Socialism is evil

[BlackAsCoal]

Perhaps you should keep drinking the "kool-aid" of Democrats if you think that Blacks have done better as a group by voting for them

What is the unemployment rate today
What is the illegitimate rate today
What is the divorce rate today


I guess since Obama is black, the Democrats can use blacks anyway they want now - don' they call that being someone's bitch



How do I am white?

You ignorance of history and life are meaningless. Your rant is ignorant as fuck. We were better off in 1960?

Today, African-Americans participate in every career and political pursuit. We excel and redefine many. We've only been relatively free for 45 years and if you don't see the tremendous gains made in just 45 years .. it's because you're a moron .. a racist one.

No one wants your company or affinity. We don't aspire to be you.

Are there still problems? Of course there are .. we've only been "free" for 45 years .. but no one wants to go back to 1960.

Your problem isn't that you don't see the progress .. your problem is that you do and it eats away at your cancerous soul.

Stormfront is calling you.

This is the wingnut who thinks all cats are tigers. You are wasting your time trying to educate him

Someone who thinks all cats are tigers should have their stupidity ridicule, not patronized

Oh no .. not trying to educate this dummy .. just enjoying his pain.

 

[JamesInFlorida]

1) You cited Marx's definition of socialism and said it was the correct definition

How is that not agreeing with Marx?

2) My quote says nothing about allocation being "subject to workers" I have no idea what you're talking about.

3) You are mistating what I wrote. I did not say that MW's definition was authoritative or final, the way you presented Marxs' definition. I posted the link to show that socialism is not as clearly defined as the Marxists like you would like to think

4) Show me where it says that private property is prohibited.

1. I posted a definition of socialism, and while there are certainly many of them-they all contain certain aspects of Marxism (being as Marx's is the most widely used among socialists).

2. Pretty sure you said that the workers work through the government, whereas this isn't true.

3. I understand what you meant-however there's little question as to who has more authority in discussing socialism. But how about someone else's defintion:

4. Throughout the wikipedia page it states:

-"Modern socialism originated from an 18th-century intellectual and working class political movement that criticised the effects of industrialisation and private property on society."

-"Libertarian socialists promote a non-hierarchical, non-bureaucratic, stateless society without private property in the means of production."

-"Robert Owen advocating the transformation of society to small communities without private property."

Marx also had one on the page, but none of these are from Marx, or from the Marx section of the page. If a society is without private property, it's fair to say that you can't own private property.

 

[sangha]

1) You cited Marx's definition of socialism and said it was the correct definition

How is that not agreeing with Marx?

2) My quote says nothing about allocation being "subject to workers" I have no idea what you're talking about.

3) You are mistating what I wrote. I did not say that MW's definition was authoritative or final, the way you presented Marxs' definition. I posted the link to show that socialism is not as clearly defined as the Marxists like you would like to think

4) Show me where it says that private property is prohibited.

1. I posted a definition of socialism, and while there are certainly many of them-they all contain certain aspects of Marxism (being as Marx's is the most widely used among socialists).

2. Pretty sure you said that the workers work through the government, whereas this isn't true.

3. I understand what you meant-however there's little question as to who has more authority in discussing socialism. But how about someone else's defintion:

4. Throughout the wikipedia page it states:

-"Modern socialism originated from an 18th-century intellectual and working class political movement that criticised the effects of industrialisation and private property on society."

-"Libertarian socialists promote a non-hierarchical, non-bureaucratic, stateless society without private property in the means of production."

-"Robert Owen advocating the transformation of society to small communities without private property."

Marx also had one on the page, but none of these are from Marx, or from the Marx section of the page. If a society is without private property, it's fair to say that you can't own private property.

1) You said something about "allocation" being "subject to workers". I say you made it up. SO why are you changing your argument to a straw man ("they all contain some marxism" bs)

2) I didn't say that is required. Try again,

3) Once again, you are proving your Marxism by claiming that Marx is the authority. You are not being honest

4) All you've shown is that some forms of socialism ALLOWS for the prohibition of private property; it does not show that socialism REQUIRES the prohibition of private property, as you dishonestly claimed and are now dishonestly failing to support

 

[Neotrotsky]

Actually I'm a moderate democrat...nice try. I even voted for Obama (and probably will again unless the GOP runs Romney). You can go box people in somewhere else now.

