Everything offending everybody

[Dan the Damned]

You really don't know their reasons? You're calling them fascists without even hearing them out?

From what I have read, apparently Churchill was a huge racist. And apparently a lot of historians say that his status as a hero is based more on his uplifting speeches rather than his actual decision-making during the war.

And this debate is not new. Here's a video from 2 years ago with the byline "Should We Be Ashamed of Churchill?". Note that the lady in yellow does not condone taking down his statue, but the objections she has about Churchill are shared by those who do want his statues taken down today.



In the end, however, this is a British leader, and not being English, myself, I don't really feel comfortable suggesting what they do with their own statues or telling them how they should feel about their own leaders.


Lincoln is a different matter. F*ck that guy!

Just kidding. Of course Lincoln was a true American hero.

You seem to imply that people want Lincoln's statue removed because they dislike the man. But that is not the case at all.

People have a problem with one statue of Lincoln. A statue of a slave kneeling at Lincoln's feet. And the problem is with the way the slave is depicted.



Some people feel that this is degrading. If black men are equal to white men, then why is he kneeling? To them, it shows the black man as more of an animal, half-naked and in shackles being "blessed" by the all-powerful white man with the gift of equality.

Others say that the slave is simply thanking Lincoln for his work in ending slavery. That's how I view it, and that is most likely what the artist intended -- but people can look at the exact same thing and get a very different message from it. This statue has been controversial ever since it was first erected.

Funny thing is, back when Lincoln was still alive, he actually did have black people come and kneel in front of him. This reportedly embarrassed Lincoln greatly, and he would tell them, "Don't kneel to me -- that is not right."

So it would seem that Lincoln, himself, would also be in favor of this statue's removal...

[Amit Y Ville]

As a British I'm fully proud of Churchill, he is a hero.

Dan, you live in the US right? Using GMB as a source is not good. Unless you value Karens opinion as the epitome of truth.

[Dan the Damned]

It's not Karen's views I was going for. It seemed that Afua Hirsch's viewpoints were very similar to the viewpoints of today's protesters who wish the Churchill statues removed.

And Piers Morgan's viewpoints seemed to be along the same lines of what you guys have been posting.

[Amit Y Ville]

It's not Karen's views I was going for. It seemed that Afua Hirsch's viewpoints were very similar to the viewpoints of today's protesters who wish the Churchill statues removed.

And Piers Morgan's viewpoints seemed to be along the same lines of what you guys have been posting.

I wouldn't know, maybe Piers read my posts?

Anyway, I'm a little perplexed why someone would choose to remove a statue of a celebrated hero. There's a really good movie about Churchill that was made recently. Definitely recommend that to you Dan.

[Brendan72]

I am extremely suspicious of who is the real driving force behind this removal of statues. First it is Confederate statues (incidentally 9 out of 11 of the statues were of men who were Democrats, go figure) and these represent a dark history in the South and therefore reasonable to have removed.

But now there appears to be a co-opted momentum towards the removal of others such as Churchill and Lincoln. The protests that commenced were (and are) for legitimate reasons, but there is a radicalized element that has hijacked the movement, continuing the momentum to an outcome which the silent majority do not want.

As an Australian I am not a huge fan of Winston Churchill (primarily because of what happened in Gallipoli in WW1) when he was Lord of the Admiralty. That being said I am not going to jump up and down and demand his statue be removed for that reason.

[Dan the Damned]

The Democrat and Republican parties were kinda "reversed" back when our Civil War was happening. That's why Lincoln was a Republican. In today's political climate, Lincoln would be a Democrat.

Over time, the Republicans became more conservative and the Democrats became more liberal, in effect, "switching sides" so to speak.

So yeah, there was a time when all the racists were Democrats.

Here's a good video talking about the Confederate statues. Note the speaker ends with "Taking down these monuments will not cure the problem, but it is at least an indication that we are ready to deal with the truth."



Regarding the statues of others who were racist (or had other flaws) but also did good things that benefited society -- yeah, I hear what you guys are saying. It's a tough call. No pun intended, but it's not always so black and white.

Here's a short video clip from last year where Obama talks about how people have flaws. He's talking about the "call-out culture" on social media, but it also applies to the topic we're talking about. And that's one reason why I said I don't feel right telling the British how they should feel about their own flawed heroes.



Yeah, unless it's a real clear-cut thing, I don't feel comfortable telling people how they should think about their own heroes and such. Likewise, unless I have very strong feelings about it, I don't feel comfortable telling black people how they should feel when looking at certain statues.

Like I said in my last post, when I look at the "Emancipation Memorial" (that's the controversial statue featuring Lincoln and a kneeling slave, which people want taken down), I see a depiction of Lincoln's legacy: the freeing an enslaved man. The depicted slave is in bad shape, representing how horrible they were treated.

But a black person can look at that same statue and say to me, "You don't see anything wrong with this? That black man is half naked and crouching down in chains! He's being presented as an animal. Totally subservient to the all-powerful white man, who seems to be ordaining the slave's freedom as if he were on the same level as Jesus and the black man was some ignorant piece of trash that needs to be led around and told what to do by the white man."

