Why do the trump haters get to have all the say??
Josh said:So much for all that 'Jim Crow' stuff being exclusively Democrats.
"Black people across US receive racist text messages after Trump’s win"
"Just hours after Donald Trump’s election win on Tuesday, Black people across the US reported receiving racist text messages telling them that they had been “selected” to pick cotton and needed to report to “the nearest plantation”. While the texts, some of which were signed “a Trump supporter”, varied in detail, they all conveyed the same essential message about being selected to pick cotton."
"On Thursday, the NAACP condemned the messages.
“The unfortunate reality of electing a President who historically has embraced, and at times encouraged hate, is unfolding before our eyes. These messages represent an alarming increase in vile and abhorrent rhetoric from racist groups across the country, who now feel emboldened to spread hate and stoke the flames of fear that many of us are feeling after Tuesday’s election results,” the NAACP president and CEO, Derrick Johnson, said in a statement.
“We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again – there is no place for hate in a democracy. The threat – and the mention of slavery in 2024 – is not only deeply disturbing, but perpetuates a legacy of evil that dates back to before the Jim Crow era, and now seeks to prevent Black Americans from enjoying the same freedom to pursue life, liberty, and happiness."
(The Guardian, Friday 8th November)
I would have to ask, if this was truly a Trump supporter sending the text, or someone who hates Trump, sending the text in order to start trouble and pin it on him .
Not all is what we assume it to be..... irregular warfare, etc.
"Black people across US receive racist text messages after Trump’s win"
"Just hours after Donald Trump’s election win on Tuesday, Black people across the US reported receiving racist text messages telling them that they had been “selected” to pick cotton and needed to report to “the nearest plantation”. While the texts, some of which were signed “a Trump supporter”, varied in detail, they all conveyed the same essential message about being selected to pick cotton."
"On Thursday, the NAACP condemned the messages.
“The unfortunate reality of electing a President who historically has embraced, and at times encouraged hate, is unfolding before our eyes. These messages represent an alarming increase in vile and abhorrent rhetoric from racist groups across the country, who now feel emboldened to spread hate and stoke the flames of fear that many of us are feeling after Tuesday’s election results,” the NAACP president and CEO, Derrick Johnson, said in a statement.
“We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again – there is no place for hate in a democracy. The threat – and the mention of slavery in 2024 – is not only deeply disturbing, but perpetuates a legacy of evil that dates back to before the Jim Crow era, and now seeks to prevent Black Americans from enjoying the same freedom to pursue life, liberty, and happiness."
(The Guardian, Friday 8th November)
I would have to ask, if this was truly a Trump supporter sending the text, or someone who hates Trump, sending the text in order to start trouble and pin it on him .
Not all is what we assume it to be..... irregular warfare, etc.
Josh said:[i]
"Black people across US receive racist text messages after Trump’s win"
Come on, Josh. As if there were no racism in the US before Trump won. The population of the US is 346,083,451m. This is a few dicks with a computer, who'd still be a few dicks with a computer if the Dems had won. I bet similar things happened numerous times during Biden's term of office as well, but never gained newspaper coverage. It's exactly this sort of Guardian reportage which detracts from serious debate and is just another example of why the Democrats were trounced by Trump in the election. I don't know, and I haven't looked, but I'd expect there'd be little difference between the number of black people killed by police during either of the Obama terms in office, for example, and the number killed during Trump's last term in office. If we concentrate on the real stuff, the institutional racism, instead of the bollocks, we may be able to make a bit of progress. Blaming Donald Trump for everything only obscures the problem.
"Black people across US receive racist text messages after Trump’s win"
Come on, Josh. As if there were no racism in the US before Trump won. The population of the US is 346,083,451m. This is a few dicks with a computer, who'd still be a few dicks with a computer if the Dems had won. I bet similar things happened numerous times during Biden's term of office as well, but never gained newspaper coverage. It's exactly this sort of Guardian reportage which detracts from serious debate and is just another example of why the Democrats were trounced by Trump in the election. I don't know, and I haven't looked, but I'd expect there'd be little difference between the number of black people killed by police during either of the Obama terms in office, for example, and the number killed during Trump's last term in office. If we concentrate on the real stuff, the institutional racism, instead of the bollocks, we may be able to make a bit of progress. Blaming Donald Trump for everything only obscures the problem.
