Trump's position on the far right

[fides' Jack]

40 minutes ago, Peace said:

I would say that my opinion is based on my own personal experience living as a black person in the USA, my own personal interactions with people, and conclusions drawn from the sad racial history of the US, data and the like.

I'll give you an interesting antecedent. When I moved to Japan for about 5 years, many of my white American friends would complain day and night about how racist the Japanese were. To me, I hardly noticed any difference at all. In many respects I thought it was actually better. I think the difference was that in the USA, they were in the majority, but in Japan they were in the minority. You feel it a lot more when you are in the minority, which is why I think it came as a big shock to many of them.

 

40 minutes ago, Peace said:

That is what it sounded like to me.

I think one of the biggest problems in our world today is the perpetual preaching of victimization.  And it's never been as apparent as it is with identity politics. 

These days, with the grotesque attention payed to identity politics, everybody other than straight, white males are given some status of victimhood.

People who don't see themselves as victims usually end up not being victims.  That remains the case whether we're talking about victims of oppression from race, or from class, or from political attacks, or slander, or family disputes, or even just a disrespectful spouse.

 

Let me ask you something - you don't have to answer.  You went to college, right?  Where did you go and what did you major in?  How old were you, then?

[Anomaly]

2 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

 

These days, with the grotesque attention payed to identity politics, everybody other than straight, white males are given some status of victimhood.

Hold on there.  

As a straight, white male, I can claim victimhood from identity politics and mainstream bias hysteria.

[fides' Jack]

33 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

Hold on there.  

As a straight, white male, I can claim victimhood from identity politics and mainstream bias hysteria.

Yes, but all of society would reject that claim.  

[Didacus]

4 hours ago, Peace said:

I support a good border, even perhaps with a wall or a gate too.

I ain't gonna try to prove it to you pal. If you want to make excuses for his behavior or try to explain it away, that is your business.

But from my standpoint, it would be like arguing with a child that 2 + 2 does not equal 4. I honestly think that anyone who does not understand it is an idiot or oblivious.

Wanting a wall or strong border is a legal issue - no a race issue.

[Peace]

1 hour ago, fides' Jack said:

 

I think one of the biggest problems in our world today is the perpetual preaching of victimization.  And it's never been as apparent as it is with identity politics. 

I agree that the preaching of victimization and identity politics are huge problems. I am not in the camp of folks who thinks it is a good idea to go outside with a picket in one's hand trying to get other people to love them, treat them better, or whatever it is that the picketers want. I think people should work hard to get what they want, and solve their own problems, for the most part. You have to get on with it because nobody is going to save you.

Quote

These days, with the grotesque attention payed to identity politics, everybody other than straight, white males are given some status of victimhood.

Well, there are plenty of straight, white males, who give themselves victim status, if we are being realistic here. These folks go around complaining about how their job was given to someone because of affirmative action and so forth.

Quote

People who don't see themselves as victims usually end up not being victims.  That remains the case whether we're talking about victims of oppression from race, or from class, or from political attacks, or slander, or family disputes, or even just a disrespectful spouse.

Everyone is a victim of something, whether you see yourself as one or not. Life is not fair for anyone. To me that is pretty irrelevant, honestly. You have to get on with it.

Quote

Let me ask you something - you don't have to answer.  You went to college, right?  Where did you go and what did you major in?  How old were you, then?

I graduated around the year 2000. I went to Northwestern, and I majored in engineering.

31 minutes ago, Didacus said:

Wanting a wall or strong border is a legal issue - no a race issue.

I never said that it was. Obviously the "build the wall" campaign was about a lot more than just building a wall. It was about painting a particular group of foreign people as an enemy to be feared. It's not like its the first time in American history that we have seen it. We saw the same sort of demonization played out against Catholic immigrants in the US, with the No-Nothings and the Irish in particular, before they gained acceptance into the mainstream.

[fides' Jack]

10 minutes ago, Peace said:

I graduated around the year 2000. I went to Northwestern, and I majored in engineering.

