Can someone — anyone — counter the following simple assertion?

There are, demonstrably, no more obstacles impeding a black person’s success in America, than there are impeding any other person.

Note the key word in that phrase: Demonstrably.

By the way, I can think of a very significant impediment to black success in America that is, again demonstrably, not in the path of white people. That impediment is: the leftist lie that black people can’t succeed in America because of white racism.

However, it strikes me, and I could be wrong here: that is an impediment one chooses to impose upon oneself; an obstacle that one could shuck off just as easily as one sheds a ratty old sweater.

So, absent the major impediment to black Americans’ success — leftist hostility — is there anything else that would indicate that black Americans have more obstacles in their path than white people?

Serious question.

Note: I should remark that I’ve posed this question on numerous occasions, on numerous blogs, in social media, in various publications. No one has ever taken me up seriously on the assertion.

Plenty have said that the conclusion is wrong. No one has offered any evidence, logic, reasoning, thinking that would support the idea that the conclusion is wrong.(1)

On second thought, that’s not completely true either. Some have put forward notions supporting the conclusion that the major obstacle in the path of black success in America is, indeed, leftist hostility. They didn’t know they were doing it, but they were.

For example: some have mentioned the widespread belier that “it’s open season on young black men in America,” and things like “the cops are killing unarmed black men.”

Both of these notions are patently false. Outside of America’s major cities, a black American runs no more risk to his or her safety than any other ethnicity.

The American Left is tirelessly promoting the above two false premises. There can be only one reason for which they would do that: Opposition to black success in America or, more succinctly stated: Leftist hostility toward black Americans.

— xPraetorius

Notes:


(1) That’s a serious problem in America today: Lots of people just say things. Things that are often flat-out false, but that the media and others take as true without questioning… because they support a preferred narrative.

14 thoughts on “A Simple Question…

  1. If you are hell-bent on wanting to assign every calamity, social problem, and any other problem with American democracy onto some blame-game of always pointing the finger at Liberals, that’s totally on you, and ignorant to boot. Just serves to imply your reasoning is motivated by political opinion opportunism… and less concerned with trying to solve problems.

    You said………
    “By the way, I can think of a very significant impediment to black success in America that is, again demonstrably, not in the path of white people. That impediment is: the leftist lie that black people can’t succeed in America because of white racism.”

    Anyone with a grasp on 20th century civil rights history knows better than this broad stroke “conclusion”. To solve the problem we have to broadly recognize that there is a problem… and then target on the specifics… and we will never do that because of the political divisions you and others generally echo.

    First off.. you don’t need a lot of stats to see completely the problem surrounding Black Americans. Back in the 60’s we called their neighborhoods ghettos because those living inside those areas were “pressed” there by economic disparity and legitimate and very overt institutional racism that just represented the holdover from the white prejudices dating from the Civil War to the then Greatest Generation of the 60’s who were running things. It all becomes a variant of the chicken or the egg.
    It’s far more complex that I am making here… but… Black neighborhoods bred increased criminal activity and gangs because of the economic disadvantages.. the economic disadvantages fed by lower educational opportunities in marginal public education in inner cities.. which in turn fed a deterioration of family values, establishing adaptive behaviors that were called “cultural” when in fact they were a variation of “street survival”… the lower family values and lack of need, or hope, in escaping the effects of the ghetto led to generations of poor self-esteem, academic encouragement, and morality. Those that did engage in public education ended up under the peer pressures of gang life and apathy in a future.

    If you can get past the criminal record you might do a search on Bill Cosby’s “Pound Cake” speech in Wiki. He goes into some detail on many of the problems with black behaviors have at the center a family life of adaptive behaviors passed through generations. Even down to the African-American dialect with it’s poor grammar and diction.

    The current demonstrations about police violence against black Americans and the disparity in a legal system that ends up feeding into the prison system an inordinate number of blacks… is NOT the subject but rather is a result of continuing social inattention to the greater problem. Forget the constant search to blame. This has lasted for countless administrations.. and Congresses, Dem and GOP.

    1. Thanks for a more substantive reply this time! It’s appreciated! There’s much I agree with, much that needs a response. Please don’t forget my assertion: “America is not a racist country.” Key word: “is.” Note that the word “was” is not in my assertion, and never has been. In the meantime…

      You said:
      If you are hell-bent on wanting to assign every calamity, social problem, and any other problem with American democracy onto some blame-game of always pointing the finger at Liberals, that’s totally on you, and ignorant to boot. Just serves to imply your reasoning is motivated by political opinion opportunism… and less concerned with trying to solve problems.
      My Reply:
      Incorrect. Calamities have causes. If one can identify such causes, it is irresponsible not to point them out. I never assign blame to anyone who I think doesn’t deserve it.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –

      You said:
      (Quoting me:) “By the way, I can think of a very significant impediment to black success in America that is, again demonstrably, not in the path of white people. That impediment is: the leftist lie that black people can’t succeed in America because of white racism.” (End quote)

      (Doug’s Reply to my quote:) Anyone with a grasp on 20th century civil rights history knows better than this broad stroke “conclusion”. To solve the problem we have to broadly recognize that there is a problem… and then target on the specifics… and we will never do that because of the political divisions you and others generally echo.
      My Reply:
      (Now my reply, to Doug’s reply:) Oh, how’s that? Yes, America was a racist country. Is it anymore? Nope. And it — demonstrably — has not been for nearly three generations.

      I’ve never denied that racism is a problem. It is not, however, a big problem, as it had once been.

      Furthermore, I’ve been asking — over and over and over and over and over and over again — for actual specifics on (1) what the problem is now (not in the increasingly long ago past), and (2) what are the specific solutions we should bring to bear to fix things. Your assertion that America has been racist is ,b>absolutely true… and irrelevant.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –

      You said:
      First off.. you don’t need a lot of stats to see completely the problem surrounding Black Americans. Back in the 60’s we called their neighborhoods ghettos because those living inside those areas were “pressed” there by economic disparity and legitimate and very overt institutional racism that just represented the holdover from the white prejudices dating from the Civil War to the then Greatest Generation of the 60’s who were running things. It all becomes a variant of the chicken or the egg.
      My Reply:
      Okay. I don’t disagree with too much of this. But, again, that was almost three generations ago. No one whom anyone takes even slightly seriously feels — today — that this was appropriate treatment of an American racial minority. More to the point the nearly universal American concensus — today is that such treatment of black Americans was really bad, even crossing over the line into: evil. And, again, not one single person, whom anyone even takes even slightly seriously — today — believes differently. Not one. It would be hard to find a more universal consensus in the world today about anything.

      Also, about “stats,” I’ll quote a dear friend of mine: “Statistics tell all… if you have all the statistics.” Yep.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –

      You said:
      It’s far more complex that I am making here… but… Black neighborhoods bred increased criminal activity and gangs because of the economic disadvantages.. the economic disadvantages fed by lower educational opportunities in marginal public education in inner cities.. which in turn fed a deterioration of family values, establishing adaptive behaviors that were called “cultural” when in fact they were a variation of “street survival”… the lower family values and lack of need, or hope, in escaping the effects of the ghetto led to generations of poor self-esteem, academic encouragement, and morality. Those that did engage in public education ended up under the peer pressures of gang life and apathy in a future.
      My Reply:
      This is a good paragraph, Doug, and thank you for it! Why am I thanking you? Because what you’re saying is largely true. And it neatly confirms all we’ve been saying for a long time. As you probably know if you’ve been reading what we’ve been writing, these are problems cdnered largely (but not exclusively, of course) in big-city America. The American Left, and its political wing the Democrat Party, have owned the cities, lock, stock and barrel, for — yep — about three generations. Are you starting to get a theme here?

