Racist groups vs Free Speech, i've converted...

[Slade3200]

You make a good point. The German people were smart enough to reject Nazism right after the war, where it took the US over 100 years to accept blacks as equals. Something we actually are still struggling with. You know, Lee even advocated not to build statues and monuments for himself or the confederate because he knew it would be divisive... smart man.

Having every bit of your infrastructure in large cities demolished to debris, and having 4 different occupying armies dictate your every move does wonders to motivating people to comply or else. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. The difference is that in the US Civil war we were fighting our own countrymen, and occupying our own territory. Plus Reconstruction was done by committee, and that is never a good way to do things. One wonders what would have happened if Lincoln was not assassinated.

That is an interesting thought, what would Lincoln have done? I can't tell if you are supporting the German effort of wiping out Nazism or critiquing it. I agree with your points about the differences between the post WW2 and post Civil War situations. We took a more civil and democratic approach to rebuilding our nation. But for our argument about the appropriateness of statues that stand in contrast to our values there are similarities that can be analyzed.

It wasn't really a German effort, it was imposed upon them by the victors after an unconditional surrender and the disruption of any remaining form of Civil Government. Even their current laws outlawing Nazi symbolism comes from the rules imposed on them.

The German government still allows memorials to the Soldiers who fought in the war, even SS units. The leaders are not memorialized, but again I still see a huge difference between people fighting for what they thought was their own country, even with their peculiar institution, and a country that was practicing genocide against one group, and planning for more if they managed to actually win the war.

Jews were only the first step,. Poles and Russians were next.

See this is where you lose me with the false comparisons. You bring up WW2 and call it genocide against one group and compare it to the Civil War that you describe as "people fighting for what they thought was their own country". You leave out the fact that they were fighting for the right to own people against their president and governments directives. Slavery is not as bad as genocide but it is still disgustingly bad, there were plenty of rapes and murders and abuses going on. It was a shameful element of our society and the the civil war was centered around it. These statues and confederate symbols represent those detestable values to many people. Just as Nazi symbols represented a disgraceful agenda and history that did not deserve to be celebrated through public monuments. Do you not understand that?

Actually they were fighting due to the chance of Slavery maybe being curtailed in the territories, and eventual, probably compensated emancipation. The South feared Lincoln like progressives fear Trump.

You also have to remember that Citizenship in a State was far more of an identifier then that it is now. People were often Citizens of the States first, and their Country second. To them, they were just exercising the same method of gaining independence that the Colonists did against the Crown. Now to me, you need the consent of the rest of the country before you can go, and that means war if they don't. Which is what happened.

Slavery was also waning at the time, but was still not universally condemned. Killing a whole people off "because they are an enemy" was recognized as an evil thing pretty much universally by the rest of the world when the Germans were doing it.

The difference still is Nazi symbology was removed at the time the other side won and imposed its rules. We have allowed the South to memorialize its lost cause and dead citizens for over a decade, now all of a sudden all that is evil evil evil. I'm sorry but I refuse to bend the knee to the chronically offended who if they win will just move on to the next idiotic request to assuage their own butt hurt.

States were allowed to erect these statues and hang the confederate flag and even institute Jim Crow laws because States Rights was still a concept that was respected within reason following the Civil War. Those laws were eventually overturned but it took decades until the 1960's and a civil rights movement. The Flag was ultimately taken down in 2015 and now some of the statues are being targeted that represent divisive values and symbolism. There is a process being taken to decide what happens with these items and many of the states are going through that process. Many feel that it is long overdue and to be honest having a President who is questionable at best about his support of race issues, at a time when hate groups feel empowered and are speaking up and holding rallies, well these conditions are likely pushing an agenda where civil rights activists want to take action that show a proactive stand against the hate groups.

 

[Slade3200]

Both were there to fight and provoke. You obviously don't have a good handle on the events that happened nor do you have an objective viewpoint on Trumps speech when he minimized the condemnation of those hate groups. You don't seem to be aware of the shuttering reaction that it sent through the nation. You simply point blame at "leftists" without really looking at the people that reacted critically, many of whom were supporters of Trump that could objectively call him out on reacting inappropriately. Your immaturity and bias is very apparent.

The irony of saying one doesn't have an objective viewpoint while not having an objective viewpoint. Trump condemned those that needed to be, and that's what everyone wanted to see. You only think he minimized the role of the white supremacists because he also condemned ANTIFA when nobody was calling for it. Just because you and yours didn't ask for it, doesn't mean it wasn't the right course of action. Addressing all guilty parties doesn't minimize the role of one of said guilty parties.