Thanks for answering.  And, do you think that some of your current mindset regarding the political landscape was solidified during your time there?  I accept that at least involving race issues, you've had experiences that form your impressions your entire life.  (Thankfully, I have not had any of those experiences - I live in an area where race was never a big deal)

I would say, after the media (which includes TV news, online news networks, as well as social media like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc..., and includes entertainment from Hollywood), the public education system has been the most intrusive and detrimental part of our culture that has brainwashed people into leftism.  To your mind, how much of your ideology was formed at school and among friends of that age group vs at home before college years?  How much information about the current world do you get from social media?

I'm just curious about your own view on this, I won't ask more personal questions.

[Peace]

35 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Thanks for answering.  And, do you think that some of your current mindset regarding the political landscape was solidified during your time there?

I highly doubt it. Between class / studying and work, I did not have a whole lot of time left for much else during college. I was taking fluid mechanics and dynamics, not "critical race theory" or what have you.

Quote

 I accept that at least involving race issues, you've had experiences that form your impressions your entire life.  (Thankfully, I have not had any of those experiences - I live in an area where race was never a big deal)

You live in Canada?

Quote

I would say, after the media (which includes TV news, online news networks, as well as social media like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc..., and includes entertainment from Hollywood), the public education system has been the most intrusive and detrimental part of our culture that has brainwashed people into leftism. 

I am far from a leftist. I would call myself more of a Milton Friedman type libertarian, except that my Catholic faith informs me of the need for certain types of moral restraints on the free-market.

Quote

To your mind, how much of your ideology was formed at school and among friends of that age group vs at home before college years? 

I would not say that school has much to do with it honestly. I would say that my beliefs are based on my personal experiences with people.

Let me ask you this. You seem to concede that it is possible for certain systems of beliefs or ways of viewing the world  of being instilled into people via institutions such as schools, media, etc. For example, you seem to suggest that this "victimhood" or "leftist" mentality has been instilled into many people through these mediums.

Now, if we say hypothetically that for hundreds of years those same institutions were explicitly racist, like having laws barring black people from voting, making it illegal to teach them to read, enslaving most of them, forcing them to attend segregated schools, barring them from eating in restaurants, making them sit in the back of the bus, barring them from jury service, serving as a witness at trial, and so forth, media like "Birth of a Nation" and blackface, minstrel shows, etc. should it really be all that much of a surprise if a few decades later after most of that was ended, the average person in the same society had deeply ingrained views of blacks being inferior?

Just some food for thought.

Quote

How much information about the current world do you get from social media?

None. I have Linked-In. That's about it. I don't have Instaface and all of that jazz.

Quote

I'm just curious about your own view on this, I won't ask more personal questions.

I don't mind. It's just a conversation. None of it is personal.

Edited October 15, 2020 by Peace

[fides' Jack]

15 minutes ago, Peace said:

You live in Canada?

Colorado, in the country.  But my parents never really talked about it, and by then the public elementary schools were very much anti-racism, from the earliest grades.

15 minutes ago, Peace said:

I was taking fluid mechanics and dynamics, not "critical race theory" or what have you.

I think it's so pervasive that you don't have to take a course dedicated to it to get the indoctrination.  But, I doubt they had courses on critical race theory in the year 2000.  Maybe I'm wrong...  My first college class was in 2000 (I think, it might've been '99), and I don't remember seeing anything like that. 

Plus, the fact that you went into an engineering direction likely shielded you from a lot of it.  Especially back then.

But I'm still trying to understand where your views came from.  My next question would have been, "Did you grow up in a big city?", but I already said I wouldn't ask more personal questions, so I won't ask that...   

