A culture of violence

[The Rabbi]

The "culture of violence" is largely a product of inner city black culture, itself a copy of southern redneck culture. It thrives on lack of responsibility, which has been facilitated by the state welfare apparatus which encourages irresponsible behavior. Throwing more money at schools will not do anything. You have to start with making responsible for their own actions and for their own care and feeding.

 

[Rocko]

The "culture of violence" is largely a product of inner city black culture, itself a copy of southern redneck culture. It thrives on lack of responsibility, which has been facilitated by the state welfare apparatus which encourages irresponsible behavior. Throwing more money at schools will not do anything. You have to start with making responsible for their own actions and for their own care and feeding.

Did you read Thomas Sowell's book (Black Rednecks and White Liberals)?

 

[editec]

The "culture of violence" is largely a product of inner city black culture, itself a copy of southern redneck culture. It thrives on lack of responsibility, which has been facilitated by the state welfare apparatus which encourages irresponsible behavior. Throwing more money at schools will not do anything. You have to start with making responsible for their own actions and for their own care and feeding.

Violence begats still more violence.

I think even you and I can agree to that, right?

 

[The Rabbi]

The "culture of violence" is largely a product of inner city black culture, itself a copy of southern redneck culture. It thrives on lack of responsibility, which has been facilitated by the state welfare apparatus which encourages irresponsible behavior. Throwing more money at schools will not do anything. You have to start with making responsible for their own actions and for their own care and feeding.

Did you read Thomas Sowell's book (Black Rednecks and White Liberals)?

Yes, of course. Now reading his book on racism and intellectuals.

 

[The Rabbi]

The "culture of violence" is largely a product of inner city black culture, itself a copy of southern redneck culture. It thrives on lack of responsibility, which has been facilitated by the state welfare apparatus which encourages irresponsible behavior. Throwing more money at schools will not do anything. You have to start with making responsible for their own actions and for their own care and feeding.

Violence begats still more violence.

I think even you and I can agree to that, right?

You mean like ML King and the civil rights marches? Oops.

 

[Agit8r]

The USA is a violent culture.

It was a violent country BEFORE it became the United States, it grew thanks to violence, it prospered thanks to slavery...

And how is it it that none of the slave states had a proper economy? Precisely because there was a lack of the movement of goods and services due to the suppression of wage labor. The same problem in any plutocracy

 

[The Rabbi]

The USA is a violent culture.

It was a violent country BEFORE it became the United States, it grew thanks to violence, it prospered thanks to slavery...

And how is it it that none of the slave states had a proper economy? Precisely because there was a lack of the movement of goods and services due to the suppression of wage labor. The same problem in any plutocracy

Of cvourse they had a proper economy. Where the **** do they teach this?

 

[Agit8r]

The USA is a violent culture.

It was a violent country BEFORE it became the United States, it grew thanks to violence, it prospered thanks to slavery...

And how is it it that none of the slave states had a proper economy? Precisely because there was a lack of the movement of goods and services due to the suppression of wage labor. The same problem in any plutocracy

Of cvourse they had a proper economy. Where the **** do they teach this?

If they had, they wouldn't have got their asses handed to them in the Civil War. It certainly wasn't as if the Union had superior Generals.

 

[jasonnfree]

DISCLAIMER:
Many of the Republicans are not going to like this solution, and will instantly misquote my own thread about MNSBC and public education and claim hypocrisy. I will not edit this post (after 12:00 AM) under any circumstance, so that you know I said it before they did.

The solution to the problem are the dilapidated educational facilities, lack of teachers and scarcity of textbooks and school supplies in impoverished communities. We spend the most money per student compared to every other nation, but we don't spend that money correctly. When the children of impoverished communities lack educational opportunities, and there is an insufficient number of low skilled jobs, and no family possessing financial means to fallback on for support, these children will quickly resort to crime --- just to survive.

So when you combine a terrible Public Education system, with a lack of jobs, because of high taxes or other unfavorable laws for businesses, you end up with A LOT of violence, simply because people want to survive. Throw this needless and counter-productive Drug War on top of the mess, and you end up with gangs that recruit young strong males to advance and promote their activities.

Much of the money spent on "education" goes to the teacher's unions and not to actually improve the conditions of the schools.

