The Political & Philosophy Thread

Dak said:
Progressive idol FDR was also at odds with the courts and just hung around until many died. Speaking of emperors....
Click to expand...

http://www.businessinsider.com/samantha-bee-donald-trump-immigration-muslim-ban-2017-2

In order to express the full consequences of the US refusing to admit refugees, Bee took us back to World War II and President Franklin D. Roosevelt's denial of Jewish refugees fleeing Nazi-occupied Europe. Coincidentally, Roosevelt and Trump have used the same reasoning to defend their refugee bans: a desire to avoid a "Trojan horse" — enemies of the US who gain entry as refugees.

"F--- you, F.D.R., they weren't Trojans or Nazis, they were Jewish refugees," Bee said. "And they definitely did have something to fear besides fear itself... The way America welcomed the last non-Christian war refugees to knock at our door was one of the most shameful stains on our history, which is saying a lot."
Click to expand...

So much for idol worship.
 
I wish Trump would use the argument "They're expensive and it's America's money and territory and we choose what to do with it"

Nobody ever talks about that enough, left OR right. It's always vetting and security and terrorists and I'm sick of it.

Need to hammer home the our money/our land/our choice argument harder because it's irrefutable.

Don't you think so @CASSETTEISGOD
 
Last edited:
crimsonfloyd said:
That would be a good point if I were arguing "Right Wing Extremists are worse than Muslim extremists". I'm not. I'm saying that federal programs, such as the CVE, should continue to monitor both groups. It's a false dilemma to act as if you can just track one. We HAVE been tracking both, but now Trump wants to focus on only one. Obviously, that decision isn't about making people safer. And if your black, Muslim, or a member of any other group that may be targeted by right-wing extremists, then this is a clear message from the president that "your life and safety isn't important to me."

As far as which group has committed more per capita, that's also not a very important point, since the vast majority of both groups are not a threat to anybody. Focus on the groups, organizations, and individuals who provide reason for concern.
Click to expand...

Blacks are in far, far more danger from other blacks than whites or Muslims, and the moment Trump threatened to do something about this problem in one particular area (an area run by a former Obama cabinet member which you have never been vocally opposed to), there was an outrage. Gangs constitute the greatest domestic threat to peace and safety and yet there's no real acknowledgement of this.

I looked at one study that attempted to assess "right wing violence" and the largest portion, were simply a minority beating. Absolutely ridiculous to lump that in the same category as the Orlando night club, or 9/11, or OKC. Obviously it's a problem, but a black person is far less safe walking through a black ghetto in Chicago than walking through a Kentucky town. The same would go for a hispanic wearing the wrong clothing in LA vs Kentucky.
 
Dak said:
Blacks are in far, far more danger from other blacks than whites or Muslims, and the moment Trump threatened to do something about this problem in one particular area (an area run by a former Obama cabinet member which you have never been vocally opposed to), there was an outrage. Gangs constitute the greatest domestic threat to peace and safety and yet there's no real acknowledgement of this.

I looked at one study that attempted to assess "right wing violence" and the largest portion, were simply a minority beating. Absolutely ridiculous to lump that in the same category as the Orlando night club, or 9/11, or OKC. Obviously it's a problem, but a black person is far less safe walking through a black ghetto in Chicago than walking through a Kentucky town. The same would go for a hispanic wearing the wrong clothing in LA vs Kentucky.
Click to expand...

Let's stop with the false dilemmas. There's no reason that gang and drug related violence cannot be addressed while still monitoring right-wing extremism.
 
crimsonfloyd said:
Let's stop with the false dilemmas. There's no reason that gang and drug related violence cannot be addressed while still monitoring right-wing extremism.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it couldn't be (in fact, it's so relatively miniscule it wouldn't be difficult). I'm pointing out that if we want to get real about where the greatest problems lie in terms of organized domestic violence and violent ideologies, gangs are far and away the greatest domestic issue. Of course, it's also possible to monitor domestic threats while at the same time monitoring foreign threats.
 
Dak said:
I didn't say it couldn't be (in fact, it's so relatively miniscule it wouldn't be difficult). I'm pointing out that if we want to get real about where the greatest problems lie in terms of organized domestic violence and violent ideologies, gangs are far and away the greatest domestic issue. Of course, it's also possible to monitor domestic threats while at the same time monitoring foreign threats.
Click to expand...