Like I said, you're a wingnut

Oh and knowing about Marx, Lenin, Bebel, etc. doesn't make me a marxist. I know about Hitler-does that mean I support his ideas? I have to know these things (being a social studies teacher).

Knowing about them doesn't make you a marxist. Citing them as the final authoritiies on Socialism makes you a marxist. After, a marxist is one who agrees with marx, as you are doing here.

If you had agrees with Hitlers ideas, I would call you a Nazi. You didn't, so I didn't. You did agree with Marxs' ideas. You're a Marxist

And if that's the only response you have to my post-at least grow up and admit when you're wrong. I can't stand people who say we're a socialist country but have almost zero understanding of the economically system.

Like a True Wingnut, all you have is your claim of knowledge; Let me know when you have something to back up your wingnut claims

Socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Socialism is an economic and political theory advocating public or common ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources.[1][2][3] A socialist society is a social structure organized on the basis of relatively equal power-relations, self-management, dispersed decision-making (adhocracy) and a reduction or elimination of hierarchical and bureaucratic forms of administration and governance; the extent of which varies in different types of socialism.[4][5] This ranges from the establishment of cooperative management structures in the economy to the abolition of all hierarchical structures in favor of free association.

As an economic system, socialism is a system of production and allocation based on the direct production of use-values by allocating economic inputs, the means of production and investment through planning to directly satisfy economic demand.[clarification needed] Economic calculation is based on either calculation-in-kind, some physical magnitude or a direct measure of labour time.[6][7][clarification needed] Output for individual consumption is distributed through markets, and distribution of income is based on individual merit or individual contribution.[8]

As you can see, there is no requirement to abolish real estate in private hands or abolish inheritance laws.

Socialism - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

MW gives your definition as only one of three appropriate definitions, so obviously, Marxs definition is not universally accepted

Apparently, you do not know what "public" ownership or "means of production" and private property means. What do they teach you in public school. Plus, You posted only the beginning synopsis. Perhaps your limited selection was intentional or just an oversight.



It would really help if you read the links first before just posting to them

From your Webster Dictionary definition link:

2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3
: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

​

Further down the page from YOUR link (wik):

The ownership of the means of production can be based on direct ownership by the users of the productive property through worker cooperative; or commonly owned by all of society with management and control delegated to those who operate/use the means of production; or public ownership by a state apparatus.
​

Yes, the devil is in the details is it not...


As I have posted earlier:

" The biggest problem with socialism is the means not necessary the goals or ends. If ones describes the "ends" as everyone having what they need to survive. All politicians try to claim that is what they are doing for the masses.

There are many in the US who claim to be socialists or claim to want the same ends with little understanding or care of the means on how to achieve those goals. They just know we must achieve those goals, at any cost. Which is where the problems come in.... "

​

Thanks for proving my point that many in the US have little understanding of the means.

You do indeed put new meaning to Lenin's term "useful idiot"



But if it makes you feel better or smarter then you can just call me a "wingnut"

This seems to be your favorite way to "prove" your point



To be fair, most in the US do not understand the means- they just want the stated goals.

For the ones that do understand and still want socialism's goals but not necessarily full blown socialism,
they believe that they can limit and control the power of the state to not over ride individual rights

Yeah good luck with that one....


For the rest who want the goals but do not understand the means, I dare say a lot of them would be
more apprehensive if they understood the means better.

 

[Neotrotsky]

Who said he was right?

Did you know that by 1960 African-Americans began to move into every career endeavor that had been denied to them for almost 400 years?

Did you know that by 1970 African-Americans had more democratic representation in Congress than ALL African-American republican representation COMBINED.

When was the last time you had THREE .. Reconstruction?

Perhaps you should go play this gane with someone else .. someone white who doesn't know history .. like another right-winger like you.

Perhaps you should keep drinking the "kool-aid" of Democrats if you think that Blacks have done better as a group by voting for them

What is the unemployment rate today
What is the illegitimate rate today
What is the divorce rate today


I guess since Obama is black, the Democrats can use blacks anyway they want now - don' they call that being someone's bitch



How do I am white?

You ignorance of history and life are meaningless. Your rant is ignorant as fuck. We were better off in 1960?

