Racial Narratives Of The Left

[Mike S]

I went to the source you cited. I understood the article, I just wasn't impressed with it. I thought his argument that liberals are the driving force behind keeping race issues alive and in the media a sad and narrow minded pov. Or must the author be reminded that it was conservatives that kept the fires of hatred brewing in America as they struggled to keep the status quo in place.

I presume you're referring to the "liberal" Democrats who supported slavery until the Civil War, and then voted against the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, and established the Ku Klux Klan, and set up Jim Crow governments throughout the south, and voted against every civil rights legislation offered by Republicans until the 1960s, when the saw the change in public mood and decided to jump in front of a parade and pretend to lead it, and even then supported their brand new stylish racial preference system called Affirmation Action. Are those the people you're talking about? Because "liberal" Democrats have never been able to resist manipulation of race relations, right up to today, with their racial narratives - which, some need to be reminded, are the subject of this thread - Victor Davis Hanson and Thomas Sowell recognize, even if you don't.

 

[D4Christ]

I presume you're referring to the "liberal" Democrats who supported slavery until the Civil War, and then voted against the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments to the Constitution, and established the Ku Klux Klan, and set up Jim Crow governments throughout the south, and voted against every civil rights legislation offered by Republicans until the 1960s, when the saw the change in public mood and decided to jump in front of a parade and pretend to lead it, and even then supported their brand new stylish racial preference system called Affirmation Action. Are those the people you're talking about? Because "liberal" Democrats have never been able to resist manipulation of race relations, right up to today, with their racial narratives Victor Davis Hanson and Thomas Sowell recognize, even if you don't.

We all know that over history parties have changed. So of course some of these same liberal democrates....let's say this correctly, "southern" democrats defected to the Republican party after the Civil Rights Act was passed. But is this is a discussion about liberals and conservatives - democrates vs. republicans? Or is it about ignorant people with ignorant ideas that will stand behind whichever party or ideaology supports their agenda.

Label it what you want. The author of the OP has ideas and conclusions that are twisted....they twist history and confuse the issue as he tries to blame race and culture issues on a polictical party, instead of the twisted hearts and minds of individuals.

 

[Danus]

As Christians, we are commanded by Jesus Christ to do three things. One is to love the Lord your God with all that you are. The second is to love your neighbor as you love yourself. The final is to love your neighbor as Christ loves us. This puts Christians in a sticky situation since we are not to condone sin nor condemn (judgment is reserved for God) in that we have to respect and love those that are sinners or different from ourself as Christ loves us.

True.

As for the political parties I've found it not wise to worship either one.

As Psalms 116:11 points out; "in my dismay, all men are liars." No where do I see this truth more then when I see politics try and stand on the principles of Christianity; whether it's the left trying to "take care of the poor", or the right charging the left with immorality. What a joke, they all are.

I think the highest examples of hypocrisy can be found in the "political pulpits" when preachers and politicians pin their political affiliation to their religious affiliation.

God must be laughing at us, and it's no wonder to me that he might leave some to their own damnation to show his final judgment to the proud foolish, who are in reality only worshiping men.

 

[CalledToServe]

True.

As for the political parties I've found it not wise to worship either one.

As Psalms 116:11 points out; "in my dismay, all men are liars." No where do I see this truth more then when I see politics try and stand on the principles of Christianity; whether it's the left trying to "take care of the poor", or the right charging the left with immorality. What a joke, they all are.

I think the highest examples of hypocrisy can be found in the "political pulpits" when preachers and politicians pin their political affiliation to their religious affiliation.

God must be laughing at us, and it's no wonder to me that he might leave some to their own damnation to show his final judgment to the proud foolish, who are in reality only worshiping men.

Too true and God definitely has a sense of humor. Look at the platypus.

 

[Mike S]

We all know that over history parties have changed. So of course some of these same liberal democrates....let's say this correctly, "southern" democrats defected to the Republican party after the Civil Rights Act was passed. But is this is a discussion about liberals and conservatives - democrates vs. republicans? Or is it about ignorant people with ignorant ideas that will stand behind whichever party or ideaology supports their agenda.

Label it what you want. The author of the OP has ideas and conclusions that are twisted....they twist history and confuse the issue as he tries to blame race and culture issues on a polictical party, instead of the twisted hearts and minds of individuals.

It's about racial narratives of the left...and it's not Hanson who is twisting history.

Tell you what, D, you make a list of those southern Democrats who "defected" to the Republican party, and I'll make a list of those who stayed with the Democrats, and we'll see who list is longer. My guess is you won't be able to name as many as five.

 

[D4Christ]

It's about racial narratives of the left...and it's not Hanson who is twisting history.

If you say it then it must be true. I'm sure Hanson can give us a great "so called" (to use his own terminology) history lesson!