I understand perfectly what happened, I'm just not looking at them through lefty goggles.

The only ones upset by his speech are those who sympathize with ANTIFA, who are in a permanent state of butthurt in the first place.

Trump didn't say ANTIFA, and I literally just posted about how they suck... you don't know what you're talking about

In which case you would have no problem with how he addressed the issue.

In any case where he didn't come off like a total douchebag. Where he came out with the same anger and pointed retribution about blantant racists groups as he does about the media or his political opponents.

He addressed them at the same time, to he addressed them the exact same way. There's no issue with that, because they're all thugs. At least your post confirms you only disliked his speech because Donald Trump is the one making it.

You may have no issue with how Trump addressed the issue, many other people do take issue with how he handled it as i've explained in previous posts. If you can't understand why then that is your issue, you should try opening up your ears. My post confirmed nothing of what you claimed it does, another example of your lack of comprehension regarding what is being communicated.

 

[Pumpkin Row]

The irony of saying one doesn't have an objective viewpoint while not having an objective viewpoint. Trump condemned those that needed to be, and that's what everyone wanted to see. You only think he minimized the role of the white supremacists because he also condemned ANTIFA when nobody was calling for it. Just because you and yours didn't ask for it, doesn't mean it wasn't the right course of action. Addressing all guilty parties doesn't minimize the role of one of said guilty parties.

I understand perfectly what happened, I'm just not looking at them through lefty goggles.

The only ones upset by his speech are those who sympathize with ANTIFA, who are in a permanent state of butthurt in the first place.

Trump didn't say ANTIFA, and I literally just posted about how they suck... you don't know what you're talking about

In which case you would have no problem with how he addressed the issue.

In any case where he didn't come off like a total douchebag. Where he came out with the same anger and pointed retribution about blantant racists groups as he does about the media or his political opponents.

He addressed them at the same time, to he addressed them the exact same way. There's no issue with that, because they're all thugs. At least your post confirms you only disliked his speech because Donald Trump is the one making it.

You may have no issue with how Trump addressed the issue, many other people do take issue with how he handled it as i've explained in previous posts. If you can't understand why then that is your issue, you should try opening up your ears. My post confirmed nothing of what you claimed it does, another example of your lack of comprehension regarding what is being communicated.

If the 'issue' was so obvious, you would have been able to explain it. YOU claim that he minimized the role of the white supremacists, because he addressed the fact that the counter protesters were ALSO a problem, when in fact, it minimizes nothing to include all guilty parties. In complaining about that, it shows you wanted said counter protestors to have a free pass, because you didn't want them mentioned. Really, the problem the left is facing is coming up with an actual legitimate reason to complain.

 

[Slade3200]

Trump didn't say ANTIFA, and I literally just posted about how they suck... you don't know what you're talking about

In which case you would have no problem with how he addressed the issue.

In any case where he didn't come off like a total douchebag. Where he came out with the same anger and pointed retribution about blantant racists groups as he does about the media or his political opponents.

He addressed them at the same time, to he addressed them the exact same way. There's no issue with that, because they're all thugs. At least your post confirms you only disliked his speech because Donald Trump is the one making it.

You may have no issue with how Trump addressed the issue, many other people do take issue with how he handled it as i've explained in previous posts. If you can't understand why then that is your issue, you should try opening up your ears. My post confirmed nothing of what you claimed it does, another example of your lack of comprehension regarding what is being communicated.

If the 'issue' was so obvious, you would have been able to explain it. YOU claim that he minimized the role of the white supremacists, because he addressed the fact that the counter protesters were ALSO a problem, when in fact, it minimizes nothing to include all guilty parties. In complaining about that, it shows you wanted said counter protestors to have a free pass, because you didn't want them mentioned. Really, the problem the left is facing is coming up with an actual legitimate reason to complain.

I have explained it, you seem so determined to argue and defend Trump that you don't objectively listen. This makes you out of touch with the reality of how his actions resonate with the nation. I understand and acknowledge the point that you and Trump are trying to make. Groups like ANTIFA are violent and a problem and they shouldn't be given a free pass. I get it. I agree. But I also don't think that Trump responded appropriately given what happened in Charlottesville. I'm not alone in those feelings, conservatives and republicans from all over who are Trump supporters are coming out against the way he handled this. Turn on Fox News and watch the coverage. Staunch Trump supporters have been at a loss of words for the past week.