      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –

      You said:
      If you can get past the criminal record you might do a search on Bill Cosby’s “Pound Cake” speech in Wiki. He goes into some detail on many of the problems with black behaviors have at the center a family life of adaptive behaviors passed through generations. Even down to the African-American dialect with it’s poor grammar and diction.
      My Reply:
      Bill Cosby — personally — has feet of clay. What he said about black life in America was very intelligent and well-thought out. I remain an admirer of what he said, if not of the man himself. This is an important point: Perfectly irrelevant to the validity of a truth is the identity of the person expressing the truth. Meaninng; The truth is the truth is the truth is the truth… regardless of who says it. This is a major problem of the Left, whose main tactic to “win an argument” is to cast ugly aspersions on the character, honesty, integrity, intelligence, or education of the person saying something. The (fallacious) implication being: If the person saying something you don’t like is bad, then the thing being said must be bad.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –

      You said:
      The current demonstrations about police violence against black Americans and the disparity in a legal system that ends up feeding into the prison system an inordinate number of blacks… is NOT the subject but rather is a result of continuing social inattention to the greater problem. Forget the constant search to blame. This has lasted for countless administrations.. and Congresses, Dem and GOP.
      My Reply:
      Here’s what’s wrong with this otherwise good paragraph. It posits a falsehood as a given. Your first phrase should read: “The current demonstrations about nearly nonexistent police violence against black Americans.” At which you should have made any adjustments implied for the rest of your paragraph.

      Now, you have another intersting phrase in there. Here it is: “the disparity in a legal system that ends up feeding into the prison system an inordinate number of blacks…”

      Okay… that’s a loaded phrase. I assume that you can give me all the context that it implies: (1) what are the different crime rates in black vs. other areas? (2) What is the rate of recidivism among black Americans, as opposed to other groups. (3) To what extent does our current legislation contribute unfairly, if at all, to disparate incarceration rates? (4) Therefore, are disparate incarceration rates unfair? The responses to just these two questions imply still other questions, and all the questions need some sort of understanding.

      Now, for example, statistics seem to bear out, and few on any side of any debate seem to disagree with, the understanding that violent crime is disproportionately perpetrated by black Americans. If that is, indeed, the case, as it appears to be, then it would be a deep, deep injustice not to incarcerate more black people. Injustice to the victims of black violent crime, who are, by the way, generally black Americans. Why on earth would we, as a nation, favor black criminals over black victims of crime? But that’s the very poistion that the Black Lives Matter movement is taing. It might be by accident, but that’s exactly what they mean. That’s pathological.

      I have never “searched to blame.” I have always searched for causes. If those causes are the actions of people, then it woould be irresponsible not to point that out. Otherwise those humans will continue to cause injury to people. If you don’t stop causes of problems then, generally, those causes continue to cause problems. Especially if those causes are… other humans.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      Best,

      — x

      1. Your last word is the essence of the entire subject… human beings, all around. It’s not a problem because of Lefties or even because of black Americans themselves. None of this goes away because legislation or stronger police training. We all have to embrace human diversity and prioritize how we want to take care of ourselves.. and in doing that we take care of each other. Pretty much a pie-in-the-sky goal… but trying is part of the process as well.

        Regarding stats… I was in the business once… and stats can mean anything you want them to mean. It’s rather an example of the “truths” floating around. It’s all in the presentation… and subsequent interpretation. But.. that is exactly why stats need to be presented for what they are… including all their variances and interpretation. The glass is either half empty or half full. We have stats to prove, verify, quantify and substantiate success or failure.

        Also, I never once said anything regarding “America” being racist. There’s no widespread policy with the intent toward racism. There IS racism in America. Totally different concept which defines a social condition NOT a political goal… or intent. There are aspects of our institutional processes that can inadvertently result in a racist policy.

        No, my friend… much of your admonitions and pontifications very much lean toward affixing blame.. albeit being part of your idea of a cause. Your approach is biased… as are your conclusions.

        1. You said:
          Your last word is the essence of the entire subject… human beings, all around. It’s not a problem because of Lefties or even because of black Americans themselves. None of this goes away because legislation or stronger police training. We all have to embrace human diversity and prioritize how we want to take care of ourselves.. and in doing that we take care of each other. Pretty much a pie-in-the-sky goal… but trying is part of the process as well.
          My Reply:
          I see little with which to disagree in this Doug. Some nuances, of course. For example: there’s no intrinsic value in “diversity.” If there were, then it would be vital to get Nazis into our inner circles and in the halls of government. I see no reason to embrace diversity. If, however, you embrace integrity, intelligence, creativity, decency, humility, then by definition, you will get real diversity. Real diversity, of course, is diversity of thought, of perspective. Diversity of looks or skin color is perfectly worthless by itself.

          One other small quibble. Much of this would go away with the repeal of lots and lots and lots of legislation.
          – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
          You said:
          Regarding stats… I was in the business once… and stats can mean anything you want them to mean. It’s rather an example of the “truths” floating around. It’s all in the presentation… and subsequent interpretation. But.. that is exactly why stats need to be presented for what they are… including all their variances and interpretation. The glass is either half empty or half full. We have stats to prove, verify, quantify and substantiate success or failure.
          My Reply:
          Yes, your first assertion is correct. What my friend was saying when he said: “Stats tell all… if you have all the stats,” was that you need to know everything about something to be able to have a comprehensive understanding of it. You have to be in possession of “all the stats,” especially those that contradict your point of view. About the “Glass is half…” thing. I never understood that. The glass is, obviously, both half-full and half-empty at the same time. I get that the example helps to illustrate a person’s general outlook, but the point is that the reality is that the glass is both, and that in order to have the best understanding of life is not to be an “optimist,” or a “pessimist,” but to have your viewpoint informed by a solid understanding of what’s real.

          Your last sentence is, of course, correct, though I might replace the word “prove” with “support.” I’d have to think about it.
          – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
          You said:
          Also, I never once said anything regarding “America” being racist. There’s no widespread policy with the intent toward racism. There IS racism in America. Totally different concept which defines a social condition NOT a political goal… or intent. There are aspects of our institutional processes that can inadvertently result in a racist policy.
          My Reply:
          — “There’s no widespread policy with the intent toward racism.” — Correct. In fact all such policies are aggressively anti-racist.

          — “There’s no widespread policy with the intent toward racism.” — Correct, but doesn’t go far enough. Literally all published policies, rules, regulations, procedures in America and in corporate America are aggressively anti-racism.

          — “There IS racism in America.” — Correct, but again, doesn’t go far enough. The point is that anyone who hasn’t been living under a rock for the past 60 years understands that he or she can’t act on his or her racism, without life-upending negative consequences. From this perspective, racism exists, but has been soundly and utterly defeated as a force that affects black Americans negatively in America today. When the mere allegation of racism can end your career, lose all your friends, and even imperil your life, everyone understands that they can’t be racist in any public kind of way. Furthermore, all of corporate America understands that they had best bend over backwards to be polite, to be deferential, to be respectful, to be even obsequious toward non-white Americans… or else. And the “or else” is potentially a very big, very bad, life-ruining “or else.”

          Not only is America as a whole not racist, it’s aggressively, militantly, sometimes violently anti-racist. Furthermore, America is obviously the least racist country in the world. Now, the question poses itself: “Why on earth are there race riots in America?!?!? Answer: Fabricated grievances. Lies. Lives lost, billions of dollars lost, vast public dislocation, fear, violence, businesses ruined, and their employees impoverished, vast human suffering… for nothing.
          — “There are aspects of our institutional processes that can inadvertently result in a racist policy.” — Semi-correct. For example: If you identify someone as a racist, and you publicly humiliate her, and you publicize her name on mass media, and you do to her what was done to the woman with the unfortunate AIDS tweet, you don’t fix her racism, you don’t correct her state of mind, you don’t diminish her racism, you simply make her justifiably bitter, and you drive her state of mind underground. What happened to the lady with the unfortunate tweet was deeply unjust. Her life was ruined for a dozen or so words tweeted out when she was being careless and unguarded. Ridiculous! THAT kind of thing DOES result in racism — anti-white racism, but racism all the same.

          I think you’d be hard-pressed to identify any “aspects of our institutional processes that can inadvertently result in a racist policy” anywhere that would contribute to anti-black racism. Unless, that is, you agree with me that this infantilization of black Americans is a form of abuse that is much more pernicious than overtly hostility. Treating black Americans like tender, fragile babies is damaging to them, as it would be to anyone to whom you do it!

          More likely you’ll find policies like those at the mortgage company where I used to work. Policies that mandated that we discriminate aggressively in favor of racial minorities in our lending guidelines and practices. Those policies were then, and remain, universal across America.

          – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
          You said:
          No, my friend… much of your admonitions and pontifications very much lean toward affixing blame.. albeit being part of your idea of a cause. Your approach is biased… as are your conclusions.
          My Reply:
          I agree. Of course my admonitions and pontifications lean toward “affixing blame.” There’s plenty of blame to affix! We have no qualms about blaming people like Hitler for the crimes they committed (Godwin’s Law again!); why on earth should we shy away from blaming the people who have been spreading the lies and fabrications that have caused all the crap we’re seeing today?

          My “approach is biased,” because all approaches are biased. There is not a single approach — not even the purest scientific approach — that’s unbiased. Someone once said — correctly — “We keep an open mind in order to close it again.” That’s why we feel comfortable saying, “No, I don’t need to evaluate Nazi propaganda with an open mind. I’ts been hashed over adequately for me.” We feel comfortable with that conclusion because we believe that our odds of having drawn the correct conclusion are north of 99.999%. Not 100%, of course, but certainly near 100%. We draw many, many, many such conclusions like that. We walk out the door, because while there’s a non-zero chance that we’ll be killed by a meteor, or a random falling tree, the odds are so low that we feel perfectly safe in walking outside.

          So, to paraphrase the “open mind” phrase just a bit: “We stay unbiased only long enough to become biased.” We hope, of course, that the bias that we take on is good bias, that is that we favor the good, the intelligent, the decent, the true. I’ve lived long enough to understand that I don’t have to be unbiased toward rape, or murder, or child abuse. No, it’s okay to be completely biased on those topics.

          Same with my perspectives on America today. I’ve studied American history as well as current events for many years. Long enough to have real, legitimate, intelligent, rational, appropriate bias. There’s another expression about open-mindedness: “His mind was so open his brains fell out.” Yep. Makes sense.

          – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
          Best,

          — x

          1. There’s “blame” and there’s “cause”.. the latter generally with the intent to find the level of having caused something we don’t wish to repeat. Yeah.. Hitler did all that… then we move down the chain of command and we go after brutal and tortuous camp guards.. and the guys who dropped the Xyclon-B pellets down the vents. Assigning blame is easy.. establishing cause is far more difficult. There’s a direct link between the guard who dropped the Xyclon-B to the political mood and general arrogance of power prior to WW1 that led to the crazy defense alliances of the post-Victorian European nations and mini-empires of the day that initiated the alliance domino effect that forced sides after Ferdinand’s assassination. We can even go so far as the imposition of the ridiculous reparations forced onto Germany by the then Allies at Versailles, smack in the middle of a general depression… thus creating economic turmoil and inspiring nationalistic movements of former soldiers who themselves thought they were betrayed by their own government into the cease fire/surrender/armistice.. that in turn inspired many to find some level of hope and logic in listening to the “blaming” rhetoric of a beer hall nut job putz named Hitler… who, in any other “normal” political climate, most would have shrugged off.
            No.. timing us usually a component to any causal effect of an unwanted event.

            Our current demonstrations… call them riots if you wish, but they were far less than that back in the 60’s. I know that much to be fact given I lived the times and it was readily apparent the damage, deaths, and mayhem back then was carried out by the people themselves… on both sides. There were no organized anarchists, political extremists in those days.. and just watching the video of the last 18 days.. there was no Antifa, Neo-nationalist whatevers, or renegade church ladies causing any of this . It was groups of sporadic gang members, most were independent spontaneous groups of individuals taking advantage of the lack of law enforcement, males AND females entering and leaving looted stores… some very likely law-abiding normally and just taking advantage of a situation to grab some things of value.
            No.. I will NEVER concede to the Conservative mindset that everything “bad” is the result of Left wing collusion and conspiracy. As it turns out, the recent police data on those arrested in the various communities had little if anything to do with Antifa or Nazis and any other organized group.

            Now.. why is any of this important? Because we can’t begin to try and solve issues of race if we can get past the political divide that the “other side” wants to taker over “our side”… and everything is a plot.
            If you can’t get over that.. then all this is just going to continue again at some point in someone’s future.

            Second item…
            Before we can solve social problems we also have to recognize and embrace our human qualities. Us humans spend a HUGE amount of time trying to control ourselves and trying to deny our actions or inactions as having anything even remotely to be attributed to “human traits”. Our laws, our religions, are all in place to control ourselves. Example?
            Stereotyping. It’s a totally natural human trait likely part of our evolutionary defense system of being able to determine cause & effect in the world around us. We are set by nature to assign risk to our physical being, visually and physically. This identification process works its way down through all the common threads of human interaction. In a simple form we see there are left hand people and right hand people in the world… and while this difference has very little assigned behavioral difference or perceived threat we give the occurrence little more than an interesting quirk of birth and lightly joke about it. Stereotyping is normal. It’s certainly the foundation for much of human comedy as we find our stereotypical differences part of life. But stereotyping crosses a line when we carry out harmful words and deeds toward another with the intent to harm… irregardless if the stereotyping qualifier is true or not.
            For sure white Europeans have engaged in slavery in North America for the last 400 hundred years. The process required that enslaved blacks be kept ignorant from learning, and in receiving all the social and physical amenities of their white counterparts. So the stereotypes developed about black people which carried well after they became black Americans.,, and science itself caught up with proof that there is no physical disparity between white and black humans.. or between any other combination of racial types.

            My point here is that we need to understand the how-and-why we got to a place in time in order to try and attack a correction to diminish racial stereotypes. Right now it’s black Americans screaming to white Americans about social injustice.. and it’s white Americans having to bear some guilt as a requirement to solving the problem. This time around the demonstrations include white folks sympathetic to the black cause for whatever reasons.. among which could be something as simple as subliminal guilt for Greatest Generation parents/grandparents.. uncles and aunts.. who in the past used demeaning racial rhetoric at some party… which was accepted in their generation (by other white folks) but way out of touch today.

            As for me.. my folks were of that generation and if they had their own feelings and perceptions they never conveyed any racism to me or my sis while growing up. I was about ten years old… 1960.. we went on a road trip to Florida (from Chicago) ad we drove through the deep South and through some cities and towns (not a lot of interstates in those days). I was in total shock & awe at the despicable living conditions of black people.. but mostly it was the “colored only” signs on water fountains and store entrances. I’d ask my folks sitting in the front seat… why are the black people separated with all these signs? Mother replied that this is how lives were in the South. I said.. “But, mom… I thought the Constitution made everyone equal?” To this day.. that was my “welcome to America” moment.

            I’m not feeling a bit guilty for having been born white… but if my race was “in charge” and living in entitlement, I am left wondering why we.. my “race”, let this go on for so long.

          2. You said:
            There’s “blame” and there’s “cause”.. the latter generally with the intent to find the level of having caused something we don’t wish to repeat. Yeah.. Hitler did all that… then we move down the chain of command and we go after brutal and tortuous camp guards.. and the guys who dropped the Xyclon-B pellets down the vents. Assigning blame is easy.. establishing cause is far more difficult. There’s a direct link between the guard who dropped the Xyclon-B to the political mood and general arrogance of power prior to WW1 that led to the crazy defense alliances of the post-Victorian European nations and mini-empires of the day that initiated the alliance domino effect that forced sides after Ferdinand’s assassination. We can even go so far as the imposition of the ridiculous reparations forced onto Germany by the then Allies at Versailles, smack in the middle of a general depression… thus creating economic turmoil and inspiring nationalistic movements of former soldiers who themselves thought they were betrayed by their own government into the cease fire/surrender/armistice.. that in turn inspired many to find some level of hope and logic in listening to the “blaming” rhetoric of a beer hall nut job putz named Hitler… who, in any other “normal” political climate, most would have shrugged off.

            My Reply:
            Okay. Interesting summation of turn of the 20th Century Europe. Your distinction between “blame” and “cause” are semantics only. Blame is cause… cause of something bad. “Credit” is the other side of blame, or: cause of something good. Note: Both “blame” and “credit” imply a human cause.

            When you identify something bad, there is nothing wrong with assigning blame, if you do, indeed, identify human causes for something very bad. The “something very bad” today is the lie that America is a racist country, and that it’s okay therefore to riot and loot in support of defeating that asserted racism. These are lies. Lies are bad faith efforts to deceive people. The source of lies is: liars. It’s okay to blame liars for lies. This is not that difficult. Your going all sophist on me doesn’t change that.

            Noe of this changes by one iota another simple fact: The people of Germany had an affirmative responsibility to reject Hitler and his ridiculous fanaticism. Regardless of the circumstances. Right is right. Good is good. Bad is bad. People have the ability to see these things. Furthermore, untethered from much bigger notions of right and wrong, you can get the namby-pamby, go-along-to-get-along, The-Left-is-as-patiotic-as-anyone-else flapdoodle that leads directly to bloody tyranny.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            No.. timing us usually a component to any causal effect of an unwanted event.
            My Reply:
            Not sure what you mean by this, but “timing” is a component of every event that ever happened, happens or will happen. Are you referring to the chronological juxtaposition of someone’s effort to do something and the fact that the something occurs? Or something? This is a mystifying paragraph.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            Our current demonstrations… call them riots if you wish, but they were far less than that back in the 60’s. I know that much to be fact given I lived the times and it was readily apparent the damage, deaths, and mayhem back then was carried out by the people themselves… on both sides. There were no organized anarchists, political extremists in those days.. and just watching the video of the last 18 days.. there was no Antifa, Neo-nationalist whatevers, or renegade church ladies causing any of this . It was groups of sporadic gang members, most were independent spontaneous groups of individuals taking advantage of the lack of law enforcement, males AND females entering and leaving looted stores… some very likely law-abiding normally and just taking advantage of a situation to grab some things of value.

            My Reply:
            Don’t play fast and loose with this. I don’t “wish” to call them riots, there were and are riots. And there were and are demonstrations. There were both. And, yes, there were fewer recently than back in the ’60’s. It doesn’t change the fact that the demonstrations and riots of today are based on lies and fabrications.

            By the ways, the riots of the ’60’s were based on lies and fabrications too. However, there was more substance to the riots of the ’60’s than those of today. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the Mitrokhin Archive pointed to the fact that the funding and the management and organization of the riots of the ’60’s were all from the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union started, funded, managed and saw to fruition the so-called “Peace Movement” of the ’60’s that resulted in the murder of millions throughout the world, but especially in Southeast Asia.

            It’s important to remember — and you should read this very well — society is not a static thing, it’s a trajectory. Society is always changing, and moving. And it’s moving in a direction. If that direction never changes, then the society in question inevitably ends up at the extreme of that direction. Since American society has been moving steadily leftward for the entirety of its existence (again, see “xPraetorius Curve” in these pages, for an illustration of this) then if there is no correction, and more importantly, no reversal, then we will end up with a leftist tyranny in America.

            We’ve seen that before. The result was — conservative estimate — 120 million murdered around the world — in only a century! — or, the single deadliest phenomenon in the history of the world… except for the asteroid that wiped out nearly all life in the world and made the Gulf of Mexico.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            No.. I will NEVER concede to the Conservative mindset that everything “bad” is the result of Left wing collusion and conspiracy. As it turns out, the recent police data on those arrested in the various communities had little if anything to do with Antifa or Nazis and any other organized group.
            My Reply:
            Good. Because that’s not a Conservative mindset. Don’t make strawmen, Doug. However, the Left is a conspiratorial group. The ’60’s showed this very well. None of the basic, underlying organizational structures and strategies of the ’60’s were dismantled when the Left became the establishment. There’s no other way to account for the unanimity of opinion, the uniformity of expression of all the left-wing institutions and organizations every time an issue arises.

            The rest of what you said appears to be correct. Let’s also remember, however, that Antifa is a fascist organization that the Democrat Party has never disavowed. Nazis are fringe fascistic goons whose numbers are because the American political Right has explicitly and overtly and aggressively rejected them. The lack of rejection from the Democrat Party is the reason that the fascist Antifa is growing, and the rejection from the Right, and the Republicans, is why the numbers of all the popular bogeymen — Nazis, so-called White Supremacists, so-called White Nationalists, and others — are insignificant and decreasing.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            Now.. why is any of this important? Because we can’t begin to try and solve issues of race if we can get past the political divide that the “other side” wants to taker over “our side”… and everything is a plot.
            My Reply:
            Except… in the case where the other side is trying to take over, and is interested only in power. And, the Left is, indeed, funded and organized and set up to plot to “take over.”

            You may say that I’m being paranoid. But people accused Churchill of being paranoid when he was all alone raising the alarm about Hitler. But Churchill was right. People called those raising the alarm about the new-born Soviet régime, paranoid. But the “alarmists” were right. People called those raising the alarm about the new Maoist régime in China, paranoid. The “alarmists” were right.

            Dude, anyone who has been watching anything with an even slightly open mind, and doesn’t conclude that the Left is trying to take over is either not too bright, or dishonest.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            If you can’t get over that.. then all this is just going to continue again at some point in someone’s future.

            My Reply:
            No, this is “just going to continue again at some point in the future“… regardless of whether or not anyone can “get over it.”

            Dude: why is it strange for you to imagine that there are people trying to seize power in America? America is a juggernaut of vast, immense power. Why would it be strange to think that people with fervent political or social beliefs would want to take control of such a powerful thing? Moreover, why would it be strange to imagine that some of those people might be tempted to try to seize power through nefarious or corrupt means? Why would it seem strange to you that some people who are eager to seize power might consider that actual democratic means might be too slow for them? This is, in fact, precisely why the Left so disdains real democracy. Also: the fact that the Left is overwhelmingly atheist, so is pretty sure that they have only a few short decades in which to bring about change they’ll be able to see and appreciate.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            Second item…
            Before we can solve social problems we also have to recognize and embrace our human qualities. Us humans spend a HUGE amount of time trying to control ourselves and trying to deny our actions or inactions as having anything even remotely to be attributed to “human traits”. Our laws, our religions, are all in place to control ourselves. Example?

            Stereotyping. It’s a totally natural human trait likely part of our evolutionary defense system of being able to determine cause & effect in the world around us. We are set by nature to assign risk to our physical being, visually and physically. This identification process works its way down through all the common threads of human interaction. In a simple form we see there are left hand people and right hand people in the world… and while this difference has very little assigned behavioral difference or perceived threat we give the occurrence little more than an interesting quirk of birth and lightly joke about it. Stereotyping is normal. It’s certainly the foundation for much of human comedy as we find our stereotypical differences part of life. But stereotyping crosses a line when we carry out harmful words and deeds toward another with the intent to harm… irregardless if the stereotyping qualifier is true or not.
            My Reply:
            Mildly interesting opinions.

            You got one very important thing wrong: There are no harmful words. Words are not harmful; they’re simply carriers of meaning; carriers that communicate meaning more or less effectively depending on the skill of the person using them. Words are like hammers. You can use a hammer to assist you in assembling some beautiful, useful, wonderful things. Or you can use a hammer to kill someone. Or you can use a hammer to do something really badly, for which a hammer is poorly suited. But the hammer has no inherent good or bad. That’s it.

            Stereotyping is also like anything else: It has a good side and a bad side. It has utility for understandinng things and people, and it contains the risk of promoting laziness. Best understood, a stereotype is a perfectly accurate picture of someone who doesn’t exist. Like “the average man.” There is no “average man.” But the description of the “average man” is accurat, and helps us to better understand vast numbers of men.

            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            For sure white Europeans have engaged in slavery in North America for the last 400 hundred years. The process required that enslaved blacks be kept ignorant from learning, and in receiving all the social and physical amenities of their white counterparts. So the stereotypes developed about black people which carried well after they became black Americans.,, and science itself caught up with proof that there is no physical disparity between white and black humans.. or between any other combination of racial types.

            My Reply:
            Ummmm… no, Western Europeans — or, as you say, “white Europeans” — have not engaged in slavery in North America for the last 400 hundred years. In fact: these “white Europeans” have not engaged in slavery in North America for more than 150 years.

            Serious question, Doug: why would you say something like this? Especially in light of the fact that western Europeans abolished slavery, AND tried hard to spread the notion of abolition throughout the world.

            If you’re trying to make the case that the past affects the present and the future, you’ll get no argument from me. However, the fact that America was a bad place for black people, and is no longer is massively important too. It is likewise true that the better America becomes for black Americans, the more the Left complain about it! The reason is simple: as America improves, the case for leftist “solutions” to problems disappears. Hence as the great Kevin D. Williamson points out, the need for abstract, undefinable problems — things like “White Supremacy,” and “Systemic Racism,” and “whiteness,” and “Institutional Racism.” These are things that can’t be defeated, because they’re in “whiteness,” so the need for leftists, and for leftist “solutions” never goes away.

            Science has found differences between various demographics — sometimes significant differences — and these differences have profound implications. Yes, yes, yes… I’m going down the IQ route. By the way, the IQ issue has no bearing on the relative merits of any given group compared to any other, but there are extremely important policy implications in those differences. So, after that very fine disclaimer, scientists have found significant differences in average IQ between defined demographic groups. Ashkenazi Jews are the highest-ranked, followed by Asians (broadly construed), then whites, then hispanics, then blacks. Now, it’s important to understand that IQ in society is also not a static thing. All these average IQ’s are on a trajectory… either going up or down, so this hierarchy won’t remain that way in the future. However, for an increasingly technically-focused society, IQ differences across demographic groups, and what public policies to enact in light of them, are extremely important.Rapidly developing and advancing western countries are failing in this crucial responsibility. It’s not racism fueling that failure, but rather the demands of the Left that no one ever discuss IQ disparities. Even when that means that the poorest will remain poor, and even become poorer, all because no one will address how society should provide meaningful, remunerative opportunities. This is compelling proof that real racism is solidly on the Left.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            My point here is that we need to understand the how-and-why we got to a place in time in order to try and attack a correction to diminish racial stereotypes. Right now it’s black Americans screaming to white Americans about social injustice.. and it’s white Americans having to bear some guilt as a requirement to solving the problem. This time around the demonstrations include white folks sympathetic to the black cause for whatever reasons.. among which could be something as simple as subliminal guilt for Greatest Generation parents/grandparents.. uncles and aunts.. who in the past used demeaning racial rhetoric at some party… which was accepted in their generation (by other white folks) but way out of touch today.
            My Reply:
            There is no need to diminish racial stereotypes. Stereotypes are just words. They can’t hurt anyone who can’t be hurt by harmless words. If you want to defeat a malicious stereotype, then don’t live according to it, and laugh it off as ridiculous when you hear it. Laugh it off forthrightly, good-humouredly, but emphatically. Let the person know that what he’s said is idiotic, but that you don’t necessarily consider him an idiot. Done.

            The only white Americans who need to feel any guilt whatsoever are those who have actually hurt non-white people. Period. Sorry, but this notion that someone who has done nothing wrong needs to feel bad because others who might look like him have misbehaved is so stupid, so idiotic, and evil, that it needs desperately to be dispelled. It’s the very core of racism itself! It’s why people like Hitler were able to tar an entire demographic group with horrific labels because of what he perceived as the misdeeds of some of them. It’s a grotesque notion, and its end result, when carried to its logical endpoint, is monstrous. If a white person is innocent of wrongdoing, then he has no reason whatsoever to feel guilt. He might feel an added impetus to counter the acts of others of his demographic, but that’s just being a good citizen. He should also feel free to try to counter the misdeeds of those who are not in his demographic group, and feel no shame whatsoever in doing so. This is why we don’t slander all black men as murderers, even though there are some black men who murder. The evil side of stereotyping is precisely what you’re trying to perpetuate when you suggest that white people need to feel guilty for the sins of others, even if they’re guilty of none themselves.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            This time around the demonstrations include white folks sympathetic to the black cause for whatever reasons.. among which could be something as simple as subliminal guilt for Greatest Generation parents/grandparents.. uncles and aunts.. who in the past used demeaning racial rhetoric at some party… which was accepted in their generation (by other white folks) but way out of touch today.
            My Reply:
            Yes. However, and it’s a big one. I did this kind of thing when I was a kid too. And so did black people about white people. The various disparaging words that black people use about white people didn’t just pop up when white people stopped using disparaging words for black people. What really happened was that the Left decided that their designated victim client groups needed to become hyper-sensitive about words. That’s the new thing. Now, somehow it’s better that black people are able to demean white people all the time, while it’s career-ending, marriage-ending, job-losing, social ostracism if a white person is caught having used, say, the “N” word 25 years ago! Eg.: Paula Deen. Now, black people aren’t the only ones to have fallen for this codswallop. Linguistically at least, you have to walk on eggshells around women, gays, trans, hispanics, Asians, and so on and so forth. But it’s perfectly fashionable to use slurs for white people and Christians, for example. This is not an improvement in society.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            As for me.. my folks were of that generation and if they had their own feelings and perceptions they never conveyed any racism to me or my sis while growing up. I was about ten years old… 1960.. we went on a road trip to Florida (from Chicago) ad we drove through the deep South and through some cities and towns (not a lot of interstates in those days). I was in total shock & awe at the despicable living conditions of black people.. but mostly it was the “colored only” signs on water fountains and store entrances. I’d ask my folks sitting in the front seat… why are the black people separated with all these signs? Mother replied that this is how lives were in the South. I said.. “But, mom… I thought the Constitution made everyone equal?” To this day.. that was my “welcome to America” moment.

            My Reply:
            Interesting story. And one that should make you thoroughly thrilled at the astonishing progress that this country has made since the time when you were able to see a “Colored Only” sign. One sign of that: No more such signs, and anyone who might choose to display one can count on being unceremoniously ostracized from polite society. And, of course, a million other signs that the society you saw in 1960 is long, long gone.

            To use your “Welcome to America” image just a bit more, it was shortly after your trip down South that America replaced the “Colored Only” sign with a very real “Welcome” sign. Aaaaaaaand, it was shortly after that that the Left began to complain about America all the more furiously. Understand for a very long time before the 1960’s the Left has been a force for corruption, degradation, and destruction of all that’s decent in this the most decent country that has ever existed in the history of the world. (Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism is a great read for more about this.) Don’t forget that Henry Wallace was a Vice-President of the United States. Henry Wallace was also a Communist. Furthermore, Soviet agents were riddled throughout the American government, some in very high positions of authority, throughout the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations. These were people who actively worked, though behind the scenes, to overthrow the United States government and to replace it with one modeled after the bloodthirsty, fascistic Soviet régime.

            The Democrat Party has never renouced the part of its past when many of them were merely stooges for Stalin. Because many of them are merely stooges for the American Left now. These are, of course, the direct heirs to Stalin and his depredations.

            Please tell me you’ve read “The Black Book of Communism.” And the “Mitrokhin Archive.” And “The Venona Papers.”
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            You said:
            I’m not feeling a bit guilty for having been born white… but if my race was “in charge” and living in entitlement, I am left wondering why we.. my “race”, let this go on for so long.

            My Reply:
            Easy: inertia. That’s no excuse, but it is the reason. Then, when black people raised their voices and people started to pay attention, white people merely said, “Ok. You’re right. We’ll cut it out.” That fact alone proves that it was just dumb inertia keeping discrimination and racial disparities in place for too long. And Americans did then cut it out. Convincingly, forthrightly, aggressively, openly, unambiguously. And they utterly and copletely defeated racism. They didn’t eliminate it… you can’t just eliminate a state of mind that quickly, but they made sure that it was no longer a significant or widespread obstacle in the path of non-white Americans. And it hasn’t been a significant obstacle to black Americans’ success for nearly three generations.
            – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
            Best,

            — x

          3. You’re a political cynic.. and have zero faith in the Constitution. (since you get hung up on applying your own semantics… I am saying you have zero faith in it.. I am not saying you don’t believe in it.)

          4. You’re getting closer.

            The Constitution is the law. And, in my very humble opinion, it’s a great document. I’d amend it in several different ways, but it’s the best ever written.

            However, any law is only as good as (1) the willingness of the people to live according to it, (2) the willingness of the government to abide by it, (3) the willingness of the final arbiters (our Supreme Court) to enforce it, and to adjudicate faithfully to it.

            The problem is like that of the 1936 Soviet (called: the “Stalin”) Constitution. It was a beautiful document. It was filled with rights and freedoms like you wouldn’t believe. There were rights and freedoms right straight out of the American Constitution. Free speech. Freedom to worship as you please. Freedom peaceably to assemble, and such.

            BUT, and it’s a big one… the three conditions for a viable Constitution that I enumerated above were not present at the level of the government and the final arbiters. The Soviet Union that followed the enactment of the Stalin Constitution was hell on Earth.

            A great constitution is only part of the picture.

            Best,

            — x

  2. One of the accepted concepts in countries trying to adopt a U.S.-like Constitution.. even Third World nations wishing us to advise them along the way… is that they never spilled blood wanting it badly enough. There was no social or moral life-sacrificing investment to WANT it enough. So to them it’s simply another document the people must follow; another piece of paper when it’s violated without trust, credibility, or responsibility from the leaders. As far as Stalin’s Constitution in what we were discussing.. he was a dictator playing around to bolster his image as so many do, with no intention of surrendering power to an ideal of independent freedom. Not even sure why that was relevant.

    As far as your three points…
    “However, any law is only as good as (1) the willingness of the people to live according to it, (2) the willingness of the government to abide by it, (3) the willingness of the final arbiters (our Supreme Court) to enforce it, and to adjudicate faithfully to it.”

    …sounds nice and text-bookie.. but rather any government exists totally to your first point… the willingness of the people to live according to it, even a dicatorship. That was established in our Declaration. Government works until it doesn’t and people affect change. Government exists as a kind of “permission” of the people. Dicatorships and monarchies exist to the point where the people get fed up… even if it takes a thousand years and ultimately costs numerous lives in a civil war when the people get fed up enough.

    Every generation or so we seem to get these social disruptions which seem to challenge our Constitutional make up but then again do they really? The civil rights demonstrations of the 60’s are not all that different than the similar demonstrations of today although today far less violent, inclusive of white people within the ranks of demonstrators, and sympathetic police and Guardsmen getting involved themselves. No rifles, no bayonets, no dogs, no water cannons… no stomping and dragging of an advancing police line… and no frontal engagements by baton-swinging police banging at heads. This has been pretty mellow by comparison… and even the looting and property damage and lives lost, while dramatic to this generation… was nothing like the 60’s. No question this is all about police violence and black people being victims of that violence…. but the underlying elephant-in-the-room here is that it’s all a subliminal anti-Trump demonstration as well.

    You can believe that or not. But in the end… as Trump feels pressure regarding a non-win in 2020.. and should he loose the election, this will NOT be a peaceful transition of government… and there have already been discussions in some political circles about how to handle that. He is already setting up his own parameters of what HE wants in the voting process that the states will differ on.. so we can expect many court challenges as he throws up barriers to delay the election results. I fully expect at some point he will literally convey to his base all kinds of blathering threats to his legitimacy that some of these clowns will end up blocking the perimeter of the White House to prevent Trump’s removal under some perceived idea they are defending the Constitution. I do not expect Trump to go peacefully because I know the man is a mental narcissist. There’s going to have to be a come-to-daddy moment where Trump supporters are going to have to either support his ideas through another candidate down the line.. or support the man personally regardless what he says or does… which is way beyond the Constitution.

    1. You said:
      One of the accepted concepts in countries trying to adopt a U.S.-like Constitution.. even Third World nations wishing us to advise them along the way… is that they never spilled blood wanting it badly enough. There was no social or moral life-sacrificing investment to WANT it enough. So to them it’s simply another document the people must follow; another piece of paper when it’s violated without trust, credibility, or responsibility from the leaders. As far as Stalin’s Constitution in what we were discussing.. he was a dictator playing around to bolster his image as so many do, with no intention of surrendering power to an ideal of independent freedom. Not even sure why that was relevant.
      My Reply:
      I agree, mostly. Your view is the 50,000 foot view, and I see nothing wrong with it at that level.

      Regarding what you said about Stalin, you are, of course, on the nose. It was relevant because you talked about my lacking faith in the U.S. Constitution. I then pointed out that even the best constitution is worthless if not enough people are willing either to adhere to it or to govern according to it. Or, of course, if the supreme arbiters (the various Supreme Courts) are unwilling to interpret it honestly and with integrity.

      The other reason for which Stalin and his Constitution were relevant was that today’s Democrat Party is the direct heir to Stalin. Today’s Democrat Party is loaded with prominent Stalinists (academia is overloaded with them), and Stalinist propagandists. Today’s Democrat Party is quite open about its desire to abolish both the First and Second Amendments to the Constitution, thereby proving pretty conclusively that they do not respect the Constitution. The Democrat Party is the tail that wags the vast dog that is the United State, because of the slavish devotion of the media, academia, Hollywood and pop culture to it. Stalin, Hitler and Mao were three peas in the same pod. Hitler has, fortunately, been booted out from “the pod,” but Stalin and Mao are still solidly ensconced in it, and it is still “cool,” or “edgy,” or “avant-garde,” or “progressive” to call oneself a Stalinist or a Maoist. Such declarations should provoke exactly the same feelings as those you’d feel upon hearing that someone is a devotée of Hitler.

      Stalin and Mao (as well as many others — Pol Pot, the Castros, Tito, Honecker, Dmitrov, Husak, Kadar, Amin, Bokassa, Mugabe and so many more) should be on the same ash heap under which Hitler is buried. Along with their bloodthirsty, disgusting ideologies. Yet, these disgusting, bloodthirsty ideologies continue to be respectable in America. If you don’t see the vast peril in this fact, then you are not paying attention.

      If, like me, you react with alarm at stories of “the extreme right” experiencing “a resurgence” in various countries (eg: Germany), then you should have exactly the same feeling of revulsion in light of the fact that the extreme left is still very popular in America today. This is not a group who will tolerate your go-along-to-get-along state of mind. Assuming that they will achieve power, and will enact rules, regulations and policies to ensure that they keep power, your state-of-mind will be known as one that was crucial to their seizure of power. Such as you will be known as “useful idiots,” or those who looked the other way when the Left was busy stealing power in America. When people are whispering, “Why didn’t someone say something? Why didn’t someone do something?” the answer will be, some — a few — did try to raise the alarm, but far more said things like, “Stop assigning blame, it’s divisive.” and, “These people are just as patriotic as you are!” When the truth is simpler: There’s nothing wrong with blame, if it’s true. And: They’re not as patriotic as you and I… they’re corrupt, power-hungry bastards.

      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      You said:
      (Quoting me)As far as your three points…

      “However, any law is only as good as (1) the willingness of the people to live according to it, (2) the willingness of the government to abide by it, (3) the willingness of the final arbiters (our Supreme Court) to enforce it, and to adjudicate faithfully to it.” (End quote)

      (Doug replied:) …sounds nice and text-bookie.. but rather any government exists totally to your first point… the willingness of the people to live according to it, even a dictatorship. That was established in our Declaration. Government works until it doesn’t and people affect change. Government exists as a kind of “permission” of the people. Dictatorships and monarchies exist to the point where the people get fed up… even if it takes a thousand years and ultimately costs numerous lives in a civil war when the people get fed up enough.
      My Reply:
      Okay. We agree on all that. However, your consigning people to “a thousand years” of an obviously illegitimate, tyrannical government is a particularly bleak viewpoint. It’s also the default viewpoint of mankind pre-American Revolution. The American Constitution was the first governing framework whose main intent was to establish a society in which a government could not become tyrannical. Now, they got a lot wrong, most especially because there were aspects of their society that were by definition tyrannical — slavery, indentured servitude… things that can be described as “aspects of society that prevented certain groups of people from participating fully in the opportunities and benefits of the society” — but what they got very right was a Constitution that #1: was the very best that had ever been devised to that point, and #2: was a framework that would tend, at least eventually, to expunge existing tyrannical aspects of the society.

      Again, though, for this miraculous Constitution to work, a critical mass of American citizens has to believe in it, take it seriously, support it, act according to it, etc. The requirements that I described above. There is definitely a critical mass of people on the Left who absolutely do not believe in the validity of the American Constitution. It is not only fair, but necessary, to characterize these people as in open rebellion (and we’re seeing it in the riots and looting of today) against America as she was originally conceived. Obviously, these are not patriots. I also ascribe negative value to these people, and think that it is quite accurate to call them bastards. These people would prefer to be rid of the restrictions on governmental power inherent in the various rights of the people to be free of governmental restraint. Otherwise stated, this means that these are people who would penalize you if you were to try to avail yourself of the very freedoms that most of us take absolutely for granted. The greater the extent to which they view your freedoms as dangerous to their power, the greater the penalty. That’s why, of course, all totalitarian power structures simply kill people who dare to speak out. The American Left today are leftist totalitarians, and their language is becoming ever more totalitarian. This is why you hear more calls to “Kill all white people” or “Eliminate the rich,” and that vein of rhetoric. The milquetoasty response — “Oh, they’re just exaggerating! They don’t really mean it!” — only encourages those who truly do mean it to increase the frequency of their casually tossed off calls to mass slaughter.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      You said:
      Every generation or so we seem to get these social disruptions which seem to challenge our Constitutional make up but then again do they really? The civil rights demonstrations of the 60’s are not all that different than the similar demonstrations of today although today far less violent, inclusive of white people within the ranks of demonstrators, and sympathetic police and Guardsmen getting involved themselves. No rifles, no bayonets, no dogs, no water cannons… no stomping and dragging of an advancing police line… and no frontal engagements by baton-swinging police banging at heads. This has been pretty mellow by comparison… and even the looting and property damage and lives lost, while dramatic to this generation… was nothing like the 60’s. No question this is all about police violence and black people being victims of that violence…. but the underlying elephant-in-the-room here is that it’s all a subliminal anti-Trump demonstration as well.
      My Reply:
      You went off the rails at: “No question this is all about police violence and black people being victims of that violence.” This is incorrect. It’s easy to show that black people are not victims of police violence in any widespread sense or with any alarming frequency. Hence, these demonstrations are, like the demonstrations of the ’60’s, frauds based on lies and fabrications.

      Your assertion that it’s an anti-Trump demonstration as well is, I think, correct. And, it’s an anti-Trump based on false allegations. The things of which Trump is supposedly guilty are demonstrably false. He’s, obviously, not a racist. He’s, obviously, not most of the things that the Democrats have fabricated about Trump. There is plenty about which to disapprove in Trump as a person. Not so much to criticize with Trump as President. It remains true that no one has told me (1) what they would have done differently about COVID, (2) how a different President would have prevented the death of George Floyd, (3) how a different President would have reacted to George Floyd’s death, (4) how a different President would have governed differently overall, (5) and so forth.

      I don’t like Trump either, but he’s basically a moderate-centrist President, with an itchy twitter finger. (Heh heh. “Twitter-finger.” I made that up… pretty good, eh?) I’m a Conservative. Of course I won’t like President Trump, either from the personal or the presidential perspective. But he’s a lot better than anything the thoroughly corrupt Democrats have to offer. Or, better said, he’s a lot less bad than anything the Democrats have to offer.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      You said:
      You can believe that or not. But in the end… as Trump feels pressure regarding a non-win in 2020.. and should he loose the election, this will NOT be a peaceful transition of government… and there have already been discussions in some political circles about how to handle that. He is already setting up his own parameters of what HE wants in the voting process that the states will differ on.. so we can expect many court challenges as he throws up barriers to delay the election results. I fully expect at some point he will literally convey to his base all kinds of blathering threats to his legitimacy that some of these clowns will end up blocking the perimeter of the White House to prevent Trump’s removal under some perceived idea they are defending the Constitution. I do not expect Trump to go peacefully because I know the man is a mental narcissist. There’s going to have to be a come-to-daddy moment where Trump supporters are going to have to either support his ideas through another candidate down the line.. or support the man personally regardless what he says or does… which is way beyond the Constitution.
      My Reply:
      Pet peeve: It’s lose, not “loose.” I hope that was a typo. That one drives me crazy. Rant over. The notion that Trump wouldn’t just give up power, as have all Presidents who have lost re-election is so stupid that it should be embarrassing to you to utter it. Seriously, I’d be embarrassed to have swallowed that brain-dead, nonsensical, patently stupid codswallop. Especially since the only ones who have contested the 2016 election are… the Democrats. Regarding “commands to his base,” you’ve gone around the bend, Doug. It is Trump’s base that is demonstrating in the streets today, that is looting small businesses all over America. You see
      the Left out and about, rioting in the streets this very moment, and your concern is that “Trump’s base” will riot after November. Doug, I’m sorry, but that’s just a special kind of stupid.