Well, looks like I got well and truly trashed on that one :)
The thing is, people at the top set the tone for what is considered "o.k behaviour" by the masses. If Trump wants to send 10+million immigrants back to wherever, does that not signal something in the minds of the many? Institutional racism is emboldened to be more brazen about their partly suppressed beliefs. It legitimises threatening behaviours to 'non-whites', does it not?
The thing is, people at the top set the tone for what is considered "o.k behaviour" by the masses. If Trump wants to send 10+million immigrants back to wherever, does that not signal something in the minds of the many? Institutional racism is emboldened to be more brazen about their partly suppressed beliefs. It legitimises threatening behaviours to 'non-whites', does it not?
Josh said:Well, looks like I got well and truly trashed on that one :)
The thing is, people at the top set the tone for what is considered "o.k behaviour" by the masses. If Trump wants to send 10+million immigrants back to wherever, does that not signal something in the minds of the many? Institutional racism is emboldened to be more brazen about their partly suppressed beliefs. It legitimises threatening behaviours to 'non-whites', does it not?
Well, to be fair to Trump, the people he wants to 'send back' are the illegal immigrants to the US. For example, if a white bloke from the UK went to the US and tried to live and work there without the proper documentation, he too would be kicked out. Trump's fine with legal immigration. I would say that it's a legal issue rather than a racial one. The UK's immigration policy, and the immigration policy of most countries, is no different.
I know I'm on tricky ground here, Josh, and you know I'm not a Trump fan, so be gentle if you come back at me 🙃.
The thing is, people at the top set the tone for what is considered "o.k behaviour" by the masses. If Trump wants to send 10+million immigrants back to wherever, does that not signal something in the minds of the many? Institutional racism is emboldened to be more brazen about their partly suppressed beliefs. It legitimises threatening behaviours to 'non-whites', does it not?
Well, to be fair to Trump, the people he wants to 'send back' are the illegal immigrants to the US. For example, if a white bloke from the UK went to the US and tried to live and work there without the proper documentation, he too would be kicked out. Trump's fine with legal immigration. I would say that it's a legal issue rather than a racial one. The UK's immigration policy, and the immigration policy of most countries, is no different.
I know I'm on tricky ground here, Josh, and you know I'm not a Trump fan, so be gentle if you come back at me 🙃.
ajay said:
Well, to be fair to Trump, the people he wants to 'send back' are the illegal immigrants to the US. For example, if a white bloke from the UK went to the US and tried to live and work there without the proper documentation, he too would be kicked out. Trump's fine with legal immigration. I would say that it's a legal issue rather than a racial one. The UK's immigration policy, and the immigration policy of most countries, is no different.
I know I'm on tricky ground here, Josh, and you know I'm not a Trump fan, so be gentle if you come back at me 🙃.
If I was prime-minister, I would find the question of immigration to be the trickiest to resolve. There is a truth in the claim that for a nation to 'work smoothly' you need some level of a homogenous set of beliefs - a tribal consensus - of basic norms.
Immigration needs to be regulated in relation to how much (psychologically) the 'indigenous tribe' can adjust to accept an expanded consensus. A backlash against immigrants seems to suggest this 'adjustment' is being forced too quickly; and yet the backlash is also unfairly stoked with fear-mongering language, activating deep in the psyche a fear of the 'unknown other'.
I understand that legitimate immigrants also feel aggrieved about non-legit immigrants.
Here in Portugal, 20,000 Jews have come in the last 12 months and get special favoured treatment because ... err, well because they were kicked out 500 years ago by the Portuguese. 500 years ago! And they claim some ancestors used to live here which gives them a right to special treatment. Instant visas.
Shall I go back several centuries and claim the land lost to my ancestors of the Fraser Clan in the Highland Clearances?
We live in a time of mass-movement of peoples; and it's easy to feel threatened. The Portuguese are very accommodating so far (it's a very underpopulated country, 1/6th the density of the U.K). But local 'hotspots' of foreigners (Dutch, German, French, Belgian, Polish, Brits {fewer after Brexit}) are beginning to test the limits of Portuguese acceptance. I have no easy answers.