Dozens of people who were protesting racism were plowed down by a White supremacist in a car and an innocent girl was killed. Nazis marched the streets with loaded guns and torches calling for the eradication of Jews. It was a sick display that warranted legitimate outrage and condemnation from our president. He did not respond that way. He condemned hatred and bigotry from ALL SIDES. That minimizes the murder and moral condemnation of these hate groups. He was quicker to make the all sides point and passively point to the "Leftist" groups than he was to call out the hate groups. Just watch his tone and demeanor when he calls out the Nazi's and KKK, he does so like it is a kid whose parents make him go apologize for taking a toy from his sibling. He has more energy and anger and condemnation for his political opponents and for the news media than he does for the KKK and Nazi groups. It's pathetic as is your inability to recognize and/or acknowledge what we all know is going on.

 

[WEATHER53]

The white whatevers were there to walk around and say vile things. The Antifa were there to Do vile things
It's no more complicated than that

 

[Slade3200]

The white whatevers were there to walk around and say vile things. The Antifa were there to Do vile things
It's no more complicated than that

They both did vile things, don't fool yourself... Remember a girl died??

 

[martybegan]

Having every bit of your infrastructure in large cities demolished to debris, and having 4 different occupying armies dictate your every move does wonders to motivating people to comply or else. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. The difference is that in the US Civil war we were fighting our own countrymen, and occupying our own territory. Plus Reconstruction was done by committee, and that is never a good way to do things. One wonders what would have happened if Lincoln was not assassinated.

That is an interesting thought, what would Lincoln have done? I can't tell if you are supporting the German effort of wiping out Nazism or critiquing it. I agree with your points about the differences between the post WW2 and post Civil War situations. We took a more civil and democratic approach to rebuilding our nation. But for our argument about the appropriateness of statues that stand in contrast to our values there are similarities that can be analyzed.

It wasn't really a German effort, it was imposed upon them by the victors after an unconditional surrender and the disruption of any remaining form of Civil Government. Even their current laws outlawing Nazi symbolism comes from the rules imposed on them.

The German government still allows memorials to the Soldiers who fought in the war, even SS units. The leaders are not memorialized, but again I still see a huge difference between people fighting for what they thought was their own country, even with their peculiar institution, and a country that was practicing genocide against one group, and planning for more if they managed to actually win the war.

Jews were only the first step,. Poles and Russians were next.

See this is where you lose me with the false comparisons. You bring up WW2 and call it genocide against one group and compare it to the Civil War that you describe as "people fighting for what they thought was their own country". You leave out the fact that they were fighting for the right to own people against their president and governments directives. Slavery is not as bad as genocide but it is still disgustingly bad, there were plenty of rapes and murders and abuses going on. It was a shameful element of our society and the the civil war was centered around it. These statues and confederate symbols represent those detestable values to many people. Just as Nazi symbols represented a disgraceful agenda and history that did not deserve to be celebrated through public monuments. Do you not understand that?

Actually they were fighting due to the chance of Slavery maybe being curtailed in the territories, and eventual, probably compensated emancipation. The South feared Lincoln like progressives fear Trump.

You also have to remember that Citizenship in a State was far more of an identifier then that it is now. People were often Citizens of the States first, and their Country second. To them, they were just exercising the same method of gaining independence that the Colonists did against the Crown. Now to me, you need the consent of the rest of the country before you can go, and that means war if they don't. Which is what happened.

Slavery was also waning at the time, but was still not universally condemned. Killing a whole people off "because they are an enemy" was recognized as an evil thing pretty much universally by the rest of the world when the Germans were doing it.

The difference still is Nazi symbology was removed at the time the other side won and imposed its rules. We have allowed the South to memorialize its lost cause and dead citizens for over a decade, now all of a sudden all that is evil evil evil. I'm sorry but I refuse to bend the knee to the chronically offended who if they win will just move on to the next idiotic request to assuage their own butt hurt.

States were allowed to erect these statues and hang the confederate flag and even institute Jim Crow laws because States Rights was still a concept that was respected within reason following the Civil War. Those laws were eventually overturned but it took decades until the 1960's and a civil rights movement. The Flag was ultimately taken down in 2015 and now some of the statues are being targeted that represent divisive values and symbolism. There is a process being taken to decide what happens with these items and many of the states are going through that process. Many feel that it is long overdue and to be honest having a President who is questionable at best about his support of race issues, at a time when hate groups feel empowered and are speaking up and holding rallies, well these conditions are likely pushing an agenda where civil rights activists want to take action that show a proactive stand against the hate groups.

States were allowed to enact Jim Crow laws due to Plessey, one of my favorite examples of terrible judicial overreach, same as Roe and Obergfell. States rights is actually a concept we NEED to respect, as long as they follow the federal constitution strictly interpreted.