 

[CalledToServe]

It's about racial narratives of the left...and it's not Hanson who is twisting history.

Tell you what, D, you make a list of those southern Democrats who "defected" to the Republican party, and I'll make a list of those who stayed with the Democrats, and we'll see who list is longer. My guess is you won't be able to name as many as five.

I'm going to be blunt and it's not directed at either one of you. Speaking from a historians point of view, that people do not know the whole truth about history of the United States and are given fairy tales perpetrated by the government. The truth of the matter is that both Republicans and Democrats were racists. Republicans of the 1860's were no friend to blacks and minorities. Their policy was to use the newly freed slaves to loot the southern state governments treasury for their own benefit. These same Republicans did not want to give blacks equal rights and moved to restrict them through the use of marriage licenses.

Democrats changed after the war as a result of having their treasuries plundered and personal property (not slaves but real property) seized by the northerners without compensation and unjustly. Democrats continued the racist policies in the south, much like both parties continued them in the north. Democrats were smarting from having been denied their right to elect their government or running for office while living under a military dictatorship that could on the whim of the Union Army murder them if they so choose.

Neither side is on the high moral road since both sides have attrocious records on the protection of rights for all people. We have to move forward from this point on and improve life for everyone by adhering to the teachings of Christ.

 

[Mike S]

I'm going to be blunt and it's not directed at either one of you. Speaking from a historians point of view, that people do not know the whole truth about history of the United States and are given fairy tales perpetrated by the government. The truth of the matter is that both Republicans and Democrats were racists. Republicans of the 1860's were no friend to blacks and minorities. Their policy was to use the newly freed slaves to loot the southern state governments treasury for their own benefit. These same Republicans did not want to give blacks equal rights and moved to restrict them through the use of marriage licenses.

Democrats changed after the war as a result of having their treasuries plundered and personal property (not slaves but real property) seized by the northerners without compensation and unjustly. Democrats continued the racist policies in the south, much like both parties continued them in the north. Democrats were smarting from having been denied their right to elect their government or running for office while living under a military dictatorship that could on the whim of the Union Army murder them if they so choose.

Neither side is on the high moral road since both sides have attrocious records on the protection of rights for all people. We have to move forward from this point on and improve life for everyone by adhering to the teachings of Christ.

The thread is about racial narratives of the left. A good start would be to recognize those narratives as being destructive, and changing them. Nothing good will come from pretending they don't exist or don't matter: that's the effective equivalent of agreeing with them.

Trying to equate the imperfections of the Republican party through the years with the utter depravity of the Democrat during the same period is a non-starter.

 

[CalledToServe]

The thread is about racial narratives of the left. A good start would be to recognize those narratives as being destructive, and changing them. Nothing good will come from pretending they don't exist or don't matter: that's the effective equivalent of agreeing with them.

Neither the right nor the left can claim the moral high ground. Both sides are racist and have a history of racism. Those are the facts of history, so deal with it.

Republicans fought every step of the way, like Democrats against integration, policies regarding education opportunities, employment, etc...

Both sides continue the racist policies of the past to divide Americans and to continue perpetrating the plantation mentality of a nanny government. Government is the blame and both sides use the government hurt the other side. Racists of both parties continue the policies that have made blacks still be inferior, especially when it comes to unemployment. Black youths are 50% unemployed and have zero prospects for moving up in the world outside of crime by pushing drugs. Drug laws were originally enacted to keep blacks and other minorities poor while developing a dependence upon the government.

 

[Mike S]

Neither the right nor the left can claim the moral high ground. Both sides are racist and have a history of racism. Those are the facts of history, so deal with it.

Republicans fought every step of the way, like Democrats against integration, policies regarding education opportunities, employment, etc...

I've already dealt with it. There is no equivalancy between the stated goal pf the Democratic party to preserve slavery and the stated goal of the Republican party to end it. Trying to equate the imperfections of the Republican party with the utter depravity of the Democratic party is a non-starter. I suggest you review your history.

 

[CalledToServe]

I've already dealt with it. There is no equivalancy between the stated goal pf the Democratic party to preserve slavery and the stated goal of the Republican party to end it. Trying to equate the imperfections of the Republican party with the utter depravity of the Democratic party is a non-starter. I suggest you review your history.

Imperfections of the Republican party? No, Lincoln's party wanted nothing to do with racial equality nor make the races equal in any shape or form. It was the Republicans that punished blacks with the black codes in both the north and the south. It was the Republicans that pushed a drug war against blacks, whose only way out of the ghetto created by both parties between 1865-1960s was to make it illegal to sell and use drugs without a Constitutional Amendment.