Today, African-Americans participate in every career and political pursuit. We excel and redefine many. We've only been relatively free for 45 years and if you don't see the tremendous gains made in just 45 years .. it's because you're a moron .. a racist one.

No one wants your company or affinity. We don't aspire to be you.

Are there still problems? Of course there are .. we've only been "free" for 45 years .. but no one wants to go back to 1960.

Your problem isn't that you don't see the progress .. your problem is that you do and it eats away at your cancerous soul.

Stormfront is calling you.

You have still not proven what my race or religion is
I assume Stormfront is not accepting of some religions.

Perhaps, it is your own bias and racial stereotypes that is making you think I am of a certain race.

You should work on that.....

This is really not part of the new civility that the Democrats are calling for now

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Perhaps you should keep drinking the "kool-aid" of Democrats if you think that Blacks have done better as a group by voting for them

What is the unemployment rate today
What is the illegitimate rate today
What is the divorce rate today


I guess since Obama is black, the Democrats can use blacks anyway they want now - don' they call that being someone's bitch



How do I am white?

You ignorance of history and life are meaningless. Your rant is ignorant as fuck. We were better off in 1960?

Today, African-Americans participate in every career and political pursuit. We excel and redefine many. We've only been relatively free for 45 years and if you don't see the tremendous gains made in just 45 years .. it's because you're a moron .. a racist one.

No one wants your company or affinity. We don't aspire to be you.

Are there still problems? Of course there are .. we've only been "free" for 45 years .. but no one wants to go back to 1960.

Your problem isn't that you don't see the progress .. your problem is that you do and it eats away at your cancerous soul.

Stormfront is calling you.

You have still not proven what my race or religion is
I assume Stormfront is not accepting of some religions.

Perhaps, it is your own bias and racial stereotypes that is making you think I am of a certain race.

You should work on that.....

This is really not part of the new civility that the Democrats are calling for now

I don't judge you by your race or faith .. only by what you say and Stormfront is looking for racists of all races and faiths.

Regardless of what you are, I responded to what you said .. and what you said was ridiculous. Frankly, that argument is ignorant .. it's always been ignorant. There is no question that African-Americans enjoy a far better quality of life then we did in 1960. There is no question we have made tremendous gains in all levels of every fucking thing in a mere 45 years.

The ignorant ass argument that democrats are the problem is just braindead. There are thousands of elected African-American democrats in office all over the country. How many are republican?

It wouldn't make the slightest difference if you're a Martian .. the shit you're talking about is ignorant as fuck.

One more thing ... I'm not a democrat so I don't give a rat's ass about democratic nor republican calls for "civility." That's just smoke and mirrors for dumb people.

C'mon dude, grow the fuck up.

 

[uscitizen]

Groucho did not invent socialism.
Nor did the toy company.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Groucho did not invent socialism.
Nor did the toy company.

Why Socialism
by Albert Einstein
Why Socialism? Albert Einstein - Monthly Review

 

[NYcarbineer]

It appears to me that, in comparing the more socialist countries with the less socialist countries,

one of the clear distinctions is that the gap between rich and poor is consistently less in the former than in the latter.

Is that a good indicator of a well functioning capitalist society/economy? A relatively greater gap between rich and poor?

Is that a good measure of capitalism's success, vs. socialism's failure??

 

[Jroc]

But that's all ancient history, altered by Nixon's southern strategy.

We return you now to the present .. where the Republican Party is a mere shadow of its former self.

Nixon’s Southern Strategy Was Not A Racist Appeal

In the arsenal of the Democrats is a condemnation of Republican President Richard Nixon for his so-called “Southern Strategy.” These same Democrats expressed no concern when the racially segregated South voted solidly for Democrats for over 100 years, yet unfairly deride Republicans because of the thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party that began in the 1970's. Nixon's "Southern Strategy” was an effort on his part to get fair-minded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks. Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Governor Bobby Jindal in 2007.

As the co-architect of Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”, Pat Buchanan provided a first-hand account of the origin and intent of that strategy in a 2002 article that can be found on the Internet at: The Neocons and Nixon's southern strategy

In that article, Buchanan wrote that when Nixon kicked off his historic comeback in 1966 with a column about the South (written by Buchanan), Nixon declared that the Republican Party would be built on a foundation of states rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense, and leave it to the “party of Maddox, Mahoney and Wallace to squeeze the last ounce of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice”.