15 minutes ago, Peace said:

Now, if we say hypothetically that for hundreds of years those same institutions were explicitly racist, like having laws barring black people from voting, making it illegal to teach them to read, enslaving most of them, forcing them to attend segregated schools, barring them from eating in restaurants, making them sit in the back of the bus, barring them from jury service, serving as a witness at trial, and so forth, media like "Birth of a Nation" and blackface, minstrel shows, etc. should it really be all that much of a surprise if a few decades later after most of that was ended, the average person in the same society had deeply ingrained views of blacks being inferior?

I get your point, but even during all of that, many, many people were opposed to it.  The most racist point of America came after slavery had already ended (officially, anyway), when the democrat party was pushing the idea that black people weren't even human.  Even Hitler denounced the American democrats as too debasing to black people.

But if you believe that argument you just made, you would have to see the entire world as racist, because that's been an issue since Adam and Eve were alive.  Certainly slavery has been around since then (maybe not overt racism).  Every single country has a history of slavery, and most countries today still have a fair amount of slavery.

It's probably true that, when fighting for change, the thing we're fighting against rears its ugly head the most when it realizes it's in danger.  And it became very ugly in the US, but that shows us also that it was in the US that the fight was strongest.  It was the freedoms that came with our country, and fighting to make ALL men free, that changed the cultural and social norms of the entire western world to see racism as evil.  It was the United States that made it possible.  If anything, history will remember the legacy of the United States as the country that defeated slavery.  And for a while, it looked like racist attitudes were on their way out the door, too.  The last 10 years have really turned that around, though.  Racism was less of an issue 30 years ago than it is today.  And I think the attitudes today are almost entirely due to leftist socialist/communist brainwashing.

[Peace]

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Colorado, in the country.  But my parents never really talked about it, and by then the public elementary schools were very much anti-racism, from the earliest grades.

That's cool.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

I think it's so pervasive that you don't have to take a course dedicated to it to get the indoctrination. 

I think we can view white supremacy in much the same way. It's pretty pervasive in my opinion, but of course much, much improved from times past.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

But, I doubt they had courses on critical race theory in the year 2000.  Maybe I'm wrong...  My first college class was in 2000 (I think, it might've been '99), and I don't remember seeing anything like that. 

I wouldn't know. Mostly I was interested in getting a job that paid money so I would not have been looking for courses like that.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Plus, the fact that you went into an engineering direction likely shielded you from a lot of it.  Especially back then.

Maybe.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

But I'm still trying to understand where your views came from. 

I already explained it. You are just having trouble accepting it I think. You seem to have difficulty accepting that other people have experienced things that you have not personally witnessed. Dude, I got called the N-word in high-school. Frequently. But things are much improved now.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

My next question would have been, "Did you grow up in a big city?", but I already said I wouldn't ask more personal questions, so I won't ask that...   

A city of 500,000 give or take.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

I get your point, but even during all of that, many, many people were opposed to it. 

Yeah, thankfully.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

The most racist point of America came after slavery had already ended (officially, anyway), when the democrat party was pushing the idea that black people weren't even human.  Even Hitler denounced the American democrats as too debasing to black people.

Well I dunno if it needs to be turned into a Dems versus Republicans who is more racist sort of debate. Both parties have been on the ugly side of history at various points I think.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

But if you believe that argument you just made, you would have to see the entire world as racist, because that's been an issue since Adam and Eve were alive.  Certainly slavery has been around since then (maybe not overt racism).  Every single country has a history of slavery, and most countries today still have a fair amount of slavery.

Nah, I would not say that. Certainly slavery goes back thousands of years in almost every society. What is unique about the Trans-Atlantic slave trade, I think, is that the trade became racialized. Thousands of years ago I don't think you had the notion that "Africans are particularly suited as slaves" because you had slaves of every race, from every society. It was more about say debt, or war back then I think. I think that if you look at the history of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade you will see that there was this problem of reconciling the enslavement of human beings with Christian ideals, the solution coming in the form of mentally reducing people of African descent into something less than human, in order to justify treating them in just that manner. Modern notions of race and racial superiority / inferiority seem to have arisen around that time. That's my take on the history at least.

