was instrumental to the passage of civil rights legislation and Dirksen wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.

Democrats condemn Republican President Richard Nixon for his so-called "Southern Strategy." These same Democrats expressed no concern when the racially segregated South voted solidly for Democrats for over 100 years, while deriding Republicans because of the thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party.
The "Southern Strategy" that began in the 1970's was an effort by Nixon to get fair-minded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks. Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Bobby Jindal, a person of color, as governor in 2007. As the co-architect of Nixon's "Southern Strategy", Pat Buchanan provided a first-hand account of the origin and intent of that strategy in a 2002 article posted on the Internet. Buchanan wrote that Nixon declared that the Republican Party would be built on a foundation of states' rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense. Nixon said he would leave it to the Democratic Party to squeeze the last ounce of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.

[Dinh AaronMk]

@Dinh AaronMk So they got better with pandering in ads. I suppose I agree that's a thing. xP

I don't mean to go in such divisive things. But since I know about it, I feel like I have to bring it up. Because it's important to me to note it.

Another video.

https://pjmedia.com/michaelwalsh/2013/3/29/history-lesson/

https://soapboxie.com/us-politics/Debunking-the-Myth-GOP-and-Democrats-Switched-Positions-on-Race

Written by Francis Rice-"Contains things, for sensitive eyes to not read'

From the time of its inception in 1854 as the anti-slavery party, the Republican Party has always been the party of freedom and equality for blacks. The Democratic Party is the party of the four S's: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism. Democrats have been running black communities for the past 50+ years, and the socialist policies of the Democrats have turned those communities into economic and social wastelands. Democrats first used brutality and discriminatory laws to stop blacks from voting for Republicans. Democrats now use deception and government handouts to keep blacks from voting for Republicans. In his book, "Dreams From My Father," Obama described what he and other Democrats do to poor blacks as "plantation politics."

The racist Democrats of the 1950's and 1960's that Republicans were fighting died Democrats. One racist Democrat who survived until 2010 was US Senator Robert Byrd, a former recruiter for the Ku Klux Klan. Notably, the Ku Klux Klan was started by Democrats in 1866 and became the terrorist arm of the Democratic Party for the purpose of terrorizing and lynching Republicans—black and white. Byrd became a prominent leader in the Democrat-controlled Congress where he was honored by his fellow Democrats as the "conscience of the Senate."

Byrd, Hillary Clinton's "Mentor", was a fierce opponent of desegregating the military and complained in one letter: "I would rather die a thousand times and see old glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again than see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen of the wilds."

Democrats denounced US Senator Trent Lott for his remarks about US Senator Strom Thurmond. However, there was silence when Democrat US Senator Christopher Dodd praised Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment." Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and, after he became a Republican, Thurmond defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats.

While turning a blind eye to how the Democratic Party embraced Byrd until his death, Democrats regularly lambaste the Republican Party about David Duke, a former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan.

Ignored are the facts that the Republican Party never embraced Duke and when he ran for the Republican Party presidential nomination in 1992, Republican Party officials tried to block his participation.

President Lyndon Johnson feared that the racist Democrats would again form a third party, such as the short-lived States Rights Democratic Party. In fact, Alabama's Democrat Governor George C. Wallace in 1968 started the American Independent Party that attracted other racist candidates, including Democrat Governor Lester Maddox.

Behind closed doors, Johnson said: "These *******, they're getting uppity these days. That's a problem for us, since they got something now they never had before. The political pull to back up their upityness. Now, we've got to do something about this. We've got to give them a little something. Just enough to quiet them down, but not enough to make a difference. If we don't move at all, their allies will line up against us. And there'll be no way to stop them. It'll be Reconstruction all over again."

Little known by many today is the fact that it was Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois, not Johnson, who pushed through the 1964 Civil Rights Act. In fact, Dirksen was instrumental to the passage of civil rights legislation and Dirksen wrote the language for the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing.

Democrats condemn Republican President Richard Nixon for his so-called "Southern Strategy." These same Democrats expressed no concern when the racially segregated South voted solidly for Democrats for over 100 years, while deriding Republicans because of the thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party.
The "Southern Strategy" that began in the 1970's was an effort by Nixon to get fair-minded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks. Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Bobby Jindal, a person of color, as governor in 2007. As the co-architect of Nixon's "Southern Strategy", Pat Buchanan provided a first-hand account of the origin and intent of that strategy in a 2002 article posted on the Internet. Buchanan wrote that Nixon declared that the Republican Party would be built on a foundation of states' rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense. Nixon said he would leave it to the Democratic Party to squeeze the last ounce of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice.

@SleepingSilence

All this conjecture validating party identity fails to account for what Vilage has invoked, in his posts: those trends where voting blocs can and do change. But I doubt in listening to people rant and rave on YouTube and who believe the DNC makes secret necromantic rituals to summon the ghost of Karl Marx or Pierre-Joseph Proudhon you would have heard of it.

We may be in a sixth swing. Or still in the New Deal Born Fifth.

It's kind of like saying Rome was a Republic when it was an Empire because Rome was a Republic before it was an Empire.

[Penny]

the DNC makes secret necromantic rituals to summon the ghost of Karl Marx

@Dinh AaronMk

I wish!

[Dinh AaronMk]

<Snipped quote by Dinh AaronMk>

I wish!

@Penny

Clearly you haven't been to Ann Arbor on May Day.

The town is lit up in bright red as we try to summon comrades of the past.

This year we summoned J. Posadas and we went with it and ayy lmao'd.