Jump to content
Tornado

The General 'Murican Politics Thread

Recommended Posts

“Take him out with us and let Mike [Pence] take over. At least then we could sleep well at night”

I sure as fuck couldn’t...I mean yeah I get that compared to trump he’s better, but still...is fucking Pence. And I have tons of issues with the guy that would have me not breathing a sigh of relief to see him as leader 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PaddyFancy said:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43827386

Absolutely dispicable act by the lawmakers. Made worse by comparing the statues removal to ISIS's destruction of Palmyra and other such ancient sites. Anyone see the sense in this comparison?

They don't understand history belongs in a museum and something in a public square should probably be relevant to our modern values.

Which is why it's humorous Lost Cause people almost never call for monuments to General Longstreet. You know, the top-ranking Confederate officer who later on supported Reconstruction and led a black military unit to crush a white supremacist riot.

Surely someone like Longstreet, representing repudiation of slavery and both races working together to crush divisive racial animosity, would surely be worth honoring over all these other officers with a tendency to become Klansmen and the like?

It's like their movement is rooted in racism rather than individualism and heritage or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

Surely someone like Longstreet, representing repudiation of slavery and both races working together to crush divisive racial animosity, would surely be worth honoring over all these other officers with a tendency to become Klansmen and the like?

It's like their movement is rooted in racism rather than individualism and heritage or something.

So is there ever an actual retort these people have to this point, or do they just continue to parrot the typical “I’m not racist and this isn’t about race, you just don’t get it, this has to do with ____” mantra?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, KHCast said:

So is there ever an actual retort these people have to this point, or do they just continue to parrot the typical “I’m not racist and this isn’t about race, you just don’t get it, this has to do with ____” mantra?

I fortunately have never had the discussion with one of them.

At best, best, they can legitimately claim they did not know about Longstreet, because ironically, neo-Confederates have done their part to erase him from history. If Longstreet is depicted at all, it is as an incompetent fool who cost the Confederacy the War. This in spite of most historians agreeing he was one of the best (if not the best) officer of the War, who happened to serve under Lee (who Longstreet was critical of as a general, which pisses off a lot of Lost Cause people because Lee is their Second Coming figure).

If nothing else, it could be an eye opener about the strong racist intentions of the prominent founders and leaders of the movement. I could see why someone might buy into the idea it's an innocent ideology about individualism, self-sacrifice, what have you that can be separated from the racist intentions of Confederate leadership, but the way the literature and monuments were handled indicates the biases and intentions in play. A person who can't rethink the ideology when confronted with the Longstreet issue is probably lost forever.

But here's the best part: Civil Rights leaders in the 1960s actually evoked Longstreet multiple times. Why? Because the way his legacy is treated subverts the whole idea neo-Confederate ideology is colorblind in nature. Even if a person who has neo-Confederate sympathies is not racist themselves, they are buying into an ideology largely framed by racists.

It is impossible to separate the formation of the South's identity from racism and slavery, because it framed so much of the politics and culture of the region. However, it is absolutely possible to separate Southern pride from that past, as the South has given rise to so much more than slavery and segregationists.

Question is if the person will. Of all the Southern things to cling to, the Confederacy should be at the bottom of the list. Can you imagine a German idolizing the Third Reich when Germany has given so many other things to the world? It's stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.opendemocracy.net/levi-van-sant/redneck-revolt-radical-responses-to-trumpism-in-rural-us

Somewhat of a segue from talk of conservative whites and how they can change, Redneck Revolt is getting a lot more attention.

Redneck Revolt was originally a mutual aid society in rural Kansas, but has since grown to be a prominent left-wing organization in most red states. While the organization mentions that it originated to empower the white working class, it proceeds to go in a radically different direction from Trumpism: promoting solidarity with other working class people and arguing all racism has done is divide the poor and working classes and empowered the rich. To this end, Redneck Revolt has been increasing its presence at bastions of rural and conservative culture: gun shows, rodeos, NASCAR races. These are areas traditionally ignored by urban liberal elites (let's be honest, they do exist and it's not just a right wing buzzword), but as people familiar with gun and rural culture, Redneck Revolt has made significant headway in providing an alternative to fascism, white supremacy, and conservative for rural people.

Redneck Revolt butts heads with the mainstream left because they are staunch defenders of gun rights, but they defend gun rights from a collectivist rather than individualist perspective, in line with how the Supreme Court traditionally viewed them. As an extension of these gun rights, they tend to open carry around left-wing demonstrations (for example, around 20 Redneck Revolt members were carrying weapons to protect counter-protestors in Charlottesville), providing a deterrent.

Coming from the radical left, Redneck Revolt tosses out a great deal of liberal thinking and tactics. It sees little merit in rambling about white privilege, because that does not help build solidarity between poor whites and poor non-whites. Rather than writing off the countryside as most liberals have done, Redneck Revolt is in the heart of that region, reviving the populism that once made those areas solid bases of support for Democrats. And since they are gradually moving the rural public towards support of a more inclusive left that benefits everyone, they are surely making elitists like Pelosi and Perez, who so routinely scoff at the values of rural people, fear for their jobs (and their money, because Redneck Revolt sees rich liberals as little better than rich conservatives) as these people move into the Democratic Party and change it from within.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can understand throwing a fit about Robert E. Lee or Jefferson Davis statues to a certain extent, but it's just amusing Nathan Bedford Forrest is a hill people want to die on in 2018 when he's currently most known for "founding the KKK" and "being Forrest Gump's namesake, where it was also noted that he founded the KKK".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.redneckrevolt.org/single-post/2017/11/02/WHY-SOME-MEMBERS-OF-THE-FAR-LEFT-ADVOCATE-AGAINST-GUN-CONTROL

Some interesting far left takes on gun control.