Hate groups feel empowered to speak up because leftist idiots have lumped them together with everyone to the right of Mitt Romney. They see a fertile recruiting ground of people being told they are "racist" just because of their conservative or libertarian viewpoints. I think the White Power nuts are delusional about this, but they may see increased recruiting from some fence sitters. The worst part is the press is enabling them, just like they enabled Trump to win the Republican Nomination.

You take on Hate Groups by ignoring them. You let history be history by not digging it up when the wind blows a certain way.

 

[Mac1958]

That is an interesting thought, what would Lincoln have done? I can't tell if you are supporting the German effort of wiping out Nazism or critiquing it. I agree with your points about the differences between the post WW2 and post Civil War situations. We took a more civil and democratic approach to rebuilding our nation. But for our argument about the appropriateness of statues that stand in contrast to our values there are similarities that can be analyzed.

It wasn't really a German effort, it was imposed upon them by the victors after an unconditional surrender and the disruption of any remaining form of Civil Government. Even their current laws outlawing Nazi symbolism comes from the rules imposed on them.

The German government still allows memorials to the Soldiers who fought in the war, even SS units. The leaders are not memorialized, but again I still see a huge difference between people fighting for what they thought was their own country, even with their peculiar institution, and a country that was practicing genocide against one group, and planning for more if they managed to actually win the war.

Jews were only the first step,. Poles and Russians were next.

See this is where you lose me with the false comparisons. You bring up WW2 and call it genocide against one group and compare it to the Civil War that you describe as "people fighting for what they thought was their own country". You leave out the fact that they were fighting for the right to own people against their president and governments directives. Slavery is not as bad as genocide but it is still disgustingly bad, there were plenty of rapes and murders and abuses going on. It was a shameful element of our society and the the civil war was centered around it. These statues and confederate symbols represent those detestable values to many people. Just as Nazi symbols represented a disgraceful agenda and history that did not deserve to be celebrated through public monuments. Do you not understand that?

Actually they were fighting due to the chance of Slavery maybe being curtailed in the territories, and eventual, probably compensated emancipation. The South feared Lincoln like progressives fear Trump.

You also have to remember that Citizenship in a State was far more of an identifier then that it is now. People were often Citizens of the States first, and their Country second. To them, they were just exercising the same method of gaining independence that the Colonists did against the Crown. Now to me, you need the consent of the rest of the country before you can go, and that means war if they don't. Which is what happened.

Slavery was also waning at the time, but was still not universally condemned. Killing a whole people off "because they are an enemy" was recognized as an evil thing pretty much universally by the rest of the world when the Germans were doing it.

The difference still is Nazi symbology was removed at the time the other side won and imposed its rules. We have allowed the South to memorialize its lost cause and dead citizens for over a decade, now all of a sudden all that is evil evil evil. I'm sorry but I refuse to bend the knee to the chronically offended who if they win will just move on to the next idiotic request to assuage their own butt hurt.

States were allowed to erect these statues and hang the confederate flag and even institute Jim Crow laws because States Rights was still a concept that was respected within reason following the Civil War. Those laws were eventually overturned but it took decades until the 1960's and a civil rights movement. The Flag was ultimately taken down in 2015 and now some of the statues are being targeted that represent divisive values and symbolism. There is a process being taken to decide what happens with these items and many of the states are going through that process. Many feel that it is long overdue and to be honest having a President who is questionable at best about his support of race issues, at a time when hate groups feel empowered and are speaking up and holding rallies, well these conditions are likely pushing an agenda where civil rights activists want to take action that show a proactive stand against the hate groups.

States were allowed to enact Jim Crow laws due to Plessey, one of my favorite examples of terrible judicial overreach, same as Roe and Obergfell. States rights is actually a concept we NEED to respect, as long as they follow the federal constitution strictly interpreted.

Hate groups feel empowered to speak up because leftist idiots have lumped them together with everyone to the right of Mitt Romney. They see a fertile recruiting ground of people being told they are "racist" just because of their conservative or libertarian viewpoints. I think the White Power nuts are delusional about this, but they may see increased recruiting from some fence sitters. The worst part is the press is enabling them, just like they enabled Trump to win the Republican Nomination.

You take on Hate Groups by ignoring them. You let history be history by not digging it up when the wind blows a certain way.

"You take on Hate Groups by ignoring them."

Well, that would depend on your goal. If your goal is to heal wounds and solve problems, yes.