13 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

It's probably true that, when fighting for change, the thing we're fighting against rears its ugly head the most when it realizes it's in danger.  And it became very ugly in the US, but that shows us also that it was in the US that the fight was strongest.  It was the freedoms that came with our country, and fighting to make ALL men free, that changed the cultural and social norms of the entire western world to see racism as evil.  It was the United States that made it possible.  If anything, history will remember the legacy of the United States as the country that defeated slavery.  And for a while, it looked like racist attitudes were on their way out the door, too.  The last 10 years have really turned that around, though.  Racism was less of an issue 30 years ago than it is today.  And I think the attitudes today are almost entirely due to leftist socialist/communist brainwashing.

 I think this is a bit of wishful thinking here. We certainly were not the first to abolish, and that had to come via the deaths of many thousands via war. I think we have to say that the UK was ahead of the US, as far as the abolition movement.

[fides' Jack]

1 hour ago, Peace said:

I think this is a bit of wishful thinking here. We certainly were not the first to abolish, and that had to come via the deaths of many thousands via war. I think we have to say that the UK was ahead of the US, as far as the abolition movement.

I agree with everything else you said.  I think we're actually largely on the same page, except for our current view of the world.  For this, I did not say that the US was the first to abolish slavery.  I said it was the freedoms that the US enjoyed that changed the culture of the west enough to make it possible to abolish slavery.  It's my understanding we were 3rd - UK was first, I think, and there was another country... maybe France?  I'm too lazy to google it.

But yeah, I agree, slavery was not always about race.  

And I agree it's not about Democrats vs Republicans.  I do think Republicans have the better history, but I also think Republicans today are almost entirely leftists now, too.

And I'll admit that it IS hard for me to understand the racial tensions that are out there.  I've had this conversation several times with my wife - she grew up in Atlanta and saw it first-hand.  But yet, she's not racist, and she's just as white as I am.  So... yeah.  I don't get it.  But I also don't see racism where other people do.  I do see a lot of the left calling people racist - most notably the president.  But I haven't seen any evidence of that (only lies about it), so I'll defend him from that attack.

I was just watching this, and I think it speaks to the heart of the issue:

 

 

[Ice_nine]

11 hours ago, Peace said:

I support a good border, even perhaps with a wall or a gate too.

I ain't gonna try to prove it to you pal. If you want to make excuses for his behavior or try to explain it away, that is your business.

But from my standpoint, it would be like arguing with a child that 2 + 2 does not equal 4. I honestly think that anyone who does not understand it is an idiot or oblivious.

I used to think this was evidence for Trump's racism. I have become less sure of that due to the media's piss-poor coverage of him. I mean there are plenty of criticisms you can leverage against Trump, but they consistently come at him with, I hate to say it but it's true, fake news. 

So I have to look into it more to get the context. The "very fine people on both sides" clip, if you play that for a few more seconds he clarifies to exclude white supremacists from that group. And the "they're rapists and murderers" one, which I was initially shocked by, I've recently heard he was referring to MS-13, not Mexicans in general. I'm not sure and I'll have to dig into the context of that more.

Listen, I had your exact same opinion. People who don't realize he's racist must be stupid or ignorant. Maybe I've recently been brainwashed but I'm just not so sure of that assertion any longer. Maybe because I'm somewhat of a reactionary, my media diet has shifted to the right, or maybe I am just an idiot. But I'm not so sure he's racist (if we're using the old definition of the word. The new definition, I'm a default racist and pretty much everyone in the majority is also racist).

[Peace]

3 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

I agree with everything else you said.  I think we're actually largely on the same page, except for our current view of the world.  For this, I did not say that the US was the first to abolish slavery.  I said it was the freedoms that the US enjoyed that changed the culture of the west enough to make it possible to abolish slavery.  It's my understanding we were 3rd - UK was first, I think, and there was another country... maybe France?  I'm too lazy to google it.

But yeah, I agree, slavery was not always about race.  