And if people see that in the statue -- if it really offends them -- why not remove it? If it makes some people feel this way, then it is not having its desired effect, and it should be replaced with something else. Perhaps a statue of Lincoln and Barack Obama, standing side by side as equals? That sounds nice to me! And it seems very fitting.

The Emancipation Memorial stands in Washington DC. There is a copy of the statue in Boston which will be removed by the city soon and put into storage.

[Anarane]

I don't think you know what you're talking about so not going to waste much time replying.

Fortunately for me, I don't think you don't know what you're talking about. I KNOW you don't.

If black persons were qualified then they would be getting the job now, and they are doing. Now there is a culture of they will look at their skin colour first and try to slot them based on qualifications to make up the 2/10. I've seen people not qualified at all for jobs who are getting employed, so its not quantifiable. Its absolutely positive discrimination but will be masked as something else.

I've already explained why this isn't true. I've already linked you to prove that BAME people make up less than 11% of boardroom appointments. But here's more stats given you're doubling down on your delightful casual racism to show that it's not just a boardroom issue – https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.ser ... -ethnicity

Oh, and here's some more: https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/ ... statistics

Not sure how all these BAME people are stealing jobs they're not qualified for given the unemployment rates were significantly higher for ethnic minorities at 12.9 per cent compared with 6.3 per cent for White people; Black workers with degrees earn 23.1 per cent less on average than White workers, and in Britain, significantly lower percentages of ethnic minorities (8.8 per cent) worked as managers, directors and senior officials, compared with White people (10.7 per cent) and this was particularly true for African or Caribbean or Black people (5.7 per cent) and those of mixed ethnicity (7.2 per cent).

Black people who leave school with A-levels typically get paid 14.3 per cent less than their White peers.

So can you show me again – with hard evidence as I have done here – that black people are stealing jobs they're not qualified for?

If you support pulling down statues which is surely illegal then why are you even in the country to begin with. Respect history and stop trying to rewrite it. Churchill helped save our country in the war and anyone who says his statue should be removed doesn't have the right to an opinion.

But it was ok when we did it in Bagdad, right?

As I said right at the beginning, no-one's asking to rewrite history. It can still be taught in schools and statues should be saved and displayed in museums. We just shouldn't be celebrating those whose wealth, success and legacy came at the cost of the exploitation of others.

As for "doesn't have the right to an opinion"? Lol, OK, boomer.

Not going to say you need your head checked or anything because you're not aware of the facts thats all.

Given how hysterically wrong you've been about the law thus far – and you seem to have glossed over the fact I told you I'm a lawyer, right? – I'm going to say that goes both ways, good buddy.

The real reason or what MSM are telling us?

You always know you're walking into fun times when the MSM comes up. Dude, there is no single, narrative-spinning mainstream media. There are outlets that are liberal and outlets that are conservative. End of. You drink your Fox News coolaid, I drink my CNN coolaid but one side isn't better or more impartial than the other. They ALL have biases and the ALL an agenda but Fox News/OANN is as much in the mainstream as CNN is.

Funny how you guys fail to mention the reasons people are giving for wanting the statues of Lincoln and Churchill taken down. Almost like you haven't bothered to check it out.

I know, right?! XD

Anyway, I'm a little perplexed why someone would choose to remove a statue of a celebrated hero.

That's weird, given I've already explained why twice in this thread already.

Here's a good video talking about the Confederate statues. Note the speaker ends with "Taking down these monuments will not cure the problem, but it is at least an indication that we are ready to deal with the truth."

What a great quote, Dan – thank you! <3

[Amit Y Ville]

I'm with Piers on this one, probably the best thing i've seen of him since leaving 'murica. Saving the world from Hitler is far more important than him hating Indians.

The world has moved on so no I absolutely stand by my comments about his statue.

Fortunately for me, I don't think you don't know what you're talking about. I KNOW you don't

Wow, that's such a childish thing to say. This "lawyer" (or did you mean solicitor?) Isn't worth the time of day.

[Dan the Damned]

I don't think you know what you're talking about so not going to waste much time replying.

Fortunately for me, I don't think you don't know what you're talking about. I KNOW you don't.

Wow, that's such a childish thing to say.

Amit, I'm not sure which line you think is childish here. The one you originally wrote, or the one Anarane responded with. lol

[Anarane]

Ha! Thanks, Dan.

I said lawyer because I wasn't 100% sure if you were in the UK or Stateside, Amit, but I'm a barrister, actually, specialising in employment, education, and employers' liability chiefly around discrimination and dismissal/employment rights. I honestly couldn't give two tin sh!ts if you believe me or not, although a not insignificant part of me feels like dropping a link to my firm's website right here so we can help you fight those dreadful illegal positive discrimination cases.

Oh, I also write about video games on the side! Admittedly not as often as I'd like, though.

So can you show me again – with hard evidence as I have done here – that black people are stealing jobs they're not qualified for?

Still waiting for your response for this. Suspect I'll be waiting for some time, though...

[Amit Y Ville]

The movement has only just started so doubt you're going to see analysis on it yet, maybe you can check in three months.