During the 1966 campaign, Nixon was personally thanked by Dr. King for his help in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Nixon also endorsed all Republicans, except the members of the John Birch Society.

Notably, the enforcement of affirmative action began with Richard Nixon‘s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher who became know as “the father of affirmative action enforcement”) that set the nation‘s first goals and timetables. Nixon was also responsible for the passage of civil rights legislation in the 1970’s, including the Equal Employment Act of 1972.

Fletcher, as president of the United Negro College Fund, coined the phrase “the mind is a terrible thing to waste.” Fletcher was also one of the original nine plaintiffs in the famous “Brown v. Topeka Board of Education” decision. Fletcher briefly pursued a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 1995.

Nixon began his merit-based affirmative action program to overcome the harm caused by Democrat President Woodrow Wilson who, after he was elected in 1912, kicked blacks out of federal government jobs and prevented blacks from obtaining federal contracts. Also, while Wilson was president and Congress was controlled by the Democrats, more discriminatory bills were introduced in Congress than ever before in our nation’s history. Today, Democrats have turned affirmative action into an unfair quota system that even most blacks do not support.

Frequently Asked Questions | National Black Republican Association

 

[Jroc]

All republicans are black is stupid .. and has nothing to do with your question.

Come with me to skip through time and history.

At one time, nearly ALL African-Americans were republicans. The Republican Party was founded as an anti-slavery party.

At one time the Republican Party sort of made sense .. even up to the day of Dr. King.

One of my civil rights heroes was a conservative Senator from Illinois, Everett Dirksen .. at one time.

But that's all ancient history, altered by Nixon's southern strategy.

We return you now to the present .. where the Republican Party is a mere shadow of its former self.

So MLK was right then but he would be wrong now to be a Republican?

Did you know before 1960 Blacks had a lower illegitimate rate than whites, a higher employment rate than whites and a lower divorce rate than whites


But, yeah sure is a good thing they joined the Democrats

Who said he was right?

Did you know that by 1960 African-Americans began to move into every career endeavor that had been denied to them for almost 400 years?

Did you know that by 1970 African-Americans had more democratic representation in Congress than ALL African-American republican representation from 1970 - 2010 COMBINED.

When was the last time you had THREE .. Reconstruction?

Perhaps you should go play this game with someone else .. someone white who doesn't know history .. like another right-winger like you.

You’re same old reliable comeback and it's lame one. Like I said head counts don't mean a thing

 

[BlackAsCoal]

It appears to me that, in comparing the more socialist countries with the less socialist countries,

one of the clear distinctions is that the gap between rich and poor is consistently less in the former than in the latter.

Is that a good indicator of a well functioning capitalist society/economy? A relatively greater gap between rich and poor?

Is that a good measure of capitalism's success, vs. socialism's failure??

That's a very good observation and question.

 

[Neotrotsky]

You ignorance of history and life are meaningless. Your rant is ignorant as fuck. We were better off in 1960?

Today, African-Americans participate in every career and political pursuit. We excel and redefine many. We've only been relatively free for 45 years and if you don't see the tremendous gains made in just 45 years .. it's because you're a moron .. a racist one.

No one wants your company or affinity. We don't aspire to be you.

Are there still problems? Of course there are .. we've only been "free" for 45 years .. but no one wants to go back to 1960.

Your problem isn't that you don't see the progress .. your problem is that you do and it eats away at your cancerous soul.

Stormfront is calling you.

You have still not proven what my race or religion is
I assume Stormfront is not accepting of some religions.

Perhaps, it is your own bias and racial stereotypes that is making you think I am of a certain race.

You should work on that.....

This is really not part of the new civility that the Democrats are calling for now

I don't judge you by your race or faith .. only by what you say and Stormfront is looking for racists of all races and faiths.

Regardless of what you are, I responded to what you said .. and what you said was ridiculous. Frankly, that argument is ignorant .. it's always been ignorant. There is no question that African-Americans enjoy a far better quality of life then we did in 1960. There is no question we have made tremendous gains in all levels of every fucking thing in a mere 45 years.