And I agree it's not about Democrats vs Republicans.  I do think Republicans have the better history, but I also think Republicans today are almost entirely leftists now, too.

And I'll admit that it IS hard for me to understand the racial tensions that are out there.  I've had this conversation several times with my wife - she grew up in Atlanta and saw it first-hand.  But yet, she's not racist, and she's just as white as I am.  So... yeah.  I don't get it.  But I also don't see racism where other people do.  I do see a lot of the left calling people racist - most notably the president.  But I haven't seen any evidence of that (only lies about it), so I'll defend him from that attack.

I was just watching this, and I think it speaks to the heart of the issue:

 

 

Yeah there is a big perception gap I think. A lot of folks on the right side of the isle would often say things like "President Obama is a racist" which I found quite comical, but I guess from their perspective they felt like they were being targeted by some statements that he made. But then the same folks turn around, see some of the stuff Trump has said, and can't see the slightest hint of racism at all. It's almost as if we are living in two different worlds it seems sometimes. As for the video, you'll have to give me an executive summary.

23 minutes ago, Ice_nine said:

I used to think this was evidence for Trump's racism. I have become less sure of that due to the media's piss-poor coverage of him. I mean there are plenty of criticisms you can leverage against Trump, but they consistently come at him with, I hate to say it but it's true, fake news. 

So I have to look into it more to get the context. The "very fine people on both sides" clip, if you play that for a few more seconds he clarifies to exclude white supremacists from that group. And the "they're rapists and murderers" one, which I was initially shocked by, I've recently heard he was referring to MS-13, not Mexicans in general. I'm not sure and I'll have to dig into the context of that more.

Listen, I had your exact same opinion. People who don't realize he's racist must be stupid or ignorant. Maybe I've recently been brainwashed but I'm just not so sure of that assertion any longer. Maybe because I'm somewhat of a reactionary, my media diet has shifted to the right, or maybe I am just an idiot. But I'm not so sure he's racist (if we're using the old definition of the word. The new definition, I'm a default racist and pretty much everyone in the majority is also racist).

Well I'll agree that there is a big media campaign against him, and that his message is often distorted. That being said, my view of him is based on the things that have came out of his actual mouth, and the particular issues that he has chosen to focus on. If other folks have a different opinion of him that is perfectly fine by me though. I don't have some deep psychological need to prove to people that he is racist, although I personally believe that he is. I think that I gave him the benefit doubt in assessing him, honestly, but if you add everything up, I see a 2 +2 = 4 situation.

What are the new and old definitions?

[Anomaly]

I’m guessing the old racist definition is “Intentional behavior to act against another based on disdain for that specific race.”

New definition is “Behavior that may be interpreted as an act biased against a specific race, regardless of intent, conscious or subconscious.”

[fides' Jack]

31 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

I’m guessing the old racist definition is “Intentional behavior to act against another based on disdain for that specific race.”

New definition is “Behavior that may be interpreted as an act biased against a specific race, regardless of intent, conscious or subconscious.”

The new definition is a joke, and can be applied to any and every situation, based on nothing but whim. 

I guess I go by the old definition.

14 hours ago, Ice_nine said:

And the "they're rapists and murderers" one, which I was initially shocked by, I've recently heard he was referring to MS-13, not Mexicans in general. I'm not sure and I'll have to dig into the context of that more.

That is indeed the case.  Watch the entire clip, it's not even close.  It's absolutely clear he's just talking about the MS-13 gang.  It's as clear as is the "Fine people on both sides" quote.

If you watch the very recent town hall meetings, and kind of watch them both side-by-side, as much as is possible, it becomes certain that the media has not given him a fair chance.  They don't go after anything that Biden has done (and he's said some very racist and very direct things recently, and it hasn't been mentioned by the left once), and they crucify Trump, almost entirely by taking him out of context, in order to ruin his image (in a seriously sinful way) so people won't vote for him.

If they have actual dirt on him, why don't they use the actual dirt and not make up lies to smear him?