[gd134]

I just now saw this post and I totally agree. This world has gone mad, especially here in the US. It doesn't matter what statue it is, it will be vandalized no matter what like the Lincoln memorial. I'm not gonna lie, some statues I do support tearing down. But others deserve to stay standing for the great history and achievements they resemble. I'm thankful that president Trump signed an executive order demanding 10 year prison sentences to people who tear down federal statues because this behavior is just disgusting. Based on what I see, the democratic party gets 90% of the black vote today because they've somehow convinced blacks that they're being hunted down by the police. If the BLM movement gave a :) flower :) about black lives, the movement would address black-on-black more because that's what's harming the black community. Recently, 9 children died in Chicago for no reason because of black-on-black crime. Correct me if I'm wrong, but police brutality is rare and is highly exaggerated, and it's certainly not the black community's biggest issue. It's not even worth rioting for! This nation is not perfect, but it's not systemically racist. I would be more than happy to provide my evidence. If you wanna help the black community, please address the problems that are ACTUALLY holding it down, which are described by the leftist Don Lemon from CNN in this video: . That is the kind of thinking we need to solve these problems, because we are too politically correct. Did you know that the BLM movement insists that most blacks are incarcerated because the justice system in the U.S. is systemically racist? Nope, it's all due to culture and the fact that blacks just happen to commit more crime. Go ahead and call me a racist, but if we wanna solve problems in the black community, we need to stop the riots and look at facts. Please note, I'm just a 16 year old voicing my opinion as I observe the current "crisis".

[Amit Y Ville]

I just now saw this post and I totally agree. This world has gone mad, especially here in the US. It doesn't matter what statue it is, it will be vandalized no matter what like the Lincoln memorial. I'm not gonna lie, some statues I do support tearing down. But others deserve to stay standing for the great history and achievements they resemble. I'm thankful that president Trump signed an executive order demanding 10 year prison sentences to people who tear down federal statues because this behavior is just disgusting. Based on what I see, the democratic party gets 90% of the black vote today because they've somehow convinced blacks that they're being hunted down by the police. If the BLM movement gave a flower about black lives, the movement would address black-on-black more because that's what's harming the black community. Recently, 9 children died in Chicago for no reason because of black-on-black crime. Correct me if I'm wrong, but police brutality is rare and is highly exaggerated, and it's certainly not the black community's biggest issue. It's not even worth rioting for! This nation is not perfect, but it's not systemically racist. I would be more than happy to provide my evidence. If you wanna help the black community, please address the problems that are ACTUALLY holding it down, which are described by the leftist Don Lemon from CNN in this video: . That is the kind of thinking we need to solve these problems, because we are too politically correct. Did you know that the BLM movement insists that most blacks are incarcerated because the justice system in the U.S. is systemically racist? Nope, it's all due to culture and the fact that blacks just happen to commit more crime. Go ahead and call me a racist, but if we wanna solve problems in the black community, we need to stop the riots and look at facts. Please note, I'm just a 16 year old voicing my opinion as I observe the current "crisis".

Great points!

Looks like the truth is too much. I didn't even need to point out what a piece of work George Floyd was before they fled this thread.

[Dan the Damned]

I didn't even need to point out what a piece of work George Floyd was before they fled this thread.

Are you serious?!?

Are you suggesting that it's okay for racist cops to murder black people because, in retrospect, it just might turn out that the victim was convicted of a horrible crime many years earlier? That is insane! No wonder you agree so much with Piers Morgan...

It doesn't matter what statue it is, it will be vandalized no matter what like the Lincoln memorial.

The Lincoln Memorial wasn't vandalized. Check your facts.

Based on what I see, the democratic party gets 90% of the black vote today because they've somehow convinced blacks that they're being hunted down by the police.

Actually, STATISTICS have demonstrated that black people are being disproportionately killed by police.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6080222/

https://www.statista.com/statistics/585 ... e-by-race/

https://www.pnas.org/content/116/34/16793

https://www.newscientist.com/article/22 ... te-people/

And it's not all about the police. BLM was founded after the death of Trayvon Martin (not killed by the cops, but rather by a racist motherf*cker)...

If the BLM movement gave a flower about black lives, the movement would address black-on-black more because that's what's harming the black community.

They can't be upset by 2 things at once?

The BLM movement started after Trayvon Martin was stalked and killed like an animal by that racist idiot in Florida. BLM is a movement addressing the issue of racists who kill black people merely because of the color of their skin (people who feel that black lives do not matter -- hence the name).

"Black on black crime" is simply crime, just like "white on white crime." It is a totally separate issue with a different dynamic. It has its own set of causes. And, for decades the black community has addressed various problems in their neighborhoods and there have been countless organizations and programs nationwide to help with the issue of gangs and street violence.

The issue of "black on black crime" is being used a lot lately as a tactic of shifting the blame off of the racists and on to the victims, themselves. Don't cloud or confuse the issues. They are largely unrelated.

This nation is not perfect, but it's not systemically racist.

Racism is a huge problem in this country. And it's not just the Klan or the Proud Boys or the Neo Nazis. It's everyday racism all around us. It's the people phoning the police because "there is a black person where he shouldn't be." Open your eyes.

I would be more than happy to provide my evidence.