The ignorant ass argument that democrats are the problem is just braindead. There are thousands of elected African-American democrats in office all over the country. How many are republican?

It wouldn't make the slightest difference if you're a Martian .. the shit you're talking about is ignorant as fuck.

One more thing ... I'm not a democrat so I don't give a rat's ass about democratic nor republican calls for "civility." That's just smoke and mirrors for dumb people.

C'mon dude, grow the fuck up.

Really, asking you to deal with your own prejudices before you calls others racist

Most would say that is the mature thing to do



So what race do you think I am and why?

Know the correct answer and you will mature beyond your dreams

 

[BlackAsCoal]

So MLK was right then but he would be wrong now to be a Republican?

Did you know before 1960 Blacks had a lower illegitimate rate than whites, a higher employment rate than whites and a lower divorce rate than whites


But, yeah sure is a good thing they joined the Democrats

Who said he was right?

Did you know that by 1960 African-Americans began to move into every career endeavor that had been denied to them for almost 400 years?

Did you know that by 1970 African-Americans had more democratic representation in Congress than ALL African-American republican representation from 1970 - 2010 COMBINED.

When was the last time you had THREE .. Reconstruction?

Perhaps you should go play this game with someone else .. someone white who doesn't know history .. like another right-winger like you.

You’re same old reliable comeback and it's lame one. Like I said head counts don't mean a thing

Another really dumb response.

Of course head counts matter. It's a sign of diversity of opinion and thought .. of course that is if one values diversity of opinion and thought .. which republicans do not. Just follow B'wana.

Frankly, I love challenging right-wing "thought" .. becauuse it's ignorant. They'll resort to stupid shit .. like head counts don't matter.

All message boards should have at least one of two of them so people with brains can see just how illogical and out of touch with planet earth they are.

 

[shintao]

Socialism is evil

Walter E. Williams


What is socialism? We miss the boat if we say it's the agenda of left-wingers and Democrats. According to Marxist doctrine, socialism is a stage of society between capitalism and communism where private ownership and control over property are eliminated. The essence of socialism is the attenuation and ultimate abolition of private property rights. Attacks on private property include, but are not limited to, confiscating the rightful property of one person and giving it to another to whom it doesn't belong. When this is done privately, we call it theft. When it's done collectively, we use euphemisms: income transfers or redistribution. It's not just left-wingers and Democrats who call for and admire socialism but right-wingers and Republicans as well.

Republicans and right-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to farmers, banks, airlines and other failing businesses. Democrats and left-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to poor people, cities and artists. Both agree on taking one American's earnings to give to another; they simply differ on the recipients. This kind of congressional activity constitutes at least two-thirds of the federal budget.

Regardless of the purpose, such behavior is immoral. It's a reduced form of slavery. After all, what is the essence of slavery? It's the forceful use of one person to serve the purposes of another person. When Congress, through the tax code, takes the earnings of one person and turns around to give it to another person in the forms of prescription drugs, Social Security, food stamps, farm subsidies or airline bailouts, it is forcibly using one person to serve the purposes of another.

The moral question stands out in starker relief when we acknowledge that those spending programs coming out of Congress do not represent lawmakers reaching into their own pockets and sending out the money. Moreover, there's no tooth fairy or Santa Claus giving them the money. The fact that government has no resources of its very own forces us to acknowledge that the only way government can give one American a dollar is to first -- through intimidation, threats and coercion -- take that dollar from some other American.

Some might rejoin that all of this is a result of a democratic process and it's legal. Legality alone is no guide for a moral people. There are many things in this world that have been, or are, legal but clearly immoral. Slavery was legal. Did that make it moral? South Africa's apartheid, Nazi persecution of Jews, and Stalinist and Maoist purges were all legal, but did that make them moral?

Can a moral case be made for taking the rightful property of one American and giving it to another to whom it does not belong? I think not. That's why socialism is evil. It uses evil means (coercion) to achieve what are seen as good ends (helping people). We might also note that an act that is inherently evil does not become moral simply because there's a majority consensus.