If your goal is to push division at all times for political advantage, you make the biggest possible deal of them.
.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Why should countries like Italy, Poland, Germany, Greece, Britain, France, Sweden become a mixed culture, when their culture has been thousands of years in the making?

People in those countries and every country should be able to mate with whoever the hell they want. It's called freedom

Who the f*ck voted for the Third-World multicultural takeover of our countries?

This is an anti-Democratic monstrosity.

Are you talking about immigration? Who voted for immigration? Are you serious?

Well, when did we vote for all these immigrants to be here?

How do you think YOU got here? We all came from immigrants from a diversity of different countries.

Immigration law has been developed by our elected leaders and rulings have been made by the supreme court. People vote for our leadership who run campaigns based on policy issues. Our leaders write laws and make decisions as representatives of the people. Its called a democratic republic.

So, sorry, but I don't agree with America, it's a killer of cultures.

Multiculturalism, and Integration both are horrendous in this country.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Why should countries like Italy, Poland, Germany, Greece, Britain, France, Sweden become a mixed culture, when their culture has been thousands of years in the making?

Seriously man, how many times do I need to ask a question before you can give a straight answer. This is becomeing a joke. Back up your idiotic statements with direct responses or stop spewing shit that you can't explain

Heritage is more than just customs, people of a certain heritage also tend to have a certain phenotype.

Why should we erase any of this?

The great thing about a free society is you don't have to erase anything. You can marry a pure blood, have children, and teach them you sacred traditions. That's your prerogative and you can do that. If I see a hot Latina and she rocks my world then I can do the same with her and have radical Italian Latino babies. Lucky me.

So far the only points you've made to justify your views are intellect and phenotype. Are those the main attributes that you are trying to preserve by preventing the mixing of races?

That's the funny thing, I'd deport, or create nationhood for minorities to try, and separate ethnic groups.

So you want the government to decide who our citizens can and can't mate with... You don't see that as a gross violation of liberty and freedom?

You still have not answered the question, this is the 7th time i've asked you. What is it that is so important to preserve by separating ethnic groups, why is it so important to you? You keep giving weak round about answers that do not directly answer the question. Grow a pair and speak up for your cause. You are doing a piss poor job representing your positions.

I don't think if we aim towards a more homogenous society that anti-Miscegenation laws would be needed.

What reasons have you given to why should give up our heritage?

Our heritage is part of our legacy, and the legacy of our forefathers.

It's completely disrespectful to allow our heritage to erode.

You don't get this, because you're a cold blooded Psychopath.

 

[ChrisL]

Hey, at least Slade has taken a step in the right direction by recognizing that everyone is entitled to their free speech. That is progress.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

No, it is you who are not making sense.

Confederates were multiculturalists, who bought Blacks here for profits.

Slavery was big business, they needed people to pick plants for cheaper, so they took slaves.
Sound familiar?
Sounds exactly like the business Capitalist Multiculturalists who hire illegal immigrants for cheap labor profits.


But, I know you're obviously a product of the failed U.S education system, and can't think for yourself due to your sub-Human Western European heritage.

No it doesn't really sound familiar. If those farmers stole the illegal immigrants, took away all their rights, forced them into labor, raped and killed them and then took up arms against the US government and fought a war to protect that right against the US, then we might be getting somewhere close.

Killed them? The U.S slave population grew faster than anywhere in Europe at the same time.

But, the needs are virtually identical between slavery, and illegal immigrants, they both fill the needs of cheap labor for the Capitalists.

 

[ChrisL]

The white whatevers were there to walk around and say vile things. The Antifa were there to Do vile things
It's no more complicated than that

They both did vile things, don't fool yourself... Remember a girl died??

Exactly. They both did vile things. Just like Donald Trump said.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

People in those countries and every country should be able to mate with whoever the hell they want. It's called freedom

Who the f*ck voted for the Third-World multicultural takeover of our countries?

This is an anti-Democratic monstrosity.

Are you talking about immigration? Who voted for immigration? Are you serious?

Well, when did we vote for all these immigrants to be here?

How do you think YOU got here? We all came from immigrants from a diversity of different countries.

Immigration law has been developed by our elected leaders and rulings have been made by the supreme court. People vote for our leadership who run campaigns based on policy issues. Our leaders write laws and make decisions as representatives of the people. Its called a democratic republic.

Actually that should be a capitalist republic, but Socialism has fucked this country over for the last hundred plus years.

So, it's not Capitalism taking American jobs, and giving them to foreigners, because it's cheaper, which erodes national livelihood, and even poses a threat to national security.

 

[Slash]

Killed them? The U.S slave population grew faster than anywhere in Europe at the same time.