The worst thing they actually have on him is what he said years ago about grabbing women.  There's no evidence he actually did grab women that way, but he made the comment and it was inappropriate.

And honestly, that just doesn't make sense - how can that be the worst they have on him?  I've said worse things than that.  And this guy grew up rich, spoiled, in the public eye, lived the playboy life, and who knows what all else...  I mean, before 2015, he was raised up by the left as some kind of hero, because he was rich and famous.  And now, if you don't actually hate Trump, they will do everything they can to ruin your life. 

It's demonic.

[Peace]

1 hour ago, Anomaly said:

I’m guessing the old racist definition is “Intentional behavior to act against another based on disdain for that specific race.”

New definition is “Behavior that may be interpreted as an act biased against a specific race, regardless of intent, conscious or subconscious.”

This is silly. Nobody has defined racism according to your "New definition".

As for the "old definition" I think Merriam Webster's dictionary suffices:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

1) a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2) the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another

[Anomaly]

15 minutes ago, Peace said:

This is silly. Nobody has defined racism according to your "New definition".

As for the "old definition" I think Merriam Webster's dictionary suffices:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism

1) a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2) the systemic oppression of a racial group to the social, economic, and political advantage of another

Peace,

You are probably the top of my list of people I would enjoy drinking a beer with while bantering.    But I think you’re wrong in what others think the new “working” definition of racism is.  And therein is one of the difficulties is discussing how to address racism.   The different definitions has one side defensive and the other side offended at the get-go. 

Edited October 16, 2020 by Anomaly

[Peace]

Just now, Anomaly said:

Peace,

You are probably the top of my list of people I would enjoy drinking a beer with while bantering.    But I think you’re wrong in what others think the new definition of racism is.  And therein is one of the difficulties is discussing how to address racism.   The different definitions has one side defensive and the other side offended at the get-go. 

What kind of beer is the question.

You may think I am wrong and that is all well and good, but the fact is that there is not one person on the planet Earth who has publicly defined racism, for himself, according to your "New Definition".

Regardless. The problem is easily solved. One merely need to define "racism" for the purpose of the discussion (as I did above, for example).

[Anomaly]

20 minutes ago, Anomaly said:

Peace,

You are probably the top of my list of people I would enjoy drinking a beer with while bantering.    But I think you’re wrong in what others think the new “working” definition of racism is.  And therein is one of the difficulties is discussing how to address racism.   The different definitions has one side defensive and the other side offended at the get-go. 

It’s beer.   There’s too many kinds to pick one.   If you don’t like it, don’t drink a second one. 

I find it difficult to believe too many people behave in a racial manner based on your Miriam definitions.  I do believe that people do behave in prejudicial manners based on Cultural differences that may happen to be grouped on shared culture of racial groups.   For example, as a white guy walking in a strange neighborhood, if a black man addresses me with a “Hey, man” i’d Think nothing of it.     Same guy, same neighborhood it’s “Yo, yo, wotie”, I’d be nervous.  I’d be nervous if the guy was any color, because I have no idea how this stranger is addressing me.  (Unless I was in n’awlins). 

Is my trepidation racist, or cultural because I can’t interpret wotie and guess at the guy’s intentions?    It’s survival instinct to distrust strangers of unknown intent. Throw in constant media and cultural pressures that differences need to be adversarial.  

[Didacus]

There is nothing racist with reacting favorably to something that is familiar.  It is perfectly natural to have a pisitive reaction to something to which you are accustomed.

If somwone in town greets me in french... i always like it... i'm french, that's just natural.

Does that mean i hate english speaking people?

My team is the Montreal Canadiens (no surprises there-right?).  Do I hate Leaf fans... no...  but i might be more incline to buy a beer to a fellow Montreal fan than a stinking no good english speaking Leaf fan... just saying...

[fides' Jack]

Is wotie an actual word in New Orleans?  I mean, I know it's not a real word, but is that something people say?  And if so, what does it mean?