Socialism is evil

You seem to be applauding anarchy and chaos, and a return to the nomad existence, which is ok. You can be where ever and whatever state you wish to be in. But what you can't be is an American. Mainly because the constitution has always demanded taxes that are given to someone else. So if you own no property or soil of America, and have no means of support from American soil or otherwise, it would be rather silly to stay here. In fact American law puts you out past the 3 mile limit. And that is just the facts.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

You have still not proven what my race or religion is
I assume Stormfront is not accepting of some religions.

Perhaps, it is your own bias and racial stereotypes that is making you think I am of a certain race.

You should work on that.....

This is really not part of the new civility that the Democrats are calling for now

I don't judge you by your race or faith .. only by what you say and Stormfront is looking for racists of all races and faiths.

Regardless of what you are, I responded to what you said .. and what you said was ridiculous. Frankly, that argument is ignorant .. it's always been ignorant. There is no question that African-Americans enjoy a far better quality of life then we did in 1960. There is no question we have made tremendous gains in all levels of every fucking thing in a mere 45 years.

The ignorant ass argument that democrats are the problem is just braindead. There are thousands of elected African-American democrats in office all over the country. How many are republican?

It wouldn't make the slightest difference if you're a Martian .. the shit you're talking about is ignorant as fuck.

One more thing ... I'm not a democrat so I don't give a rat's ass about democratic nor republican calls for "civility." That's just smoke and mirrors for dumb people.

C'mon dude, grow the fuck up.

Really, asking you to deal with your own prejudices before you calls others racist

Most would say that is the mature thing to do



So what race do you think I am and why?

Know the correct answer and you will mature beyond your dreams

Let me write this in crayon so you might be able to interpret it.

I DON'T GIVE A FUCK WHAT RACE YOU ARE

Seriously I don't.

Even if you were black, it wouldn't make your thoughts any less ridiculous .. in fact, that would only make them more ridiculous.

The mature thing for you to have done is approach this conversation as if you know more about "mature" then how to spell it.

 

[Jroc]

Who said he was right?

Did you know that by 1960 African-Americans began to move into every career endeavor that had been denied to them for almost 400 years?

Did you know that by 1970 African-Americans had more democratic representation in Congress than ALL African-American republican representation from 1970 - 2010 COMBINED.

When was the last time you had THREE .. Reconstruction?

Perhaps you should go play this game with someone else .. someone white who doesn't know history .. like another right-winger like you.

You’re same old reliable comeback and it's lame one. Like I said head counts don't mean a thing

Another really dumb response.

Of course head counts matter. It's a sign of diversity of opinion and thought .. of course that is if one values diversity of opinion and thought .. which republicans do not. Just follow B'wana.

Frankly, I love challenging right-wing "thought" .. becauuse it's ignorant. They'll resort to stupid shit .. like head counts don't matter.

All message boards should have at least one of two of them so people with brains can see just how illogical and out of touch with planet earth they are.

Diversity? Maybe the government to should decide what is diverse. How is it a "diversity of thought" to be beholden to one party? Maybe you could explain that to me. Just to let you know I grew up in Detroit, lived there all my life, moved out about nine years ago, but I still love the city and all my friends are still there, but the democrats, and the unions who have run that city for 40 yrs have ran it into the ground. So why don't you explain to me what the democrat party has done for black people, I've asked you this before still no good answer. So what does that tell us? Oh one more thing because you choose to ignore the abortion rate amongst the black population does not make it any less relevant to the conversation

 

[Neotrotsky]

I don't judge you by your race or faith .. only by what you say and Stormfront is looking for racists of all races and faiths.

Regardless of what you are, I responded to what you said .. and what you said was ridiculous. Frankly, that argument is ignorant .. it's always been ignorant. There is no question that African-Americans enjoy a far better quality of life then we did in 1960. There is no question we have made tremendous gains in all levels of every fucking thing in a mere 45 years.

The ignorant ass argument that democrats are the problem is just braindead. There are thousands of elected African-American democrats in office all over the country. How many are republican?

It wouldn't make the slightest difference if you're a Martian .. the shit you're talking about is ignorant as fuck.

One more thing ... I'm not a democrat so I don't give a rat's ass about democratic nor republican calls for "civility." That's just smoke and mirrors for dumb people.

C'mon dude, grow the fuck up.

Really, asking you to deal with your own prejudices before you calls others racist

Most would say that is the mature thing to do



So what race do you think I am and why?