I think one thing that fuels the fire is the constant race and class warfare rhetoric coming from Washington. Hispanics were told that people who want secure borders and oppose amnesty are "enemies." Blacks and Hispanic gangs are killing each other in the cities. Obama chimes in on cases, such as Trayvon Martin, that fuels an already intense race war.

People are divided into groups, then groups are pitted against each other. Obama was helpful in garnering up hatred for all wealthy people. He vowed to 'return the wealth to it's rightful owners' and when ACORN was arranging tours so angry mobs could hop on a bus and harass some AIG execs and their families, Obama said they had a right to be angry. When the Black Panthers broke the law by intimidating people at polls, Holder opted to look the other way. Same as a thumbs up. Keep that anger going.

Some children attending decent schools are entering the system with no preparation because their parents didn't do their job. Thousands drop out every day.

Maybe society's problems all begin at home. I went to a small town school and graduated with most of my classmates. A handful of them quit and several ended up in prison. I think they came from dysfunctional homes and that is where most problems begin.

Of course, for decades, government has taken control of the schools to ensure things run smoothly and they inserted themselves into people's lives to lift people from poverty. How's that working out?

It worked out pretty good till reagan. There was pretty good education in the 50's and 60's when I was growing up. All the teachers were union as were many workers that built the middle class. Reagan and his "government is the problem" mantra helped bring down this country while he spent us into debt in the meanwhile. We've been going downhill ever since in my view.

 

[Agit8r]

"Above all things, good policy is to be used that the treasure and moneys in a state be not gathered into few hands. For otherwise a state may have a great stock, and yet starve. And money is like muck, not good except it be spread."

-- Francis Bacon; from 'Of Seditions and Troubles'

 

[Katzndogz]

The solution is to remove children from parents at birth and raise them to be completely obedient to the state.

 

[The Rabbi]

And how is it it that none of the slave states had a proper economy? Precisely because there was a lack of the movement of goods and services due to the suppression of wage labor. The same problem in any plutocracy

Of cvourse they had a proper economy. Where the **** do they teach this?

If they had, they wouldn't have got their asses handed to them in the Civil War. It certainly wasn't as if the Union had superior Generals.

Huh?
It was a rural agrarian economy that was dependent on more industrialized countries for war materiel. It had a smaller population than the North, that was filled with Irish who could be chain-ganged into the army. But that doesnt mean it wasnt a proper economy.

 

[editec]

The USA is a violent culture.

It was a violent country BEFORE it became the United States, it grew thanks to violence, it prospered thanks to slavery...

And how is it it that none of the slave states had a proper economy? Precisely because there was a lack of the movement of goods and services due to the suppression of wage labor. The same problem in any plutocracy

You have been misinformed, mate

Before the civil war, Agit8, the SOUTH was the largest part of the nations GNP.

Of course given that 75% of its anibellum capitalization was in the form of human bondage, after the war and liberation of those slaves, the south's economy was crap for the next oh, 100 years or so.

 

[Vandalshandle]

We could start to change our culture by doing away with the death penalty. If it is such a good idea, why does the government feel that it must be carried out behind closed doors with only a few onlookers? If this country feels that the death penalty is appropriate, then execution should be carried out in public.

 

[OriginalShroom]

The "culture of violence" is largely a product of inner city black culture, itself a copy of southern redneck culture. It thrives on lack of responsibility, which has been facilitated by the state welfare apparatus which encourages irresponsible behavior. Throwing more money at schools will not do anything. You have to start with making responsible for their own actions and for their own care and feeding.

You really have no idea what a "redneck" is besides what you have seen put out by Liberals in Hollywood have you?

 

[FA_Q2]

I keep hearing politicians and pundits say that we don't have a problem with guns, but rather with violence. So let's have at it!

What can be done to reform a culture in which every interaction is made a competition for status, in which life's preservation is a commodity to be bought in the marketplace, in which radio propagandists regularly call some members of society "parasites" or "a waste of oxygen"?

Simple, get rid of the violent people. War is another thing entirely. You can take a gun away from a violent criminal, but he will just find something else to kill with. Never underestimate a criminal's will for improvisation.

It's been a long day with tragedy and some personal bad news on top of it....I can't tell you why I'm still awake really.

But considering your post and the OP in the light of today's events (both national and private)....I wonder what would happen if we had a nationwide "3 strikes and you're out" law. If you are convicted of 3 crimes; regardless of severity or jurisdiction, you're in jail for life. Boom; gone. It doesn't just apply to violent crime of course.