Don Lemon's video clip (from 2013) is pretty simplistic. I have some problems with what he is saying, but I'm not going to get into it. Why not? Because he is talking about problems within the black community. That, again, is a totally different issue from the BLM protests and the protests surrounding the statues. The protests are all about racism -- all about black people being killed due to the color of their skin. Don is talking about a different issue altogether.

Did you know that the BLM movement insists that most blacks are incarcerated because the justice system in the U.S. is systemically racist? Nope, it's all due to culture and the fact that blacks just happen to commit more crime.

[Dan the Damned]

[gd134]

The Lincoln Memorial wasn't vandalized. Check your facts.

Okay, what the statues of George Washington, Theodore Roosevelt, Ulysses S. Grant, and a famous memorial that honors African Americans who fought in the civil war called the Robert Gould Shaw and the 54th Regiment Memorial. That one really made me mad because the rioters had no reason to vandalize a memorial honoring those African Americans. Here is a list of statues that had no reason to be torn down or vandalized: https://www.foxnews.com/us/statue-monum ... wn-protest

Actually, STATISTICS have demonstrated that black people are being disproportionately killed by police.

First of all, the link you sent me from statista actually shows that WHITES are being disproportionately killed by police. Are you even examining what you're sending me?

Why don't you take a look at these:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/more- ... 2020-06-17



https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-o ... 1591119883 -----------> you need to make an account to read this one

Even if blacks are being disproportionately killed by police, is that really a causation to systemic police racism?
Considering that blacks commit more crime, the police were most likely justified to open fire when needed.

This video completely throws the idea of systemic police racism towards black in the trash:

And it's not all about the police. BLM was founded after the death of Trayvon Martin (not killed by the cops, but rather by a racist motherf*cker)...

I'm sorry, but that's an absolutely false statement. BLM was founded after Michael Brown, a young 19 year old black male, was shot and killed in Ferguson, Missouri by a white cop. It was actually that event that initiated the movement of BLM. However, that event has a big lie to it because the cop was justified as explained in this video:

The Washington Post also admits the lie within the story: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/po ... ael-brown/

BLM was founded on an alleged issue with police brutality, not the death of Trayvon Martin. There is no doubt that the death of Trayvon Martin gave momentum to the movement, but it wasn't what sparked the movement.

They can't be upset by 2 things at once?

What?! That's ridiculous! Take for example the Animal Rights Movement. The movement consists of these aspects: animals that are consumed, animals used in lab testing, animals that are hunted, animals that are used in shows like circuses, and animals that are held captive in places like zoos. If the movement only focused on animals that are used in circus shows per se, is it really worthy of being called a worthy protector of animal rights? In fact, the BLM movement IS upset about two things, which are police brutality systemic racism. Do you not see how broad movements can be?! I'm sorry, but with all due respect, this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

The BLM movement started after Trayvon Martin was stalked and killed like an animal by that racist idiot in Florida. BLM is a movement addressing the issue of racists who kill black people merely because of the color of their skin (people who feel that black lives do not matter -- hence the name).

As I previously mentioned, this is false and debunked. Here is a video of a heated debate between Don Lemon and Terry Crews where Don Lemon says what the BLM movement is specifically about at the 6:20 mark: -----------> listen carefully to what he says right there. BLM is only about police brutality, which kinda goes along with what you're saying.

Either way, the sentiment Black Lives Matter SHOULD mean that ALL black lives matter.

"Black on black crime" is simply crime, just like "white on white crime." It is a totally separate issue with a different dynamic. It has its own set of causes. And, for decades the black community has addressed various problems in their neighborhoods and there have been countless organizations and programs nationwide to help with the issue of gangs and street violence.

The issue of "black on black crime" is being used a lot lately as a tactic of shifting the blame off of the racists and on to the victims, themselves. Don't cloud or confuse the issues. They are largely unrelated.

Thanks for stating the obvious but, that is irrelevant. The point is that blacks are harmed more by their own crimes than police brutality. I think it's safe to say that the idea of police brutality against blacks is debunked right now.

This nation is not perfect, but it's not systemically racist.

This video is highly opinionated and provides little to no evidence. Sorry, but I'm not gonna buy it.

If America is systemically racist, explain this shocking economic reality:

Japanese American households make on average $70,216 a year
French American households make on average $63,847 a year
Iranian American households make on average $66,168 a year
Dutch American households make on average $59,089 a year

The three ethnic groups that make the most household income by descending order are:
1. Indian Americans
2. Filipino Americans
3. Taiwanese Americans

Also, did you know that certain black ethnicities such as Nigerians and Ghanaian households make on average $61,000 per year? So tell me, why do these particular black ethnicities have a much higher household income compared to other black ethnicities like Albanian Americans?

So, how can systemic racism exist when non-white ethnic groups make more money than whites?
So much for systemic racism.....

Racism is a huge problem in this country. And it's not just the Klan or the Proud Boys or the Neo Nazis. It's everyday racism all around us. It's the people phoning the police because "there is a black person where he shouldn't be." Open your eyes.