But, the needs are virtually identical between slavery, and illegal immigrants, they both fill the needs of cheap labor for the Capitalists.

Yes it was legal to kill slaves for running away. Farmers can't do that if their illegal immigrant workforce disappears. And you are right, in the US Breeding of slaves was the preferred method of increasing their stock.


But while the needs are identical, that doesn't make slaves and illegal immigrants anything close to each other.

Just because a Superpower has the same need for a head of state, doesn't mean Hitler, Trump and Stalin are all virtually identical.

 

[Rustic]

Who the f*ck voted for the Third-World multicultural takeover of our countries?

This is an anti-Democratic monstrosity.

Are you talking about immigration? Who voted for immigration? Are you serious?

Well, when did we vote for all these immigrants to be here?

How do you think YOU got here? We all came from immigrants from a diversity of different countries.

Immigration law has been developed by our elected leaders and rulings have been made by the supreme court. People vote for our leadership who run campaigns based on policy issues. Our leaders write laws and make decisions as representatives of the people. Its called a democratic republic.

Actually that should be a capitalist republic, but Socialism has fucked this country over for the last hundred plus years.

So, it's not Capitalism taking American jobs, and giving them to foreigners, because it's cheaper, which erodes national livelihood, and even poses a threat to national security.

Socialism cannot create jobs because it's a fucked up concept that depends on taking money from others…

 

[Slade3200]

That is an interesting thought, what would Lincoln have done? I can't tell if you are supporting the German effort of wiping out Nazism or critiquing it. I agree with your points about the differences between the post WW2 and post Civil War situations. We took a more civil and democratic approach to rebuilding our nation. But for our argument about the appropriateness of statues that stand in contrast to our values there are similarities that can be analyzed.

It wasn't really a German effort, it was imposed upon them by the victors after an unconditional surrender and the disruption of any remaining form of Civil Government. Even their current laws outlawing Nazi symbolism comes from the rules imposed on them.

The German government still allows memorials to the Soldiers who fought in the war, even SS units. The leaders are not memorialized, but again I still see a huge difference between people fighting for what they thought was their own country, even with their peculiar institution, and a country that was practicing genocide against one group, and planning for more if they managed to actually win the war.

Jews were only the first step,. Poles and Russians were next.

See this is where you lose me with the false comparisons. You bring up WW2 and call it genocide against one group and compare it to the Civil War that you describe as "people fighting for what they thought was their own country". You leave out the fact that they were fighting for the right to own people against their president and governments directives. Slavery is not as bad as genocide but it is still disgustingly bad, there were plenty of rapes and murders and abuses going on. It was a shameful element of our society and the the civil war was centered around it. These statues and confederate symbols represent those detestable values to many people. Just as Nazi symbols represented a disgraceful agenda and history that did not deserve to be celebrated through public monuments. Do you not understand that?

Actually they were fighting due to the chance of Slavery maybe being curtailed in the territories, and eventual, probably compensated emancipation. The South feared Lincoln like progressives fear Trump.

You also have to remember that Citizenship in a State was far more of an identifier then that it is now. People were often Citizens of the States first, and their Country second. To them, they were just exercising the same method of gaining independence that the Colonists did against the Crown. Now to me, you need the consent of the rest of the country before you can go, and that means war if they don't. Which is what happened.

Slavery was also waning at the time, but was still not universally condemned. Killing a whole people off "because they are an enemy" was recognized as an evil thing pretty much universally by the rest of the world when the Germans were doing it.

The difference still is Nazi symbology was removed at the time the other side won and imposed its rules. We have allowed the South to memorialize its lost cause and dead citizens for over a decade, now all of a sudden all that is evil evil evil. I'm sorry but I refuse to bend the knee to the chronically offended who if they win will just move on to the next idiotic request to assuage their own butt hurt.

States were allowed to erect these statues and hang the confederate flag and even institute Jim Crow laws because States Rights was still a concept that was respected within reason following the Civil War. Those laws were eventually overturned but it took decades until the 1960's and a civil rights movement. The Flag was ultimately taken down in 2015 and now some of the statues are being targeted that represent divisive values and symbolism. There is a process being taken to decide what happens with these items and many of the states are going through that process. Many feel that it is long overdue and to be honest having a President who is questionable at best about his support of race issues, at a time when hate groups feel empowered and are speaking up and holding rallies, well these conditions are likely pushing an agenda where civil rights activists want to take action that show a proactive stand against the hate groups.

