There always has been social shunning on certain speech (which is what politically correctness amounts to), and hasn't been exclusive to liberalism. Just like now we (we = the social norms du jour) celebrate the freedom to talk about sex, drugs, s, -shows and s, we also have moved to socially shun speech related to racism, denigration of women, etc. If you go back 100 years, then it was the exact opposite. The shunning was known as taboo back then, and the other stuff was the 'normal'. But it was always there, and always pervasive. Not to mention that back then you also had the added failed attempts to actually legislate morality.
Now, the first amendment doesn't really impede any of that speech, except for very specific cases, and IMO, the fact that, unlike Europe, we haven't adopted 'hate' speech laws (which is a double-edged sword, IMO), is a plus.
But the argument can also be made that we've socially evolved, looked back, had introspection about what was right and wrong, important or not important, and that's how we arrived to the current norms. Obviously, just like anything that's temporal in nature, it's debatable.
Sorry Mike, buy this is a very ignorant take. While it's true that such base was part of the Democratic party back then, the party bases have shifted allegiances long time ago. Thus the South being a solid Republican bastion in this day and age.
Much like any political party that has been around long enough, both Republicans and Democrats have reinvented themselves and what they stand for, and thus, allegiances has shifted over time. It's only natural for political survival.
It was how it started and they supported slavery so where is the bull ?, thats a fact and thats why Byrd was mentoring Hilda and not W Bush.
Trump won Florida after Obama did it twice in ´08 and ´12.
So now according to your jokes now Florida likes to get grabbed by the old pussy?
Its natural for political survival to be against illegals and even children crossing the border and then suddenly in less than 2 years do a U turn?
Thats suicidal more than survival.
Florida has been a swing state for a minute now but that’s one of the very few outliers. From the States that seceded in the Civil War, about 80% of them are today solid Republican. And anybody that’s been around those places known racism is generally alive and well (although debatable if it’s still a majority).
Point being, it’s just plan disingenuous to pretend that the current incarnation of the Democratic Party stood for what that old version did. Same applies to Republicans.
Not to mention that’s not how it all started either. Back then you also had the Wighs being somewhat of a political force too, that eventually disintegrated, but both Republicans and Democrats grabbed bits and pieces and added to their platforms.
Yeah, thats what I said "he's a hero" direct quote
Point is you cant claim he is not willing to give money if he's campaigning to get his own taxes raised.
the racist Confederate states were Dems to counter the war-winning Repug "party of Lincoln" up north.
Nixon/A er/Ailes' Southern Strategy recruited the slave state racists to the Repug party in reaction to the legal advances of their dearly beloved slave descendants in the '50s and '60s.
Repugs are the party of racism, xenophobia, ethnic cleansing.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 09-14-2018 at 11:45 AM.
In a perfect Capitalist society there will still always be people who are more talented and creative than others, and those would accomulate most of the capital, no matter how creative and talented the rest is. The capitalist system is based on inequality. On a reduced number of people who control the capital, and the rest, who work for them.
Last edited by DAF86; 09-14-2018 at 11:24 AM.
It doesn't matter. I just wanted to point out that as an abstract idea, Socialism is more desirable than Capitalism. In reality, neither system works well on it's own.
nah i just think the entire south had a massive political shift overnight. they decided to change the way they looked at race, taxes, education, healthcare, foreign policy, etc
sarcasm?
50s and 60s saw huge PROGRESSIVE LEGAL advances for blacks, REALLY pissed off the slave state DEM racists.
Nixon/A er/Ailes/Stone depraved brilliance was to use the racists' anger to recruit them to Repug party, where they have been ever since.
Even LBJ, in his own political brilliance, said something like "if I sign this (civil rights, voting rights, war on poverty, whatever) law, we've lost the South for a generation"
"taxes, education, healthcare, foreign policy, etc" totally secondary to racism back then, and also today.
Trash was elected on a racist, xenophobic strategy, which research was even more important than his economic and "swamp" lies
Last edited by boutons_deux; 09-14-2018 at 12:06 PM.
you think?
Lol "liberal trend"
Trump s on the 1st amendment almost on the daily
I've always found it amusing how many people on the left hate Trump. You do realize that the dude is a Democrat for the most part. If your goal is to move to a more socialized country, Trump is your man. The old Republican orthodox was smaller government because it's inefficient, but Trump is all about governmental power grabs and centralized power. He's for expanding the deficit for lefty goodies (if that's what he thinks people want). I think he'd just about give the farm on immigration if the Dems would just accept his wall demand (which they should do and then just not fund it in the future). The only thing the guy does that is anything resembling the Republican party of years ago is nominate conservative justices. And even that is overrated. It's true that the left has used the court system to get around the legislative branch on social issues, but I actually think that has been mostly unnecessary as public opinion continues to liberalize at least to the point where the Supreme Court decisions aren't so groundbreaking and are quickly accepted and forgotten (and even with a "conservative" court, the left has won on most of the controversial cases). Plus, those type of cases make up like 2% of the Supreme Court's docket.Holy Trump s whining about Nazis and obstruction of supreme court nominations is the funniest ever.
Nazis being very fine people
What a terrible post.
Most hate Trump because among other things, he's a terrible policy maker, has no clue what he's doing and is in general just a plain inhuman ass hole.
Trump shouldn't be anyone's "man"
I disagree that SCOTUS nominations are overrated.
The judicial branch has the last say on what the law is. Its justices are the only folks in government with life-tenure.
It's the main reason the GOP protects Donald Trump.
It's not so terrible. He takes ideology from the left and makes it mainstream. Sure he is wacko and un-Presidential, but he's doing your job. When he normalizes centralized power, he's doing what you want. And what policy-making is he even doing? Judging by what the NYT reported, what little that is happening is being done by staff without his knowledge.
This is one of the most re ed posts I have ever seen on this forum. Congrats. The guy is the GOP's useful idiot for taking over the legislature, for tax cuts on the rich, and for more wasted money on our national offense. Calling him a Democrat when he has governed from the hard right.Calling executive power grabs a Democrat thing after the Bush/Cheney years?
"People like me should give more money"
"Why don't you?"
"It's not mandatory"
You should riot.
You're misusing the term "perfect".
So, in a perfect Capitalist World, everybody would be boss and there would be no employees?
Re ed? That's not very woke of you. Ask Ben Sasse if Trump is a conservative Republican. The only thing he's passed is tax cuts. That's it. And wasteful spending? That's a key cog of the Democrat party.This is one of the most re ed posts I have ever seen on this forum. Congrats. The guy is the GOP's useful idiot for taking over the legislature, for tax cuts on the rich, and for more wasted money on our national offense. Calling him a Democrat when he has governed from the hard right.
No. In a perfect capitalist world, everyone would have a good or service they could sell for the same amount as everyone else sells their good or service, and that good or service would enable them to live just as well as anyone else. In a socialist, communist world, the goods and services of some are subpar, unwanted, but we are forced to buy them through collective payment/proxy so that everyone lives as if they have a viable good or service, even the bums.So, in a perfect Capitalist World, everybody would be boss and there would be no employees?
In a Capitalist World that "as well as" doesn't exist. Capitalism promotes individualism and competence. Socialism promotes team work, solidarity and equality.
Unless it affects me directly, probably not. I'll just continue to smhlol.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote