Joe Biden Presidency thread *Please read OP - Threadbanned Users Added 4/5/21*

eagle eye

Overheal wrote:

You don’t seem to be arguing in good faith: what is your thesis, that the natives were all braindead savages before someone carrying the Bible of King James showed up, touched them on the forehead and gave them the knowledge to stand up straight, use tools and speak? What is your thesis.

No, I said there's very little history for us to read about so we know very little about it. It's you who are not arguing in good faith, you just have an agenda to castigate anybody whose a Republican.
I'm not even saying that I think Santorum isn't racist, I'm pointing out what he said isn't.

Christy42

eagle eye wrote: »

I'm not a Republican, I've always supported the Democrats.

I did not call you a Republican. I asked why Republicans so frequently need their statements translated into English to make them not seem racist. In this case Santorum is the Republican.

I know what he said and your own translations bear little resemblance to what he said.

Overheal

eagle eye wrote: »

No, I said there's very little history for us to read about so we know very little about it. It's you who are not arguing in good faith, you just have an agenda to castigate anybody whose a Republican.
I'm not even saying that I think Santorum isn't racist, I'm pointing out what he said isn't.

So you’re arguing a negative and appealing to ignorance. Both are logical fallacies. You don’t think it’s racist because of your own appeal to ignorance.

You’ve been directed toward books, you specifically asked for books. There are lots and lots of books written about native Americans and American pre colonial history it’s up to you to search it out now I guess, you’ve already been escorted to the waters edge. There’s plenty of history to read about you just choose not to.

Any proof that I “just have an agenda to castigate anybody who is a Republican” would be welcome thanks.

everlast75

eagle eye wrote: »

No, I said there's very little history for us to read about so we know very little about it. It's you who are not arguing in good faith, you just have an agenda to castigate anybody whose a Republican.
I'm not even saying that I think Santorum isn't racist, I'm pointing out what he said isn't.

He is an a hole who has a long history of saying controversial things and people had enough.

Just like a tv show that people grow tired of.

It gets cancelled.

That's tv.

That's life.

Either learn from your warnings or don't.
But quit whinging when what you were warned would happen, happens.

duploelabs

duploelabs wrote: »

Another dodge, so what is cancel culture in your own words

No dodge, just simple facts. Re-read the thread. Is that another demand you are making, or do you not understand the function of the question mark?

Brian?

WhomadeGod wrote: »

Democratic posters deny that cancel culture exists.

Yet keep posting examples of cancel culture

I would say there is a max of 2 posters here that have ever voted for the Democrats and zero who are members of the the Democratic party.

eagle eye

eagle eye wrote: »

No, I said there's very little history for us to read about so we know very little about it. It's you who are not arguing in good faith, you just have an agenda to castigate anybody whose a Republican.
I'm not even saying that I think Santorum isn't racist, I'm pointing out what he said isn't.

Eh, he did a pretty great job of a whitewash of the genocide of European colonisation firstly. Secondly, he implied that they brought culture to the US. The US was a "blank slate". That's patently untrue and I would say there's a racist element, he basically entirely diminished a culture and claimed it doesn't even exist in the present day.... Racism through ignorance is still racist....

Also, the weirdest part is you seem to be trying to argue he has a point.

duploelabs

Hhhhh wrote: »

No dodge, just simple facts. Re-read the thread. Is that another demand you are making, or do you not understand the function of the question mark?

Another dodge, is that 4 now? So what is cancel culture?

eagle eye

Overheal wrote:

So you’re arguing a negative and appealing to ignorance. Both are logical fallacies. You don’t think it’s racist because of your own appeal to ignorance.

I said he didn't say anything racist. He just gave an opinion on history and demographics.
1.6% of the population supports his demographic opinion, lack of history means it's hard to argue with his opinion on history.
And I've said it does suggest racism but that he didn't actually say anything racist.

Overheal wrote:

You’ve been directed toward books, you specifically asked for books. There are lots and lots of books written about native Americans and American pre colonial history it’s up to you to search it out now I guess, you’ve already been escorted to the waters edge. There’s plenty of history to read about you just choose not to.

You linked to books which all seem to be about since Europeans went to north America.

Overheal wrote:

Any proof that I “just have an agenda to castigate anybody who is a Republican†would be welcome thanks.

Yeah, all through this thread and any of the old Trump threads.

eagle eye

Deleted User wrote:

Also, the weirdest part is you seem to be trying to argue he has a point.

I'm not trying to argue that he has a point. I'm saying what he said isn't racist.
I'd suspect he is racist but I've no proof of that. I'd suspect he's a homophobe too but I've no proof of that either.

Overheal

eagle eye wrote: »

I said he didn't say anything racist. He just gave an opinion on history and demographics.
1.6% of the population supports his demographic opinion, lack of history means it's hard to argue with his opinion on history.
And I've said it does suggest racism but that he didn't actually say anything racist.

Native Americans being ethnically cleansed is all that 1.6% is indicative of.

You linked to books which all seem to be about since Europeans went to north America.

Then you didn’t look at them all. All you need to know there is a history before colonization and there was more than “nothing” here. A lot more.

Yeah, all through this thread and any of the old Trump threads.

So no proof.

There are lots and lots of Republicans I don’t castigate.

Brian?

eagle eye wrote: »

I said he didn't say anything racist. He just gave an opinion on history and demographics.
1.6% of the population supports his demographic opinion, lack of history means it's hard to argue with his opinion on history.
And I've said it does suggest racism but that he didn't actually say anything racist.


You linked to books which all seem to be about since Europeans went to north America.


Yeah, all through this thread and any of the old Trump threads.

Why are you defending Santorum when he admits he was wrong himself?

Tell me how

eagle eye wrote: »

Yeah, all through this thread and any of the old Trump threads.

And similarly, you have a history of coming across as being quite supportive of Republicans and their ideals but every ten posts or so you say that you are Democrat so I must definitely be imagining that.

Aside from Santorum dismissing whatever cultural heritage native Americans do possess, his comments completely dismissed their experience of effectively being ethnically cleansed by those who he is lauding for having built the nation.
I'm guessing there'd be evidence of much more culture and contribution by the natives in the America of today if that hadn't happened as it did, but lets ignore that point.

duploelabs

duploelabs wrote: »

Another dodge, is that 4 now? So what is cancel culture?

Nope, again no dodges. I was never asked a question. You made a demand, noone else interacted me.

However, thankyou for your question. Cancel culture is an effort by (usually) a small number of people to have someone fired from a job, not re-hired, or cause some sort of financial burden on a person (for example by trying to have a publisher drop publishing a book). In its recent form was started by McCarty in the 60's, was continued by the religious right in the 90's early nouties, and has now been taken up by mainly the progressive left.

duploelabs

Hhhhh wrote: »

Nope, again no dodges. I was never asked a question. You made a demand, noone else interacted me.

However, thankyou for your question. Cancel culture is an effort by (usually) a small number of people to have someone fired from a job, not re-hired, or cause some sort of financial burden on a person (for example by trying to have a publisher drop publishing a book). In its recent form was started by McCarty in the 60's, was continued by the religious right in the 90's early nouties, and has now been taken up by mainly the progressive left.

So people shouldn't be responsible for their words they publish?

salmocab

Hhhhh wrote: »

Nope, again no dodges. I was never asked a question. You made a demand, noone else interacted me.

However, thankyou for your question. Cancel culture is an effort by (usually) a small number of people to have someone fired from a job, not re-hired, or cause some sort of financial burden on a person (for example by trying to have a publisher drop publishing a book). In its recent form was started by McCarty in the 60's, was continued by the religious right in the 90's early nouties, and has now been taken up by mainly the progressive left.

It’s always happened, it’s not a culture it’s life. People do things and others react. The only difference now is it’s been given a catchy name by people with an agenda.

Cody montana

Getting fired for being a **** person is not cancel culture.

duploelabs

duploelabs wrote: »

So people shouldn't be responsible for their words they publish?

No, I am bit busy, so have not really been specific enough. When I've time later I will elucidate more clearly.

salmocab

Cody montana wrote: »

Getting fired for being a **** person is not cancel culture.

It’s cancel culture when it’s people perceived as liberals doing the cancelling. Otherwise it’s oddly not mentioned.
It’s utter nonsense people do things that have consequences and the phrase is rolled out as if it’s a conspiracy against the right.

eagle eye

Tell me how wrote:

And similarly, you have a history of coming across as being quite supportive of Republicans and their ideals but every ten posts or so you say that you are Democrat so I must definitely be imagining that.

What Republicans have I defended.
Also.if you think this is me defending Santorum then I don't know what to say to you.
My issue is with people calling what he said racist when he didn't say anything racist. I don't like what he said but that's a whole different matter.

Hhhhh

Hhhhh wrote: »

No, I am bit busy, so have not really been specific enough. When I've time later I will elucidate more clearly.

Do you think Trump's efforts to boycott multiple businesses was cancel culture?

eagle eye wrote: »

What Republicans have I defended.
Also.if you think this is me defending Santorum then I don't know what to say to you.
My issue is with people calling what he said racist when he didn't say anything racist. I don't like what he said but that's a whole different matter.

He downplayed a genocide and claimed that the group who were killed off had no culture. It's very much the savages versus civilizing at work. Which is very much so a form of racism.

Cody montana

salmocab wrote: »

It’s cancel culture when it’s people perceived as liberals doing the cancelling. Otherwise it’s oddly not mentioned.
It’s utter nonsense people do things that have consequences and the phrase is rolled out as if it’s a conspiracy against the right.

These are the same people crowing about free speech.
Your comments and actions are not immune.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think Trump's efforts to boycott multiple businesses was cancel culture?

No, as it refers to the targeting of individuals not companies. And no, I'm not a Trump supporter, a Republican or a conservative. You've just picked a bad example. There are no doubt examples of those on the 'right' engaging in cancel culture, it happens to be that over the last number of years it's been mostly practiced by progressives.

Deleted User wrote: »

He downplayed a genocide and claimed that the group who were killed off had no culture. It's very much the savages versus civilizing at work. Which is very much so a form of racism.

Do you think it's akin to denying justifying the Holocaust?

Smee_Again

Hhhhh wrote: »

Do you think it's akin to denying the Holocaust?

Out of curiosity has anyone claim it was?

Smee_Again

Smee_Again wrote: »

Out of curiosity has anyone claim it was?

Yes, not on this thread in particular, but there was no insinuation there intended.

“Televising someone with [Santorum’s] views on Native American genocide is fundamentally no different than putting an outright Nazi on television to justify the Holocaust,” said Fawn Sharp, the group’s president, in a statement from last month. “Any mainstream media organization should fire him or face a boycott from more than 500 Tribal Nations and our allies from across the country and worldwide.”

Also on 2nd look I should've said the same as justifying, not denying. But the question still stands.

Smee_Again

Hhhhh wrote: »

Yes, not on this thread in particular, but there was no insinuation there intended.



Also on 2nd look I should've said the same as justifying, not denying. But the question still stands.

There’s a big difference between justifying and denying, thanks for clarifying.

I think those comments from Sharp are fair.

Santorum dismissed entire cultures that predate the US and cultures that were largely systematically and intentionally erased by US governments so it’s fair to draw parallels between Native Americans and the treatment of Jews by the Nazis.

Smee_Again

Smee_Again wrote: »

There’s a big difference between justifying and denying, thanks for clarifying.

Indeed, and no problem.

Smee_Again wrote: »

I think those comments from Sharp are fair.

Santorum dismissed entire cultures that predate the US and cultures that were largely systematically and intentionally erased by US governments so it’s fair to draw parallels between Native Americans and the treatment of Jews by the Nazis.

I respectively disagree, but see no reason to take this on farther.

Smee_Again

Hhhhh wrote: »

Indeed, and no problem.


I respectively disagree, but see no reason to take this on farther.

You’re obviously entitled to disagree but if you don’t explain why then I’ll have to conclude that you disagree for the sake of convenience because otherwise you’d have to admit that what Santorum said was both outrageous and racist.

Overheal

Has anyone here who has spoken against the 1619 Project ever actually read the 1619 Project, or done any research on how the material is being used in schools, or who its principle author is? I personally didn't know a lot about this, other than the talking points I get from my reps about liberal indoctrination and self-hating Americans bla bla bla.

I actually would like to know what is so fundamentally offensive about 1619 that the GOP would use government to abridge the freedom of speech between educators and students about the history of our country as told by many sources not only including 1619 but our entire literature of so-called "banned" books etc. and jim crow era textbooks as well. Why fear critical thought?

Smee_Again

Smee_Again wrote: »

You’re obviously entitled to disagree but if you don’t explain why then I’ll have to conclude that you disagree for the sake of convenience because otherwise you’d have to admit that what Santorum said was both outrageous and racist.

I think it was silly but not racist. I also disagree it is at all like justifying the Holocaust. Where does he justify the what happened to the Native Americans? It was a dumb thing to say but it's just as likely, if not more, that he spoke out of turn and as a result of ignorance then due to him being a racist, and it has been blown out of all proportion like often happens these days, particularly in America.