States were allowed to enact Jim Crow laws due to Plessey, one of my favorite examples of terrible judicial overreach, same as Roe and Obergfell. States rights is actually a concept we NEED to respect, as long as they follow the federal constitution strictly interpreted.

Hate groups feel empowered to speak up because leftist idiots have lumped them together with everyone to the right of Mitt Romney. They see a fertile recruiting ground of people being told they are "racist" just because of their conservative or libertarian viewpoints. I think the White Power nuts are delusional about this, but they may see increased recruiting from some fence sitters. The worst part is the press is enabling them, just like they enabled Trump to win the Republican Nomination.

You take on Hate Groups by ignoring them. You let history be history by not digging it up when the wind blows a certain way.

IVe seen a lot people stretch to blame the LEFT on anything and everything that's wrong with this country, this is a good one to add to the ridiculous list. White supremacists are not empowered by the Left overusing the racist card. A GOOD hearted conservative isn't going to go be a skinhead if a progressive dupe calls them a racist, that's just stupid. They are empowered when the president runs on nationalistic and anti-immigrant policies and when he appears to make excuses for them by giving half assed condemnations after they KILLED a girl, and proceeding to put his obvious anger and focus on the "other side" the left and the media.

 

[Slade3200]

People in those countries and every country should be able to mate with whoever the hell they want. It's called freedom

Who the f*ck voted for the Third-World multicultural takeover of our countries?

This is an anti-Democratic monstrosity.

Are you talking about immigration? Who voted for immigration? Are you serious?

Well, when did we vote for all these immigrants to be here?

How do you think YOU got here? We all came from immigrants from a diversity of different countries.

Immigration law has been developed by our elected leaders and rulings have been made by the supreme court. People vote for our leadership who run campaigns based on policy issues. Our leaders write laws and make decisions as representatives of the people. Its called a democratic republic.

So, sorry, but I don't agree with America, it's a killer of cultures.

Multiculturalism, and Integration both are horrendous in this country.

This country is a melting pot of cultures that was founded by "immigrants" you're living in the wrong place to have that warped point of view that you fail miserably at explaining

 

[martybegan]

It wasn't really a German effort, it was imposed upon them by the victors after an unconditional surrender and the disruption of any remaining form of Civil Government. Even their current laws outlawing Nazi symbolism comes from the rules imposed on them.

The German government still allows memorials to the Soldiers who fought in the war, even SS units. The leaders are not memorialized, but again I still see a huge difference between people fighting for what they thought was their own country, even with their peculiar institution, and a country that was practicing genocide against one group, and planning for more if they managed to actually win the war.

Jews were only the first step,. Poles and Russians were next.

See this is where you lose me with the false comparisons. You bring up WW2 and call it genocide against one group and compare it to the Civil War that you describe as "people fighting for what they thought was their own country". You leave out the fact that they were fighting for the right to own people against their president and governments directives. Slavery is not as bad as genocide but it is still disgustingly bad, there were plenty of rapes and murders and abuses going on. It was a shameful element of our society and the the civil war was centered around it. These statues and confederate symbols represent those detestable values to many people. Just as Nazi symbols represented a disgraceful agenda and history that did not deserve to be celebrated through public monuments. Do you not understand that?

Actually they were fighting due to the chance of Slavery maybe being curtailed in the territories, and eventual, probably compensated emancipation. The South feared Lincoln like progressives fear Trump.

You also have to remember that Citizenship in a State was far more of an identifier then that it is now. People were often Citizens of the States first, and their Country second. To them, they were just exercising the same method of gaining independence that the Colonists did against the Crown. Now to me, you need the consent of the rest of the country before you can go, and that means war if they don't. Which is what happened.

Slavery was also waning at the time, but was still not universally condemned. Killing a whole people off "because they are an enemy" was recognized as an evil thing pretty much universally by the rest of the world when the Germans were doing it.

The difference still is Nazi symbology was removed at the time the other side won and imposed its rules. We have allowed the South to memorialize its lost cause and dead citizens for over a decade, now all of a sudden all that is evil evil evil. I'm sorry but I refuse to bend the knee to the chronically offended who if they win will just move on to the next idiotic request to assuage their own butt hurt.

States were allowed to erect these statues and hang the confederate flag and even institute Jim Crow laws because States Rights was still a concept that was respected within reason following the Civil War. Those laws were eventually overturned but it took decades until the 1960's and a civil rights movement. The Flag was ultimately taken down in 2015 and now some of the statues are being targeted that represent divisive values and symbolism. There is a process being taken to decide what happens with these items and many of the states are going through that process. Many feel that it is long overdue and to be honest having a President who is questionable at best about his support of race issues, at a time when hate groups feel empowered and are speaking up and holding rallies, well these conditions are likely pushing an agenda where civil rights activists want to take action that show a proactive stand against the hate groups.

States were allowed to enact Jim Crow laws due to Plessey, one of my favorite examples of terrible judicial overreach, same as Roe and Obergfell. States rights is actually a concept we NEED to respect, as long as they follow the federal constitution strictly interpreted.

Hate groups feel empowered to speak up because leftist idiots have lumped them together with everyone to the right of Mitt Romney. They see a fertile recruiting ground of people being told they are "racist" just because of their conservative or libertarian viewpoints. I think the White Power nuts are delusional about this, but they may see increased recruiting from some fence sitters. The worst part is the press is enabling them, just like they enabled Trump to win the Republican Nomination.

You take on Hate Groups by ignoring them. You let history be history by not digging it up when the wind blows a certain way.

IVe seen a lot people stretch to blame the LEFT on anything and everything that's wrong with this country, this is a good one to add to the ridiculous list. White supremacists are not empowered by the Left overusing the racist card. A GOOD hearted conservative isn't going to go be a skinhead if a progressive dupe calls them a racist, that's just stupid. They are empowered when the president runs on nationalistic and anti-immigrant policies and when he appears to make excuses for them by giving half assed condemnations after they KILLED a girl, and proceeding to put his obvious anger and focus on the "other side" the left and the media.

I am blaming this one Specific wrong on the leftist press. I am not generalizing the left. And I am not talking about "good hearted conservatives", I am talking about the masses of apolitical working types that are seeing everything they believe in attacked, and some slick white power idiots offering them a reason for it.

One can have nationalism in the United States without race being a factor. One can be anti-illegal immigration without being against immigrants in general. Now YOU are the one generalizing and simplifying.

One idiot killed a girl, it wasn't the intent of the people running the rally for it to happen.

 

[Slade3200]

Seriously man, how many times do I need to ask a question before you can give a straight answer. This is becomeing a joke. Back up your idiotic statements with direct responses or stop spewing shit that you can't explain

Heritage is more than just customs, people of a certain heritage also tend to have a certain phenotype.

Why should we erase any of this?

The great thing about a free society is you don't have to erase anything. You can marry a pure blood, have children, and teach them you sacred traditions. That's your prerogative and you can do that. If I see a hot Latina and she rocks my world then I can do the same with her and have radical Italian Latino babies. Lucky me.

So far the only points you've made to justify your views are intellect and phenotype. Are those the main attributes that you are trying to preserve by preventing the mixing of races?

That's the funny thing, I'd deport, or create nationhood for minorities to try, and separate ethnic groups.

So you want the government to decide who our citizens can and can't mate with... You don't see that as a gross violation of liberty and freedom?

You still have not answered the question, this is the 7th time i've asked you. What is it that is so important to preserve by separating ethnic groups, why is it so important to you? You keep giving weak round about answers that do not directly answer the question. Grow a pair and speak up for your cause. You are doing a piss poor job representing your positions.

I don't think if we aim towards a more homogenous society that anti-Miscegenation laws would be needed.

What reasons have you given to why should give up our heritage?

Our heritage is part of our legacy, and the legacy of our forefathers.

It's completely disrespectful to allow our heritage to erode.

You don't get this, because you're a cold blooded Psychopath.

All that importance you put on heritage and legacy of a single race is complete BS, it is in your head, its not real. What's important is how we live our lives in the here and now. If you commit your time to pushing divisive rhetoric and fueling hate then you are wasting your life for no reason. Don't get me wrong my family heritage is extremely important to me. I'm writing a book about my family. My Italian side gets together every Christmas and cooks meals with recipes that have been passed down through generations, every meal we cheers to tradition. The other side of my family traces back to the Columbus crew and includes government officials, hall of fame athletes, and industry leaders that helped build this country. I find it fascinating and I love to research it, celebrate it, and pass OUR heritage, history, and traditions on to future generation of OUR family members. But none of that is dependent on all my ancestors coming from the same country or being the same race. That is a ridiculous statement. My heritage is enriched by the diversity of my ancestors. You hide your racism behind a very weak foundation of justification with this erasing heritage argument. You know your intelligence argument is complete BS because you've ditched it, I was waiting to shut you down if you brought it up again. You were smart not to. The point is, you are not fooling anybody by trying to rationalize your hate. Sounds to me like you have some personal issues you need to work out. I suggest you focus on yourself and stop being so concerned about who others mate with.