My eyes are very open. A video that shows these Karens attacking blacks doesn't make racism a huge problem in this great country. Those Karens rarely exist, and they will soon be gone as we progress into this decade. Racism is dying in this nation. In the 1960s, 88% of Americans claimed that they would never vote for a black president. Lo and behold, Barack Obama wins the 2008 election in a landslide, against a rich white man in his 80s called John McCain. These Karens are not around us, they're just not anymore. I am pretty social and outgoing, I can assure you racism isn't completely around us like you claim.

Don Lemon's video clip (from 2013) is pretty simplistic. I have some problems with what he is saying, but I'm not going to get into it. Why not? Because he is talking about problems within the black community. That, again, is a totally different issue from the BLM protests and the protests surrounding the statues. The protests are all about racism -- all about black people being killed due to the color of their skin. Don is talking about a different issue altogether.

Dan, it is not a totally different issue since black lives matter just started blaming the entire nation for inadequate success of black folks. As time goes on, the BLM movement expands it's horizons. However, inadequate success of black folks in this nation(such as lower wages) are issues that are caused by issues within black communities, which is why Don Lemon is offering solutions to those problems in that video clip.

Sorry, but your sampling size is too small. Those are just a few hand picked examples that don't really prove anything. However, I will tell you this. There is no doubt in my mind that there are racist individuals who occupy government jobs, such as judges. I will be more than happy to join you in fighting those people. However, that doesn't mean our entire justice system is racist, and it certainly doesn't prove why blacks are more incarcerated today considering that they commit significantly more crime.

[gd134]

I'll tell you who won the revolutionary war. We did! Maybe the statue was brought down as a result of our victory? I suppose the statue was standing there ever since the American colonies were under British rule.

It's even confirmed right here: https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/me ... 98mets.xml

[sherbetbizarre]

If America is systemically racist, explain this shocking economic reality:

Japanese American households make on average $70,216 a year
French American households make on average $63,847 a year
Iranian American households make on average $66,168 a year
Dutch American households make on average $59,089 a year

So, how can systemic racism exist when non-white ethnic groups make more money than whites?

Probably because speaking Japanese is a higher commodity than speaking French or Dutch in American business.

Most likely they were not going for the same jobs.

I can assure you racism isn't completely around us like you claim.

It doesn't have to be out in the open to exist.

Racism is dying in this nation.

[gd134]

Probably because speaking Japanese is a higher commodity than speaking French or Dutch in American business.
Most likely they were not going for the same jobs.

ok

It doesn't have to be out in the open to exist.

When did I ever say it doesn't exist? I only said that we're not completely surrounded by racist people.

Racism is dying in this nation.

You think it's not dying slowly at all? Well, it is. Humans will change as we progress into the decade.

[gd134]

The Democrat and Republican parties were kinda "reversed" back when our Civil War was happening. That's why Lincoln was a Republican. In today's political climate, Lincoln would be a Democrat.

Over time, the Republicans became more conservative and the Democrats became more liberal, in effect, "switching sides" so to speak.

So yeah, there was a time when all the racists were Democrats.

What the hell are you saying?! Are you insinuating that all Republicans are racist in today's political climate? You know what, that's okay. I hear leftists individuals like you accuse conservatives like me of being racist all the time, and I'm sick of it. So, who are the real racists? Let's examine some conservative and liberal beliefs. The conservative opposition to affirmative action is a good place to start, since it is overwhelmingly supported by liberals, especially on college campuses. Affirmative action is essentially the idea of lowering standards for certain races and favoring them. Affirmative action is typically used in college admissions, depending on the institution. The conservative belief to affirmative action towards blacks, for example, is that blacks have repeatedly proven themselves to be able to compete with other races without the benefit of lower standards, such as college admissions. The liberal stance of affirmative action is the complete opposite of the conservative stance, obviously. This is true, there are countless examples of blacks succeeding in every field at every level, even in the 20th century. Therefore, the policy of affirmative action is not needed at all. Study after study shows that affirmative action hurts more blacks than it helps. Why? Because the lower standards allow blacks to be placed into schools for which they are not academically prepared. High dropout rates for blacks confirm this. I hope you can see just how insulting this stupid policy is towards blacks. Yet, the radical left calls conservatives racist for opposing this racist and insulting policy. So tell me, who are the racists? Now lets talk about voter ID. Conservatives believe that an ID should be required to participate in any election, just as European countries do to keep their elections safe. Liberals believe this policy is a racist plot by the conservatives to establish voter suppression. Why? Because the radical left believes that blacks and other minority groups just aren't capable of acquiring an ID, otherwise why would they oppose it? Let's be real. You need an ID to drive, to fly, to buy alcohol, and to purchase cold medicine. So, why do liberals believe that whites are capable of acquiring voter ID but blacks aren't? You tell me. So tell me again, who are the racists?! Now let's talk about school choice. Conservatives push for school choice, which would allow all parents, not just wealthy ones, to choose where their children can attend school. Tuition Vouchers and Charter schools are all conservative initiatives. The liberal belief, obviously, is opposed to all of that. The radical left doesn't trust minority parents to select an appropriate school for their children.

So tell me Dan, given the liberal and Conservative viewpoints on those policies, who are the racists?! Which political side supports racist policies?!

