https://yarn.co/yarn-clip/65378c44-1baa-418e-85d7-3aa7432ca9b9
4 Likes
Holy shit, its Effen
1 Like
We can post pictures and videos inline on this forum.
See?
Oops yea he said child separation was done to protect the kids from the traffickers trafficking them
That is the same reasoning that will be given at the guillotinings
4 Likes
2 Likes
Moar Heritagenothate plz
An anthology of this guy’s work should be something to behold.
Have you read the Cornerstone Speech by the Vice President of the Confederacy?
He says why they seceded:
“With us, all of the white race, however high or low, rich or poor, are equal in the eye of the law. Not so with the negro. Subordination is his place. He, by nature, or by the curse against Canaan, is fitted for that condition which he occupies in our system.”
They literally believed one race was below another and fought a war to maintain that.
And today, that same idea, that the lowest, poorest white man is above the richest, highest black man is prevalent amongst a sizable % of our population.
1 Like
@Heritagenothate Do you believe Donald Trump has received a lot of letters from people like this:
If not, why do you think he would lie about that? Why do you think a habitual liar is not a thief? Why do you think a guy who has grifted more in the Whitehouse than anyone else ever is better than a thief?
Also
How many years until you believe you will be in the 1%?
slavery duh
1 Like
You said your beef with Lebron James is that he whines too much. Can I safely infer that you are a big fan of Colin Kaepernick and his method of silent protest?
10 Likes
Child separation was done solely to stop human traffickers? Interesting, what are your thoughts on Q?
That speech is one of my favorite examples.
If someone wants to argue that the North was not nearly as pure in opposition to slavery as we like to think, let’s fkin go. That is a discussion on nuance that will help us further identify racism throughout history and eradicate it in modern times.
But the South was by the words of each Confederate state’s declaration of secession ALL IN on slavery and racism.
Georgia opens with:
The people of Georgia having dissolved their political connection with the Government of the United States of America, present to their confederates and the world the causes which have led to the separation. For the last ten years we have had numerous and serious causes of complaint against our non-slave-holding confederate States with reference to the subject of African slavery
Mississippi says they were in conflict with the US constitution because it
advocates negro equality, socially and politically
Texas demands to secede because
They demand the abolition of negro slavery throughout the confederacy, the recognition of political equality between the white and negro races, and avow their determination to press on their crusade against us, so long as a negro slave remains in these States.
South Carolina says they can’t stay in the Union because
an increasing hostility on the part of the non-slaveholding States to the institution of slavery, has led to a disregard of their obligations, and the laws of the General Government have ceased to effect the objects of the Constitution.
Perhaps that was just each state saying something the Confederate government as a whole did not condone? After all, states rights means letting each state decide for themselves without speaking for all.
So instead we turn to the Vice President of the Confederacy and his Cornerstone speech (references in part by Nicholas above) declaring the independence of the Confederacy.
Alexander Stephens wanted to leave no confusion for those (like Heritagenothate?) who seemed unable to understand why the Confederacy was proud to lay down their lives to secede.
[Secession] rests upon the great truth, that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery—subordination to the superior race—is his natural and normal condition.
Stephens argued that thanks to advances in science, we now knew as an unassailable fact that all men were NOT created equal, and that enslavement of the negro was done for the better of the slave and to fulfill God’s purpose and moral teachings.
Obviously that is getting a little bit in the weeds with religious talk, and Stephens rightly suspected that many people would say that is good, but tell me there is something here for the less devout, too.
But of course! The VP of the Confederacy summed up the South’s views and purpose thusly:
Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite ideas; its foundations are laid, its cornerstone rests, upon the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and normal condition. This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth.
Our new government is founded upon exactly…the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man.
That last quote in not an accidental repeat. Stephens made sure to repeat this point.
What is next? Finding pride in the engineering marvels of a gas chamber and then showing zero awareness or compassion for why that example might be offensive? Why is it that racists insist on defending fine ideas by using the most racist possible examples? To find something to be proud of within the most racist people in history and then die on that hill wondering why no one is interested in esteeming people who were abhorrent pieces of shit? That a benevolent but proud slave owner is a racist regardless of whether they thought of themselves as benevolent and well intentioned? That a person does not need to knowingly and intentionally contribute to racism to unwittingly be the most racist person anyone has ever seen?
11 Likes
Sounds like government interfering with the free market IYAM.
1 Like
It follows that being taxed at one hundred percent the value of one’s time and labor would be the maximum level of theft under your definition. If we could identify any such cases, would you support compensating the victims and/or their descendants of such egregious theft?
12 Likes
Can you own someone when you do 99% of the work/research in arguing and they provide no content sentences and just ignore anything you say? Are we sure this guy isn’t that troll from the P+S impeachment thread that everyone waaged their time on?
Not since the Civil War amirite folks. But more seriously, nah, what this guy is getting from the thread is the opportunity to say things that will prompt a reaction. You can call it trolling if you like, though it’s a weird kind of trolling where the victims enjoy it. So I think the wrestling heel comparison is much more apt.
The thing about Trump caring about the constitution and doing his best to restore it or whatever. Nobody believes anything like that. He just knows people are likely to react to him saying it. It’s cheap heat, it’s ripping on the local sports team. You’re supposed to boo.
2 Likes