Well, to be fair to Trump, the people he wants to 'send back' are the illegal immigrants to the US. For example, if a white bloke from the UK went to the US and tried to live and work there without the proper documentation, he too would be kicked out. Trump's fine with legal immigration. I would say that it's a legal issue rather than a racial one. The UK's immigration policy, and the immigration policy of most countries, is no different.
I know I'm on tricky ground here, Josh, and you know I'm not a Trump fan, so be gentle if you come back at me 🙃.
If I was prime-minister, I would find the question of immigration to be the trickiest to resolve. There is a truth in the claim that for a nation to 'work smoothly' you need some level of a homogenous set of beliefs - a tribal consensus - of basic norms.
Immigration needs to be regulated in relation to how much (psychologically) the 'indigenous tribe' can adjust to accept an expanded consensus. A backlash against immigrants seems to suggest this 'adjustment' is being forced too quickly; and yet the backlash is also unfairly stoked with fear-mongering language, activating deep in the psyche a fear of the 'unknown other'.
I understand that legitimate immigrants also feel aggrieved about non-legit immigrants.
Here in Portugal, 20,000 Jews have come in the last 12 months and get special favoured treatment because ... err, well because they were kicked out 500 years ago by the Portuguese. 500 years ago! And they claim some ancestors used to live here which gives them a right to special treatment. Instant visas.
Shall I go back several centuries and claim the land lost to my ancestors of the Fraser Clan in the Highland Clearances?
We live in a time of mass-movement of peoples; and it's easy to feel threatened. The Portuguese are very accommodating so far (it's a very underpopulated country, 1/6th the density of the U.K). But local 'hotspots' of foreigners (Dutch, German, French, Belgian, Polish, Brits {fewer after Brexit}) are beginning to test the limits of Portuguese acceptance. I have no easy answers.
Josh said:Well, looks like I got well and truly trashed on that one :)
The thing is, people at the top set the tone for what is considered "o.k behaviour" by the masses. If Trump wants to send 10+million immigrants back to wherever, does that not signal something in the minds of the many? Institutional racism is emboldened to be more brazen about their partly suppressed beliefs. It legitimises threatening behaviours to 'non-whites', does it not?
They can always come back. LEGALLY. Whats wrong with that?
The thing is, people at the top set the tone for what is considered "o.k behaviour" by the masses. If Trump wants to send 10+million immigrants back to wherever, does that not signal something in the minds of the many? Institutional racism is emboldened to be more brazen about their partly suppressed beliefs. It legitimises threatening behaviours to 'non-whites', does it not?
They can always come back. LEGALLY. Whats wrong with that?
Josh said:So much for all that 'Jim Crow' stuff being exclusively Democrats.
"Black people across US receive racist text messages after Trump’s win"
"Just hours after Donald Trump’s election win on Tuesday, Black people across the US reported receiving racist text messages telling them that they had been “selected” to pick cotton and needed to report to “the nearest plantation”. While the texts, some of which were signed “a Trump supporter”, varied in detail, they all conveyed the same essential message about being selected to pick cotton."
"On Thursday, the NAACP condemned the messages.
“The unfortunate reality of electing a President who historically has embraced, and at times encouraged hate, is unfolding before our eyes. These messages represent an alarming increase in vile and abhorrent rhetoric from racist groups across the country, who now feel emboldened to spread hate and stoke the flames of fear that many of us are feeling after Tuesday’s election results,” the NAACP president and CEO, Derrick Johnson, said in a statement.
“We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again – there is no place for hate in a democracy. The threat – and the mention of slavery in 2024 – is not only deeply disturbing, but perpetuates a legacy of evil that dates back to before the Jim Crow era, and now seeks to prevent Black Americans from enjoying the same freedom to pursue life, liberty, and happiness."
(The Guardian, Friday 8th November)
So this current jive... completely expected from the DEFEATED slave party gasping for air as they finally die from their own corruption. I would never expect the party that has spent years locking up citizens and journalists and political rivals, murdering Trump supporters and "still" attempting assassinations and doing everything they could to censor speech .....to put out another Jessie Smollet hate hoax....
Tell me it isn't so. This is certainly not the fine upstanding Democrat morally supernal graced progressive political arm that NEVER lies or spreads propaganda like a bag of meth head fascists....
It MUST be true because the mules have copied and posted it. That is the only qualification needed ....