Know the correct answer and you will mature beyond your dreams

Let me write this in crayon so you might be able to interpret it.

I DON'T GIVE A FUCK WHAT RACE YOU ARE

Seriously I don't.

Even if you were black, it wouldn't make your thoughts any less ridiculous .. in fact, that would only make them more ridiculous.

The mature thing for you to have done is approach this conversation as if you know more about "mature" then how to spell it.

"Even if you were black, it wouldn't make your thoughts any less ridiculous .. in fact, that would only make them more ridiculous."

Really, so blacks can only think a certain way to be serious?

So, how should blacks think?

 

[BlackAsCoal]

But that's all ancient history, altered by Nixon's southern strategy.

We return you now to the present .. where the Republican Party is a mere shadow of its former self.

Nixon’s Southern Strategy Was Not A Racist Appeal

In the arsenal of the Democrats is a condemnation of Republican President Richard Nixon for his so-called “Southern Strategy.” These same Democrats expressed no concern when the racially segregated South voted solidly for Democrats for over 100 years, yet unfairly deride Republicans because of the thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party that began in the 1970's. Nixon's "Southern Strategy” was an effort on his part to get fair-minded people in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were discriminating against blacks. Georgia did not switch until 2004, and Louisiana was controlled by Democrats until the election of Republican Governor Bobby Jindal in 2007.

As the co-architect of Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”, Pat Buchanan provided a first-hand account of the origin and intent of that strategy in a 2002 article that can be found on the Internet at: The Neocons and Nixon's southern strategy

In that article, Buchanan wrote that when Nixon kicked off his historic comeback in 1966 with a column about the South (written by Buchanan), Nixon declared that the Republican Party would be built on a foundation of states rights, human rights, small government and a strong national defense, and leave it to the “party of Maddox, Mahoney and Wallace to squeeze the last ounce of political juice out of the rotting fruit of racial injustice”.

During the 1966 campaign, Nixon was personally thanked by Dr. King for his help in passing the Civil Rights Act of 1957. Nixon also endorsed all Republicans, except the members of the John Birch Society.

Notably, the enforcement of affirmative action began with Richard Nixon‘s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher who became know as “the father of affirmative action enforcement&#8221 that set the nation‘s first goals and timetables. Nixon was also responsible for the passage of civil rights legislation in the 1970’s, including the Equal Employment Act of 1972.

Fletcher, as president of the United Negro College Fund, coined the phrase “the mind is a terrible thing to waste.” Fletcher was also one of the original nine plaintiffs in the famous “Brown v. Topeka Board of Education” decision. Fletcher briefly pursued a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 1995.

Nixon began his merit-based affirmative action program to overcome the harm caused by Democrat President Woodrow Wilson who, after he was elected in 1912, kicked blacks out of federal government jobs and prevented blacks from obtaining federal contracts. Also, while Wilson was president and Congress was controlled by the Democrats, more discriminatory bills were introduced in Congress than ever before in our nation’s history. Today, Democrats have turned affirmative action into an unfair quota system that even most blacks do not support.

Frequently Asked Questions | National Black Republican Association

Again, this is why I love having these conversations with the right. All you have in one ignorant thing after another.

Nixon, who frequently used the "n" word, knew exactly who and what he was courting. He knew exactly who dixiecrats were and what they stood for. That strategy was created by Barry Goldwater who was a racist .. he called it the "white-interests" strategy.

... and they wonder why black republicans are so scorned.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Really, asking you to deal with your own prejudices before you calls others racist

Most would say that is the mature thing to do



So what race do you think I am and why?

Know the correct answer and you will mature beyond your dreams

Let me write this in crayon so you might be able to interpret it.

I DON'T GIVE A FUCK WHAT RACE YOU ARE

Seriously I don't.

Even if you were black, it wouldn't make your thoughts any less ridiculous .. in fact, that would only make them more ridiculous.

The mature thing for you to have done is approach this conversation as if you know more about "mature" then how to spell it.

"Even if you were black, it wouldn't make your thoughts any less ridiculous .. in fact, that would only make them more ridiculous."

Really, so blacks can only think a certain way to be serious?

So, how should blacks think?

With all due respect, I'm not really interested in having this conversation with you. It's pointless.