Well it doesn't appear we have a significant difference of opinion on this issue. Since the Trump took an action to withdraw attention from the far-right extremists, that's where my attention is right now. When something happens regarding gang violence, we should evaluate those actions separately. Let's not muddle issues unnecessarily.
 
Going off this tangent, I've only just noticed that Truman is apparently considered one of the greatest presidents of all time by scholars. While I think many of FDR's policies led to various problems of government overreach that we suffer from today, for the period I can kind of justify/understand it. The entire world was moving towards authoritarianism, and he tried to stay relatively neutral during WW2 until we were attacked. Truman though, what in the fuck did he do? He sold us out to foreign European powers to help their fading imperial power, allowed Russia to destroy Eastern Europe, most Russian espionage occurred under his presidency, continued to play fascist in American economic policies even after the war, and seemingly had an ego as frail as Trump's. All I'll give him is that he desegregated the army.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dak
HamburgerBoy said:
Going off this tangent, I've only just noticed that Truman is apparently considered one of the greatest presidents of all time by scholars.
Click to expand...

who told you this? I've taken a few WWII courses and read a plethora of books and I can't think of any positives from the Truman-era
 
rms said:
who told you this? I've taken a few WWII courses and read a plethora of books and I can't think of any positives from the Truman-era
Click to expand...

Wikipedia has a compilation of various sources ranking the Presidents over the years, and he's consistently in the top 10 (#7 right now). Doing some Googling this seems to be a common opinion among many people, particularly those on the left, the only criticism he receives seemingly involving nuking Japan.
 
Sorry cf, I'll respond to your comment soon, not avoiding just busy as shit. :bah:

arg said:
I wish Trump would use the argument "They're expensive and it's America's money and territory and we choose what to do with it"

Nobody ever talks about that enough, left OR right. It's always vetting and security and terrorists and I'm sick of it.

Need to hammer home the our money/our land/our choice argument harder because it's irrefutable.

Don't you think so @CASSETTEISGOD
Click to expand...

This is a better argument for the Europeans who are being flooded by the poor and culturally regressive, whereas America mostly just gets middle class Muslims/immigrants who tend to actually do quite well economically almost immediately.

Except for that clock boy who just lost his lawsuit against Ben Shapiro and has to pay all his court costs. He fucked up. Don't sue Jewish lawyers.
 
CASSETTEISGOD said:
This is a better argument for the Europeans who are being flooded by the poor and culturally regressive, whereas America mostly just gets middle class Muslims/immigrants who tend to actually do quite well economically almost immediately.
Click to expand...

Whilst this may be true for other countries in Europe, I have no idea and I don't really care, it's not for the UK. Immigrants in the UK are more likely to have a degree than natives. And a lot of those without degrees do work that, largely due to government failures, we don't have enough natives able or willing to do (so in social care, nursing, construction, etc.).

Still, enough of the kind of people that are a genuine burden upon society believe what you said to be true for the UK and so we're gonna spend years pissing about with all this brexit bollocks.

Fuckyeah, ignorance.
 
Well, technically it hasn't yet, but whatever.

I'm not even particularly bothered by brexit its self, which is why I don't rant about it or go on marches or sign petitions or any of that shit. What bothers me is the level of ignorance and/or stupidity that it's shown up.


And anyone in favour of leaving that tells people to stop moaning can fuck right off. 'Eurosceptics' have whinged and blamed government failures on the EU for decades. If people are still complaining about brexit in 2040, then they can tell them to shut the fuck up. Before? Hypocritical cunts can fuck themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

zabu of nΩd
Philosophy topic: the global society
Replies
119
Views
3K
GMD Social Forum
NoumeGnon
N
KafkaX
The Mysticism Thread
Replies
29
Views
2K
GMD Social Forum
Einherjar86
E
JColtrane
Philosophy?
Replies
25
Views
1K
The Philosopher
LDGuy
L
Valerie
2008 Presidential Candidates
Replies
984
Views
21K
GMD Social Forum
cookiecutter
C
zabu of nΩd
  • Poll Poll
The (Post-Recession/Obama) Non-Batshit Politics Thread of 2015 & Beyond
Replies
211
Views
12K
GMD Social Forum
CiG
CiG
Top Bottom