Those mean 'ol Trumpets.
They bring in the biggest red wave in 100 years ever since they ended the monopolies...
And then attack black people????
The same black people Republicans freed from bondage and secured civil liberties for the last 160 years...
Mean 'ol Trump....He really beats all, don't he??
"Black people across US receive racist text messages after Trump’s win"
"Just hours after Donald Trump’s election win on Tuesday, Black people across the US reported receiving racist text messages telling them that they had been “selected” to pick cotton and needed to report to “the nearest plantation”. While the texts, some of which were signed “a Trump supporter”, varied in detail, they all conveyed the same essential message about being selected to pick cotton."
"On Thursday, the NAACP condemned the messages.
“The unfortunate reality of electing a President who historically has embraced, and at times encouraged hate, is unfolding before our eyes. These messages represent an alarming increase in vile and abhorrent rhetoric from racist groups across the country, who now feel emboldened to spread hate and stoke the flames of fear that many of us are feeling after Tuesday’s election results,” the NAACP president and CEO, Derrick Johnson, said in a statement.
“We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again – there is no place for hate in a democracy. The threat – and the mention of slavery in 2024 – is not only deeply disturbing, but perpetuates a legacy of evil that dates back to before the Jim Crow era, and now seeks to prevent Black Americans from enjoying the same freedom to pursue life, liberty, and happiness."
(The Guardian, Friday 8th November)
So this current jive... completely expected from the DEFEATED slave party gasping for air as they finally die from their own corruption. I would never expect the party that has spent years locking up citizens and journalists and political rivals, murdering Trump supporters and "still" attempting assassinations and doing everything they could to censor speech .....to put out another Jessie Smollet hate hoax....
Tell me it isn't so. This is certainly not the fine upstanding Democrat morally supernal graced progressive political arm that NEVER lies or spreads propaganda like a bag of meth head fascists....
It MUST be true because the mules have copied and posted it. That is the only qualification needed ....
Those mean 'ol Trumpets.
They bring in the biggest red wave in 100 years ever since they ended the monopolies...
And then attack black people????
The same black people Republicans freed from bondage and secured civil liberties for the last 160 years...
Mean 'ol Trump....He really beats all, don't he??
Josh said:
If I was prime-minister, I would find the question of immigration to be the trickiest to resolve. There is a truth in the claim that for a nation to 'work smoothly' you need some level of a homogenous set of beliefs - a tribal consensus - of basic norms.
Immigration needs to be regulated in relation to how much (psychologically) the 'indigenous tribe' can adjust to accept an expanded consensus. A backlash against immigrants seems to suggest this 'adjustment' is being forced too quickly; and yet the backlash is also unfairly stoked with fear-mongering language, activating deep in the psyche a fear of the 'unknown other'.
I understand that legitimate immigrants also feel aggrieved about non-legit immigrants.
Here in Portugal, 20,000 Jews have come in the last 12 months and get special favoured treatment because ... err, well because they were kicked out 500 years ago by the Portuguese. 500 years ago! And they claim some ancestors used to live here which gives them a right to special treatment. Instant visas.
Shall I go back several centuries and claim the land lost to my ancestors of the Fraser Clan in the Highland Clearances?
We live in a time of mass-movement of peoples; and it's easy to feel threatened. The Portuguese are very accommodating so far (it's a very underpopulated country, 1/6th the density of the U.K). But local 'hotspots' of foreigners (Dutch, German, French, Belgian, Polish, Brits {fewer after Brexit}) are beginning to test the limits of Portuguese acceptance. I have no easy answers.
I think the easiest answer is that today, we are not personally responsible for something someone did, 500 years ago, we learn from their mistakes and apply that knowledge to the here and now. When it comes to immigration for entrance into any country, it needs to be done correctly according to the laws of that country, regardless of beliefs, religion or skin color.
Then, once properly admitted to that country, the newly admitted people need to learn about and assimilate into that new culture and be productive citizens. That's not to say they can't keep their own culture and beliefs as well, but the entitlement and expecting everyone to cater to their culture, needs to stop.
If I decided to move to another country and become a citizen there, I would sure as hell learn the language, laws and customs, and not expect the natural born citizens to bow to me and where I came from
If I was prime-minister, I would find the question of immigration to be the trickiest to resolve. There is a truth in the claim that for a nation to 'work smoothly' you need some level of a homogenous set of beliefs - a tribal consensus - of basic norms.