The answer is simple: the left is overly obsessed with race. The left exploits blacks and other minority groups for political power. In fact, the same goes for immigration. There was a time when the democratic party was in favor of LEGAL immigration and closed borders. Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Chuck Schumer, and 23 other senate Democrats voted for a big fence to be built along the southern border. Today, the democratic party is pretty much in complete favor of open borders. Why? Because it's all about power since minority groups are more likely to vote for democrats in elections. That's how the left functions.

“The white liberal is the worst enemy to America, and the worst enemy to the black man. The white liberal aren’t white people who are for independence, who are moral and ethical in their thinking. They are just a faction of white people that are jockeying for power. The same as the white conservative is a faction of white people that are jockeying for power. - Malcolm X

[Dan the Damned]

That one really made me mad because the rioters had no reason to vandalize a memorial honoring those African Americans.

I don't know why Shaw's memorial was vandalized, but apparently it has been vandalized many times in the past as well. Going back to your original post, you said, "I'm not gonna lie, some statues I do support tearing down. But others deserve to stay standing for the great history and achievements they resemble."

So you're not against the idea of tearing down statues -- it's just that the ones coming down need to meet with your approval, it would seem. If not, then it seems it's a case of "the world going mad."

I guess some people have a different criteria than yours regarding which statues should come down...

Actually, STATISTICS have demonstrated that black people are being disproportionately killed by police.

First of all, the link you sent me from statista actually shows that WHITES are being disproportionately killed by police. Are you even examining what you're sending me?

Aww, I'm sorry. Let me hold your hand and walk you through that.

You see, you can't just click on the link and look at the graph and consider your mind expanded. No, dear - you have to look at what the numbers on the graph represent.

The graph is showing you the overall numbers. Which is why myself (and everyone else) use the word "disproportionate." Yes, the overall numbers for dead whiteys is a lot higher, but there are a lot more white people living here than black people, so you can't just go by the raw numbers. You have to judge by the percentages.

Take a look at what is written below the graph. Titled "People shot to death by US Police, by Race 2017-2020." Read that, and you'll see the words: "Additionally, the rate of fatal police shootings among Black Americans was much higher than that for any other ethnicity, standing at 31 fatal shootings per million of the population as of June 2020."

Sorry. My fault for forcing you to use your critical thinking skills...

Even if blacks are being disproportionately killed by police, is that really a causation to systemic police racism? Considering that blacks commit more crime, the police were most likely justified to open fire when needed.

Causation, no. Indication, yes.

Where do you get this idea that "blacks commit more crimes"? Is it because there are a disproportionate number of black people in prison? Well that same fact could help my argument as well as yours.

In New York City, when they had the "stop and frisk" program, it was painfully obvious that the chances of you being stopped and questioned by the police was significantly higher if you were a person of color. And that, my friend, is racism.

Regarding when Black Lives Matter started -- it started in 2013. Michael Brown wasn't killed until 2014. There are numerous online sources supporting the fact that Black Lives Matter started after Zimmerman was acquitted for the murder of Trayvon Martin, including their own website, which clearly states: "#BlackLivesMatter was founded in 2013 in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin’s murderer." You can see that for yourself on their website:

https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/

It's a stupid point of when BLM was started, and I only address it because you think I'm lying about it for some reason. If it started after the death of Michael Brown, it wouldn't make any difference as far as I can see.

BLM was founded on an alleged issue with police brutality, not the death of Trayvon Martin. There is no doubt that the death of Trayvon Martin gave momentum to the movement, but it wasn't what sparked the movement.

How could the BLM movement "gain momentum" with Trayvon Martin's death in 2012 if, as you claim, it didn't even start until 2014 with the death of Michael Brown??? Was a time machine involved?

The phrase/hashtag "Black Lives Matter" came on the scene in 2013. It is easily researched.

The point is that blacks are harmed more by their own crimes than police brutality. I think it's safe to say that the idea of police brutality against blacks is debunked right now.

There is a freaking VIDEO of an officer (Derek Chauvin) kneeling on the neck of George Floyd for 8 goddam minutes! Long after Floyd passed out, and after being told by a fellow officer that Floyd had no pulse, Chauvin didn't jump up and exclaim, "Oh crap! Is he okay? Let's perform CPR!" No. He continued to kneel on Floyd's god-damned neck for 2 additional minutes!!!

This happened in broad daylight. It was being filmed. Chauvin knew it was being filmed. He looked right into the camera. He didn't care.

And you have the nerve to suggest "the idea of police brutality against blacks is debunked right now"??? Wow!!! You are living in a fantasy world...

So, how can systemic racism exist when non-white ethnic groups make more money than whites?
So much for systemic racism.....

And who is on the bottom of that income list? Black people!

Just because there are certain ethnic groups that have an average household income greater than those of whites does not mean "there is no systemic racism." There are rich black people and black celebrities who still fall victim to racism and police harassment.

If there was no systemic racism, why has Congress been virtually lily-white until recent years? Why have all of our Presidents been white men until 2009?

Today there are only 4 black CEOs who run a Fortune 500 company. If the numbers were proportionate, there should be 50. Not even close.