Republicans were behind the laws banning the sale of alcohol and other rights violations. Republicans were the first to erode the Constitution and the protections of the Bill of Rights under Eisenhower's administration. Eisenhower claimed that he needed the power to declare war without Congress. Lincoln was the first president to pass laws through the use of Executive Orders. It was Bush who started the egregarious rights violations to prosecute a war against an ideal through the creation of Homeland Security, TSA, etc... while removing the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.

Both sides cannot claim the moral high ground for racism since the policies of Bush's administration are clearly directed at Muslims. Care to continue with your righteous indignation and say that I'm wrong?

 

[Mike S]

Imperfections of the Republican party? No, Lincoln's party wanted nothing to do with racial equality nor make the races equal in any shape or form. It was the Republicans that punished blacks with the black codes in both the north and the south. It was the Republicans that pushed a drug war against blacks, whose only way out of the ghetto created by both parties between 1865-1960s was to make it illegal to sell and use drugs without a Constitutional Amendment.

Republicans were behind the laws banning the sale of alcohol and other rights violations. Republicans were the first to erode the Constitution and the protections of the Bill of Rights under Eisenhower's administration. Eisenhower claimed that he needed the power to declare war without Congress. Lincoln was the first president to pass laws through the use of Executive Orders. It was Bush who started the egregarious rights violations to prosecute a war against an ideal through the creation of Homeland Security, TSA, etc... while removing the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.

Both sides cannot claim the moral high ground for racism since the policies of Bush's administration are clearly directed at Muslims. Care to continue with your righteous indignation and say that I'm wrong?

I can understand your rage at being called out on your faulty understanding of history, and will gladly show you where you're wrong in another thread for that purpose. But this thread is about racial narratives of the left.

 

[D4Christ]

Imperfections of the Republican party? No, Lincoln's party wanted nothing to do with racial equality nor make the races equal in any shape or form. It was the Republicans that punished blacks with the black codes in both the north and the south. It was the Republicans that pushed a drug war against blacks, whose only way out of the ghetto created by both parties between 1865-1960s was to make it illegal to sell and use drugs without a Constitutional Amendment.

Republicans were behind the laws banning the sale of alcohol and other rights violations. Republicans were the first to erode the Constitution and the protections of the Bill of Rights under Eisenhower's administration. Eisenhower claimed that he needed the power to declare war without Congress. Lincoln was the first president to pass laws through the use of Executive Orders. It was Bush who started the egregarious rights violations to prosecute a war against an ideal through the creation of Homeland Security, TSA, etc... while removing the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.

Both sides cannot claim the moral high ground for racism since the policies of Bush's administration are clearly directed at Muslims. Care to continue with your righteous indignation and say that I'm wrong?

Called to Serve....your name serves you justice. :nod

 

[CalledToServe]

I can understand your rage at being called out on your faulty understanding of history, and will gladly show you where you're wrong in another thread for that purpose. But this thread is about racial narratives of the left.

I'm not wrong on my history because I can cite every point I made. I have studied American History for over 30 years now using primary source documentation.

 

[Mike S]

I'm not wrong on my history because I can cite every point I made. I have studied American History for over 30 years now using primary source documentation.

Not impressed.

This thread is about racial narratives of the left.

 

[CalledToServe]

Not impressed.

This thread is about racial narratives of the left.

Keep up with the discussion mark. You and Dee have been called out regarding your beliefs. I can cite everything I've said and you've presented rhetoric and emotion in comparison.

I'm not angry at either of you since that does not serve the will of God. What does serve the will of God is correction of a believer who is wrong about certain things.

How long have you studied American History? Did you use primary, secondary, or tertiary documentation to study American history?

 

[Mike S]

Keep up with the discussion mark. You and Dee have been called out regarding your beliefs. I can cite everything I've said and you've presented rhetoric and emotion in comparison.

I'm not angry at either of you since that does not serve the will of God. What does serve the will of God is correction of a believer who is wrong about certain things.

How long have you studied American History? Did you use primary, secondary, or tertiary documentation to study American history?

A different thread, Called.

 

[CalledToServe]

A different thread, Called.

I'll take that as your concession that you are wrong then. Good day.

 

[Mike S]

I'll take that as your concession that you are wrong then. Good day.

I take that as an admission you have nothing to refute the racial narratives of the left as presented in my comments, and supported by Thomas Sowell and Victor Davis Hanson. I accept your admission.

 

[D4Christ]

Keep up with the discussion mark. You and Dee have been called out regarding your beliefs.

I'm curious. Exactly what have I been called out on? You mentioned genetics which I agreed with, not that I didn't understand it before. I also stated;

But is this is a discussion about liberals and conservatives - democrates vs. republicans? Or is it about ignorant people with ignorant ideas that will stand behind whichever party or ideaology supports their agenda.

Label it what you want. The author of the OP has ideas and conclusions that are twisted....they twist history and confuse the issue as he tries to blame race and culture issues on a polictical party, instead of the twisted hearts and minds of individuals.