      Seriously, Doug, I like you, but this last paragraph is an embarrassment of tin-foil hat, paranoid nitwittery. It’s all paranoid speculation about which you have no evidence or logic to support it. In fact, there’s massive evidence to demonstrate pretty conclusively that what you’re saying is ridiculous. There have been several emergencies that would have allowed your imaginary Trump the Dictator to be, well, Trump The Dictator: COVID, George Floyd, China sanctions, economic dislocation due to COVID, Impeachment… He’s done nothing at all to give anyone who’s looking at anything rationally the slightest indication that he’s ever going to do anything outside of his powers as President. Like Obama did with, say, the IRS crimes. For which Nixon was about to be impeached, by the way.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      Best,

      –x

  3. You’d be under far less stress if you simply accepted the diversity of human opinion rather than assigning blame all the time to some “other” that offends you personally for whatever it is they collectively did to you in life. Those people on that radical (or non-radical) Left are fellow human beings and fellow Americans. Trumpian Conservatives swing this idea of patriotism as being their sole domain… and it isn’t. Just hugging the flag, flying the flag, wearing the flag, dry firing the family AK-47 at the TV screen.. does NOT make a person a patriot. Sheer idiocy.

    Also.. you have ascribed some elements, or lack of elements, of the Constitution as having been “wrong”. I couldn’t disagree more. No.. I do not disagree out of some emotional worship toward the Founders that they could do no wrong; way too Trumpian a concept for me. I disagree because they created the document according to the cultural nuances and mores for their day. To them slave owning and gender bias toward women, etc. were part of an accepted culture of the day. You can certainly suggest that our present day perception of “unalienable/inalienable” rights and human moral obligation does indeed place all of humanity within the “all men are created equal” framework, and not just limited to a world of rich, educated white males. But they were not overtly “wrong”.. but rather not as enlightened. This is my primary argument that the Constitution is a dynamic document… written in a way where men of indeed educated vision and a grasp on history and religious morality.. could carry forward into the future a mechanism by which such adaptive changes can occur along the way.. yet still retain the basic principles of the will of the people. It was never designed as some static document because indeed “stuff” important back then to retain their status quo is not as relevant to our status quo today.

    You said…..
    “Of course I won’t like President Trump, either from the personal or the presidential perspective. But he’s a lot better than anything the thoroughly corrupt Democrats have to offer. Or, better said, he’s a lot less bad than anything the Democrats have to offer.”

    Actually.. what you are saying is that even a demonstrated truly bad Conservative already in power is far better than any kind of Liberal in the candidacy for same position.
    Just saying you also dislike Trump but find no Democrat better… is just a cop-out to get some sort of acceptance. Call it what it is.

    1. You said:
      You’d be under far less stress if you simply accepted the diversity of human opinion rather than assigning blame all the time to some “other” that offends you personally for whatever it is they collectively did to you in life. Those people on that radical (or non-radical) Left are fellow human beings and fellow Americans. Trumpian Conservatives swing this idea of patriotism as being their sole domain… and it isn’t. Just hugging the flag, flying the flag, wearing the flag, dry firing the family AK-47 at the TV screen.. does NOT make a person a patriot. Sheer idiocy.
      My Reply:
      Doug: First, I’m under no real stress, I’m simply an observer.

      Now, let me transport you back in time, and suggest that you say that same thing to an opponent of Hitler before he came to power. That person would have looked at you and suggested that you were crazy, and that there needed to be focused, forceful opposition to Hitler and his brownshirts. The brownshirts are here, they’re in the streets, they’re doing what they can to seize power, and when they do take power, you’ll be one of the first to go. You can take some consolation from the fact that I will too. 🙂

      Now, your suggestion that we should be all about “diversity of human opinion” is right on the nose. Could you please pass that along — as forcefully, or persuasively, as necessary — to the Left, who are aggressively, forcefully, violently doing all they can to squash any “diversity of human opinion?”

      Dude: You can be all about “diversity of human opinion” all you want, but that works only when all opinion holders are willing to tolerate “diversity of human opinion.” Doug: you plainly don’t understand that the American Left is not at all interested in “diversity of human opinion.”

      If, in the context of all the campus shoutdowns, the censoring of Conservative opinion in social media, in the media in general, in academia, in Hollywood and pop culture, you can still suggest that we on the Right need to accept “diversity of human opinion,” then you’re just not a serious person.

      The ones who are “assigning blame all the time to some “other” that offends you personally” are, of course, the American Left.
      Those people on that radical (or non-radical) Left are fellow human beings and fellow Americans.” Is correct. But incomplete. The correct phrase is: “Those people on that radical (or non-radical) Left are fellow human beings and fellow Americans, and bastards.”

      You rail against: “Trumpian Conservatives swing this idea of patriotism as being their sole domain… and it isn’t. Just hugging the flag, flying the flag, wearing the flag, dry firing the family AK-47 at the TV screen.” — These are people who don’t exist.

      Doug: I’m struck by the extent to which you’ve elected to parrot all leftist talking points to me. Why don’t you respect the “diversity of human opinion?” For example, your hilariously dumb assertion that Trump wouldn’t leave the White House if he doesn’t win re-election is straight out of MSNBC and the Biden campaign. Why don’t you repeat to me any Conservative talking points? Are you really telling me that we get absolutely everything wrong? Or is it simply that you have no respect for “the diversity of human opinion?” Well, if we get absolutely everything wrong, then you’re also implying that the shoutdowns on campuses, the censoring of Conservatives in social media, academia, the media, and pop culture is okay. After all, we get everything wrong, right? Doug, you call yourself a “Republican,” but I haven’t heard one single, solitary thing that would even remotely come from a Republican. I’m starting to figure that this is all just a false flag operation on your part.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      You said:
      Also.. you have ascribed some elements, or lack of elements, of the Constitution as having been “wrong”. I couldn’t disagree more. No.. I do not disagree out of some emotional worship toward the Founders that they could do no wrong; way too Trumpian a concept for me. I disagree because they created the document according to the cultural nuances and mores for their day. To them slave owning and gender bias toward women, etc. were part of an accepted culture of the day. You can certainly suggest that our present day perception of “unalienable/inalienable” rights and human moral obligation does indeed place all of humanity within the “all men are created equal” framework, and not just limited to a world of rich, educated white males. But they were not overtly “wrong”.. but rather not as enlightened. This is my primary argument that the Constitution is a dynamic document… written in a way where men of indeed educated vision and a grasp on history and religious morality.. could carry forward into the future a mechanism by which such adaptive changes can occur along the way.. yet still retain the basic principles of the will of the people. It was never designed as some static document because indeed “stuff” important back then to retain their status quo is not as relevant to our status quo today.
      My Reply:
      Some of this made sense, but you trailed off into incoherence at the end. The rest of what you said was, indeed, overly reverential toward the Constitution. It was, indeed a great, great document, but it was not perfect. Hence, what 27 amendments now? Each amendment is a declaration that the Constitution needed to be changed, that it either lacked something, or (in the case of the 21st) that there was something that explicitly needed to be removed.

      You task me with insufficient devotion to “diversity of human opinion,” but that appears to be only because of your absolute blindness as it pertains to President Trump.
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      You said:
      You said…..
      “Of course I won’t like President Trump, either from the personal or the presidential perspective. But he’s a lot better than anything the thoroughly corrupt Democrats have to offer. Or, better said, he’s a lot less bad than anything the Democrats have to offer.”

      Actually.. what you are saying is that even a demonstrated truly bad Conservative already in power is far better than any kind of Liberal in the candidacy for same position.

      Just saying you also dislike Trump but find no Democrat better… is just a cop-out to get some sort of acceptance. Call it what it is.
      My Reply:
      First: I already “called it what it is.” Just because you don’t think I did, doesn’t mean you’re right. 🙂

      Next: The Democrat Party stopped being “liberal” long, long ago. I’ll grant them some political credibility when they overtly reject the fascists of Antifa, as well as the racist black supermacists of BLM. Remember what we said before:; “The new fascists are the ones waving the banner of anti-fascism.”
      – * – * – * – * – * – * – * – * –
      Best,

      — x

Please Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s