Some points are made about how gun control objectively reinforces white supremacy with the way the regulations are generally enacted, and how what private citizens can bring to bear pales in comparison to what the police have. Mention is made of groups like the NRA encouraging their membership to arm themselves against groups like Black Lives Matter.

In fact, one of the interviewees basically points out it's kind of strange how liberals decry police brutality and bias with minority communities, then tell those same minority communities they have no need for guns, they can just call the police. Like, damn, he's got them there.

On the whole, though, while most of them could get behind lighter regulations like banning bump stocks or stronger background checks, they break with the mainstream "left" in America on a lot of points. For starters, they point out cultural and economic issues and how those look to be the problem, rather than guns themselves. On top of that, they feel it is disingenuous to ask communities to disarm without also disarming the police in the same go.

While it has been found that guns' usefulness for individual self-defense is overblown and in fact can make things more dangerous, groups like Redneck Revolt emphasize collective defense, and so no doubt would see the merit in duty to retreat laws. The point of having guns from a left-wing perspective is to alter the power balance between the state/capital and communities, rather than gung ho fantasies about singlehandedly protecting one's excuse for a castle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bergamo (Ogilvie) said:

Some points are made about how gun control objectively reinforces white supremacy with the way the regulations are generally enacted, and how what private citizens can bring to bear pales in comparison to what the police have. Mention is made of groups like the NRA encouraging their membership to arm themselves against groups like Black Lives Matter.

Yeah my friends have discussed this issue regarding gun regulations and even the Florida survivors proposals, and I definitely see the argument and agree there. I initially didn’t see the problem until they brought this up, since historically gun regulation has definitely negatively targeted and harmed minority groups 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/03/jeff-sessions-pushes-the-death-penalty-for-drug-dealers/

This got lost in the deluge of bullshit spewing forth from Washington these days. Jeff Sessions is pushing prosecutors to use a provision in a drug statute to give the death penalty to large drug traffickers. That part of the statute has largely been ignored, with death being pursued only in drug cases that involved homicide.

Of course, it will run into constitutional hurdles immediately: you may remember that the Supreme Court once struck down the death penalty for rape, stating the penalty can only be applied when homicide has occurred. Otherwise it is disproportionate to take human life.

Personally, I say the death penalty should be eliminated entirely. It is a flawed, irreversible punishment that has been disproportionately been used on racial minorities and has even been used on innocent people. Capital punishment is more expensive than life imprisonment. And finally, no matter what specially curated list of "okay" cases for execution you can come up with, any supporter of death for any reason is saying that it's okay for the state to kill citizens after they no longer pose an immediate threat. Considering the cultural issue of people shrugging at the idea police summarily execute defenseless people, I think the best place to start messaging that shit is wrong is right at the very top of the system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really cannot get over how many people defend mass shootings with "muh rights", when their rights are not. Being. Threatened. At. All. Gun control doesn't have anything to do with them. The only people impacted would be the ones that wouldn't use a gun responsibly. That's it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, SSF1991 said:

I really cannot get over how many people defend mass shootings with "muh rights", when their rights are not. Being. Threatened. At. All. Gun control doesn't have anything to do with them. The only people impacted would be the ones that wouldn't use a gun responsibly. That's it.

Basically where the left and right wing gun groups break.

The right focuses very heavily on "rights" and their abstract conception of the Constitution. Like a Biblical literalist, they cling to the document and toss out any data that shows there might be a better way to do things.

Meanwhile, the (actually) left groups think of firearms as a means to shift power away from the state and capital and towards the masses. They don't generally entertain the "we'll overthrow the government" delusions you hear from the right however, but instead think of it as a collective thing: if a whole community is armed and in solidarity, for example, a bank will proceed carefully with repossessing homes in it. It also reduces dependency on the state to provide security, when the state has shown it values some people more than others.

One might raise the issue of the police. That's why those same left wingers want to demilitarize and generally disarm the police.

The left-wing arguments have some resemblance to the right, but it's noticeable they have a new spin on them. It's less about "rights" and "me" and more about redistributing power towards the people. The actual people as a whole, not the largely white, male people that groups like the NRA are focused on. And because "rights" are not the basis of discussion, but class struggle, most leftist gun groups are okay with some basic regulations. They're more wary of high licensing fees than mandatory training (which they would actually encourage) or banning of assault weapons.

Though more simply, leftist gun groups are in line with how a lot of ethnic gangs formed: when the state failed to protect a downtrodden community, another group took up the role. Leftist gun rights focus on the community and how groups interact, whereas right wing groups are more individualistic and have ultimately been subverted by white supremacist agendas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

You must read and accept our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy to continue using this website. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.