Only 3% of senior leaders in American businesses are black.

But that's okay. You just go on thinking everything is hunky dory...

A video that shows these Karens attacking blacks doesn't make racism a huge problem in this great country. Those Karens rarely exist, and they will soon be gone as we progress into this decade. ... These Karens are not around us, they're just not anymore. I am pretty social and outgoing, I can assure you racism isn't completely around us like you claim.

I like that. I post 4 examples of black people receiving harsher sentencing than white people who have committed equal (or worse) crimes, and you whine about my sampling size being too small.

But all it takes for you to believe that racism isn't an issue anymore are your little jaunts 'round the neighborhood?

My friends talk about the people they've encountered who cause scenes in restaurants and stores because they don't want to wear a mask. I've only encountered one. Is it fair for me to pronounce that "it really doesn't happen anymore" since I've personally only seen it happen once?

During your next outing, maybe walk up to some black people and ask them how often they experience racism in their daily lives. I think you'll be surprised by the answer. Then, just for a laugh, explain to them how you feel that racism isn't a big problem in this country anymore. Better yet, why not film it and put the videos on YouTube so you can post them here. I'd love to see them!

There is no doubt in my mind that there are racist individuals who occupy government jobs, such as judges. I will be more than happy to join you in fighting those people. However, that doesn't mean our entire justice system is racist...

It doesn't take "the entire justice system" being racist to cause these problems in society.

I'll tell you who won the revolutionary war. We did! Maybe the statue was brought down as a result of our victory? I suppose the statue was standing there ever since the American colonies were under British rule.

"As a result of our victory"? Wow. The date "July 9, 1776" is literally the very first thing written on this meme. And you think that date was when the Revolutionary War ended?!? That just makes it harder for me to take you seriously.

Anyway, this meme was directed more towards Kevin and Amit, who seem to feel that tearing down statues is the equivalent to "people trying to rewrite history."

Instead, it is the people coming together with the realization that "this statue doesn't represent us or our values anymore -- let's get rid of it." You know, like what the Iraqis did when they tore down Saddam Hussein's statue in 2003.

I don't think you made the same comparison, but actually, you did mention that you agreed with everything Kevin said, so I guess this meme is there for you as well...

It doesn't have to be out in the open to exist.

When did I ever say it doesn't exist? I only said that we're not completely surrounded by racist people.

But no one suggested we were 100% racist.

So yeah, there was a time when all the racists were Democrats.

What the hell are you saying?! Are you insinuating that all Republicans are racist in today's political climate?

You are reversing it, dear. I said "when all racists were Democrats," not "when all Democrats were racist."

And likewise, I'm saying that "all racists are now Republicans," not "all Republicans are racist."

All dolphins are mammals, but not all mammals are dolphins. It's okay, I know it's hard to get a grip on.

And when I say "all," I'm obviously not being literal. I'm sure there are some racists who might vote for Democrats, and probably a lot more that just plain don't vote. Just saying that if someone is a racist, then the Republican party is the place to be! Especially during these last few years...

I hear leftists individuals like you accuse conservatives like me of being racist all the time, and I'm sick of it.

You get called a racist often, do you?

The conservative opposition to affirmative action is a good place to start, since it is overwhelmingly supported by liberals, especially on college campuses. Affirmative action is essentially the idea of lowering standards for certain races and favoring them. Affirmative action is typically used in college admissions, depending on the institution. The conservative belief to affirmative action towards blacks, for example, is that blacks have repeatedly proven themselves to be able to compete with other races without the benefit of lower standards, such as college admissions.

There is no mandate for "affirmative action" in regards to college admissions.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2 ... eady-have/

The liberal stance of affirmative action is the complete opposite of the conservative stance, obviously. This is true, there are countless examples of blacks succeeding in every field at every level, even in the 20th century. Therefore, the policy of affirmative action is not needed at all. Study after study shows that affirmative action hurts more blacks than it helps. Why? Because the lower standards allow blacks to be placed into schools for which they are not academically prepared. High dropout rates for blacks confirm this. I hope you can see just how insulting this stupid policy is towards blacks. Yet, the radical left calls conservatives racist for opposing this racist and insulting policy. So tell me, who are the racists?

I see. So it's a bad thing when we help a few minorities get into college, but you're okay with the standards being dropped when it comes to students getting preferential treatment because their parents went to the same college? Or when athletes are accepted despite their grades being lower than other applicants? It's a rigged game. If you're gonna cry foul, at least be aware of all the other instances when college admission standards are dropped in order to accept various students.

Forgive us racist liberals for trying to create a loophole for black scholars who might not otherwise get a good education. Sorry for all the harm we've done to them.

Now lets talk about voter ID.

Damn, you're just gonna go all over the place, aren't you? And I bet you're gonna complain that my response is way too long. Then again, of course, if I failed to answer, you'd complain about that as well, I suppose. But okay, let's jump down your little rabbit hole as you try to convince me that liberals are racist and conservatives are the savior for the black community:

Conservatives believe that an ID should be required to participate in any election, just as European countries do to keep their elections safe. Liberals believe this policy is a racist plot by the conservatives to establish voter suppression. Why? Because the radical left believes that blacks and other minority groups just aren't capable of acquiring an ID, otherwise why would they oppose it? Let's be real. You need an ID to drive, to fly, to buy alcohol, and to purchase cold medicine. So, why do liberals believe that whites are capable of acquiring voter ID but blacks aren't? You tell me. So tell me again, who are the racists?!