I doubt there is anything we can do to stop the Marathon type of tragedy really. Getting a larger portion of the criminal element off of the streets and out of society is probably a good start I would imagine.

The ‘3 strikes law’ has always been an abject failure. It is a law of zero tolerance, one of the worst concepts in legal terms that has ever occurred.

This is the same concept that has children suspended because they brought a butter knife to school. No tolerance for weapons at school. It removes all thought from the system and that should NEVER happen. Anything but an asinine 3 strikes policy.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

I keep hearing politicians and pundits say that we don't have a problem with guns, but rather with violence. So let's have at it!

What can be done to reform a culture in which every interaction is made a competition for status, in which life's preservation is a commodity to be bought in the marketplace, in which radio propagandists regularly call some members of society "parasites" or "a waste of oxygen"?

You just wasted some bong smoke. Go to sleep now.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d1n0zDngPI]Soldiers in the Army of God 1/7 - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[OriginalShroom]

Simple, get rid of the violent people. War is another thing entirely. You can take a gun away from a violent criminal, but he will just find something else to kill with. Never underestimate a criminal's will for improvisation.

It's been a long day with tragedy and some personal bad news on top of it....I can't tell you why I'm still awake really.

But considering your post and the OP in the light of today's events (both national and private)....I wonder what would happen if we had a nationwide "3 strikes and you're out" law. If you are convicted of 3 crimes; regardless of severity or jurisdiction, you're in jail for life. Boom; gone. It doesn't just apply to violent crime of course.

I doubt there is anything we can do to stop the Marathon type of tragedy really. Getting a larger portion of the criminal element off of the streets and out of society is probably a good start I would imagine.

The ‘3 strikes law’ has always been an abject failure. It is a law of zero tolerance, one of the worst concepts in legal terms that has ever occurred.

This is the same concept that has children suspended because they brought a butter knife to school. No tolerance for weapons at school. It removes all thought from the system and that should NEVER happen. Anything but an asinine 3 strikes policy.

So let me see if I understand you correctly. You are equating a person who has been convicted three times of felonies to a 10 year old who brings a butterknife to school??

Are you serious? Do you really expect us to agree to that line of reasoning?

 

[Erand7899]

After reading Clementine's post, all I can say is I agree.

Democrats like Obama claim they want unity, but every speech they make is about divisions. Women against Men, Blacks against Whites, Poor against Rich, Hispanics against everyone, Gays against Straights, Illegals immigrants against legal immigrants.

By constantly fueling the divisions people take it to heart and look at others not as fellow Americans, but as that (Fill in the blank) S.O.B. who hates me.

Before today, when Obama, after the bombings in Boston, rarely spoke about a United United States. It was always about this sub-divided American or that Sub-division of Americans.

The Democratic Part and Obama are not "Uniters", but they cause division and hate.

Oh ******* please... this coming from ******* "You're either with us or against us" conservatives... people who draw up dividing lines constantly, even within their own party. YOU'RE A RINO! YOU AIN'T NO CONSERVATIVE!

Since you obviously do not understand the solution, you are part of the problem.

Division and disunity are vague terms, but one has to use them in context, or one is not comprehending what the other is stating. The politics of division is not about disunity of thought and ideas, but the unity of political sub groups. A minority group is a political sub group, a RINO is an example of disunity of thought and ideas.

Liberal/socialist political strategy has been, and probably will always be, the exploitation of racial, ethnic, and class differences. They magnify these differences to the maximum extent possible, reenforce group identity, and denigrate non group members as evil, greedy reactionaries. This strategy is winning political battles, but is destroying the national ethic in the process.

 

[buckeye45_73]

The USA is a violent culture.

It was a violent country BEFORE it became the United States, it grew thanks to violence, it prospered thanks to slavery...

And how is it it that none of the slave states had a proper economy? Precisely because there was a lack of the movement of goods and services due to the suppression of wage labor. The same problem in any plutocracy

You have been misinformed, mate

Before the civil war, Agit8, the SOUTH was the largest part of the nations GNP.

Of course given that 75% of its anibellum capitalization was in the form of human bondage, after the war and liberation of those slaves, the south's economy was crap for the next oh, 100 years or so.

I Agree the previous guy needs to learn real history, not libtard propaganda...Mississippi of all states was the richest.....if you dont believe in God, you should, because the Civil War came and it has been the poorest for a looooong time....you reap what you sow.