Immigration needs to be regulated in relation to how much (psychologically) the 'indigenous tribe' can adjust to accept an expanded consensus. A backlash against immigrants seems to suggest this 'adjustment' is being forced too quickly; and yet the backlash is also unfairly stoked with fear-mongering language, activating deep in the psyche a fear of the 'unknown other'.
I understand that legitimate immigrants also feel aggrieved about non-legit immigrants.
Here in Portugal, 20,000 Jews have come in the last 12 months and get special favoured treatment because ... err, well because they were kicked out 500 years ago by the Portuguese. 500 years ago! And they claim some ancestors used to live here which gives them a right to special treatment. Instant visas.
Shall I go back several centuries and claim the land lost to my ancestors of the Fraser Clan in the Highland Clearances?
We live in a time of mass-movement of peoples; and it's easy to feel threatened. The Portuguese are very accommodating so far (it's a very underpopulated country, 1/6th the density of the U.K). But local 'hotspots' of foreigners (Dutch, German, French, Belgian, Polish, Brits {fewer after Brexit}) are beginning to test the limits of Portuguese acceptance. I have no easy answers.
I think the easiest answer is that today, we are not personally responsible for something someone did, 500 years ago, we learn from their mistakes and apply that knowledge to the here and now. When it comes to immigration for entrance into any country, it needs to be done correctly according to the laws of that country, regardless of beliefs, religion or skin color.
Then, once properly admitted to that country, the newly admitted people need to learn about and assimilate into that new culture and be productive citizens. That's not to say they can't keep their own culture and beliefs as well, but the entitlement and expecting everyone to cater to their culture, needs to stop.
If I decided to move to another country and become a citizen there, I would sure as hell learn the language, laws and customs, and not expect the natural born citizens to bow to me and where I came from
MadameLavender said:
I think the easiest answer is that today, we are not personally responsible for something someone did, 500 years ago, we learn from their mistakes and apply that knowledge to the here and now. When it comes to immigration for entrance into any country, it needs to be done correctly according to the laws of that country, regardless of beliefs, religion or skin color.
Then, once properly admitted to that country, the newly admitted people need to learn about and assimilate into that new culture and be productive citizens. That's not to say they can't keep their own culture and beliefs as well, but the entitlement and expecting everyone to cater to their culture, needs to stop.
If I decided to move to another country and become a citizen there, I would sure as hell learn the language, laws and customs, and not expect the natural born citizens to bow to me and where I came from
Totally agree, ML.
Not only that, however, some countries do not acknowledge women's rights, so wed be in deep shit pending where we go....
The USA is the only country where womens rights are a thing. So for those that feel these rights are under attack, do your research, ffs.
No President not even Trump, can take your CONSTITUTIONAL rights way. Being man nor woman.
People are so fast to believe what they hear especially and not what they see......
Also this right here is huge, and thank you ML for posting this...
"we are not personally responsible for something someone did, 500 years ago"
I STILL stand by Trump.....
I think the easiest answer is that today, we are not personally responsible for something someone did, 500 years ago, we learn from their mistakes and apply that knowledge to the here and now. When it comes to immigration for entrance into any country, it needs to be done correctly according to the laws of that country, regardless of beliefs, religion or skin color.
Then, once properly admitted to that country, the newly admitted people need to learn about and assimilate into that new culture and be productive citizens. That's not to say they can't keep their own culture and beliefs as well, but the entitlement and expecting everyone to cater to their culture, needs to stop.
If I decided to move to another country and become a citizen there, I would sure as hell learn the language, laws and customs, and not expect the natural born citizens to bow to me and where I came from
Totally agree, ML.
Not only that, however, some countries do not acknowledge women's rights, so wed be in deep shit pending where we go....
The USA is the only country where womens rights are a thing. So for those that feel these rights are under attack, do your research, ffs.
No President not even Trump, can take your CONSTITUTIONAL rights way. Being man nor woman.
People are so fast to believe what they hear especially and not what they see......
Also this right here is huge, and thank you ML for posting this...
"we are not personally responsible for something someone did, 500 years ago"
I STILL stand by Trump.....