Perhaps the racist is the person who thinks, "it's easy for me to get an ID, so that means it's easy for everybody"?

Our Constitution's Equal Protection Clause says that a state is not allowed to "unduly burden" the right to vote. And the Supreme Court has ruled that even very minor burdens need a damn good reason to be enacted (a reason that far outweighs the burden). Because voting is a right. It is not a privilege (like driving or flying or buying alcohol or purchasing certain medications).

Is voter fraud a damn good reason to enact Voter ID Laws? Yeah, it would be if voter fraud was an issue. But time and again, studies clearly show that in-person voting fraud is very rare. According to one study, out of the 750 million votes cast in US elections between 2000-2012, there were 10 instances of voter impersonation fraud, 52 cases on non-citizens casting an ineligible vote, and 145 cases of double-voting. Again, that's over a 12-year period and out of a total of 750 million votes.

So right there, we see that voter ID laws do not have a damn good reason to exist.

Now, how about the burden on the voter?

Voter ID laws have been shown to deter voting by low-income families, students, seniors and minorities. These groups are less likely to have a photo ID of the class required by certain states.

Depending on the state, a drivers license can cost anywhere from $15 to nearly $60. If you are a senior citizen on a low fixed income, that could be enough to keep you from voting.

Some states offer free IDs, but to get one you need to prove your identity. It can cost $25 to get a copy of your birth certificate, depending where you live.

While some people might be willing to spend the money to get an ID for voting (when they otherwise don't need one), others might live a hundred miles from the nearest DMV.

And other people simply decide not to hassle with getting the ID and as a result, don't vote.

Don't fool yourself. Voter ID laws are not about keeping the elections secure. They are a tool to keep certain voters (who are typically Democrats) away from the polls. As such, they are very effective and are mainly in place in Republican-led states. And this is why so many of them are being struck down in the courts across the country.

Now let's talk about school choice. Conservatives push for school choice, which would allow all parents, not just wealthy ones, to choose where their children can attend school. Tuition Vouchers and Charter schools are all conservative initiatives. The liberal belief, obviously, is opposed to all of that. The radical left doesn't trust minority parents to select an appropriate school for their children.

The notion that liberals don't trust minority parents to select their kids' schools is ridiculous, and you know it. That sort of propaganda may work on your fellow Republicans, but do you really expect me to agree with such an idiotic notion? Honestly? (The Revolutionary War ended in 1783 BTW.)

The debates over Charter Schools and School Voucher programs aren't about race. It's about tax money being diverted from public schools and the fears of privatizing our public school system. At the start, the hope was that such programs might help low-income students stuck in under-funded public schools, but things didn't turn out so well over the years.

Hey! I got an idea! Instead of you and I squabbling about it, let's hear from actual black people what they think about the issue! Here's a link to a statement from the NAACP on why they want a moratorium on charter schools:

https://www.naacp.org/latest/statement- ... r-schools/

Seems like they're against it. Does that mean the NAACP is racist against black people?

So tell me Dan, given the liberal and Conservative viewpoints on those policies, who are the racists?! Which political side supports racist policies?!

I think it's clear that the racist policies out there are championed by the Republican Party. Your weak arguments aren't fooling anyone.

Republicans work overtime to silence the votes of black people, as I explained above. Trump's administration preys on the ignorant fears (of Americans who feel immigrants are stealing their jobs) by directing their focus on a silly extension of our southern border wall (ignoring our northern border for some reason other than racism). The GOP applauds when Trump bans Muslim immigration (because all Muslims are terrorists?). Republicans vote to give billions in tax breaks to the rich while, at the same time, make drastic cuts to vital social programs like Medicare and Social Security. Republicans fight against police reform. Republicans fight against consumer protections, such as predatory lending businesses.

No pun intended, but you're trying to convince me that black is white and white is black. Not sure why. It's no secret that racists tend to flock to the Republican Party.

Today, the democratic party is pretty much in complete favor of open borders.

I think you watch too much Fox News. Democrats are in favor of common sense immigration reform, as are many Republicans. Just because Democrats are against many of Trump's immigration policies doesn't mean they want open borders. Please give me a link to where prominent democrats talk about their desire for open borders. I'll wait.

Why? Because it's all about power since minority groups are more likely to vote for democrats in elections. That's how the left functions.

The fact that minority groups tend to vote for Democrats means Democrats are somehow exploiting them? How so? By showing them how the Republican party only has the vested interests of the rich in mind?

You come up with the nutty accusation that liberals don't trust minority parents to select an appropriate school for their kids, and here you are saying that minorities aren't clever enough to choose the correct political party???

"The white conservatives aren't friends of the Negro either, but they at least don't try to hide it. They are like wolves; they show their teeth in a snarl that keeps the Negro always aware of where he stands with them."-Malcolm X