• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Louisiana Lawmaker Forced to Clarify There Was No ‘Good’ in Slavery

Now that is something I have seen Democratic reps say. That's a whole lot different than your earlier claim that they said black people were too stupid to get an ID.
What does it mean to you when you say voter ID is tough to do?
 
Would you make that effort here please?

Your sharing of your long essays here does not mean they are necessarily worthy of specific responses although I do appreciate the time Master Debater has put in.

Your dismissal of those who do not agree that your points are valid as incapable makes your invitation specious.
 
what is it with you guys that you can admit you mean BLACKS?

It just seems that way to you. Not all issues of unequal access are limited to Blacks. (And gerrymandering is something observed and informs about the intent of these legislative changes wrt how one votes.)
 
What does it mean to you when you say voter ID is tough to do?
Why wouldn't you educate yourself before you made yourself look ridiculous? No Democratic rep has said blacks were too dumb to get ID. Before we go any further let's be clear on the fact that so far, in this thread, those words have only come out of your mouth.

The actual argument is that Republicans target black voters with their ID laws.
The appeals court ruling struck down five parts of the law: its voter ID requirements, a rollback of early voting to 10 days from 17, an elimination of same-day registration and of preregistration of some teenagers, and its ban on counting votes cast in the wrong precinct.

The court found that all five restrictions “disproportionately affected African-Americans.” The law’s voter identification provision, for instance, “retained only those types of photo ID disproportionately held by whites and excluded those disproportionately held by African-Americans.”
So it's not that blacks can't get IDs, it's that Republicans write these laws to exempt the ones blacks are more likely to have. So not at all like saying black people are too dumb to get ID.
 
It just seems that way to you. Not all issues of unequal access are limited to Blacks. (And gerrymandering is something observed and informs about the intent of these legislative changes wrt how one votes.)
I don’t give a rats ass about gerrymandering because both sides do i. that is just a smokescreen and truth be known blacks can get an ID like anyone else and Pelosi teal is just inciting anger in blacks to get their votes and create division. Some of you think they are too stupid and there is no way you are talking about anyone other than black people. I hate people who lie and claim it is not blacks they are referring to.
 
Why wouldn't you educate yourself before you made yourself look ridiculous? No Democratic rep has said blacks were too dumb to get ID. Before we go any further let's be clear on the fact that so far, in this thread, those words have only come out of your mouth.

The actual argument is that Republicans target black voters with their ID laws.

So it's not that blacks can't get IDs, it's that Republicans write these laws to exempt the ones blacks are more likely to have. So not at all like saying black people are too dumb to get ID.
So the law says blacks are affected but it is not blacks you are referring to? This conversation is beyond insane.
 
We can have objective arguments on who's side is more educated, like the link I provided above shows that can have an objective answer, but notions like what ideologies or beliefs we find to be good or bad are entirely subjective. When you complain that opposition to white wing ideologies are emotional it worth pointing out that your promotion of White wing ideology is also emotional.
All that Pew has done is perform a limited statistical analysis, which is definitely based on a methodology, to determine that those in America with university education tend toward the Democratic Party.

However, in a general sense, I regard most universities today as centers of indoctrination in either a light sense but also in a more overt sense.

I agree that one's ideologies and beliefs have a subjective element, but they also have to do with how broad a range of different ideas one is introduced to or in which one is grounded. For this reason I did refer to the Millerman interview. His position is that the alternative side of the (political) coin is suppressed and the traditional, Left-Progressive side stressed.

I do not say that sound opposition to ideas from the Right perspective or right-leaning political philosophy are necessarily emotional, but rather that a great deal of today's opposition in popular culture let's say, or what is mediated through those mediating entities, is more often than not based in, grounded in, dependent on, an emotional argument.

You are a very good example of this. Even your use of the term 'White Wing' is infused with an emoted idea.

I have not made any sort of defense of a platform that could be termed *white wing ideology*. I have carefully defined that I think Caucasian-Europeans have a very specific and defined cultural base. I presented that idea pretty thoroughly here by including some concise description by Waldo Frank (BTW a very Progressive intellectual).

Over the course of weeks and months this has been, at least largely, my focus. Just this idea is intolerable to you and as I say what you do is to emotionally react against any idea that you imagine as threatening. I further suggest that everything about *white culture* and also *whiteness* is similarly threatening to you. And these observations go back some months now to suggestions I have made that the reason this is so is because you, as an African brought to the New World, have been forced substantially against your will to *labor* within that empire of the white man's will. This exposes *your problem* and that of a rebellious Black-American culture generally. Your resistance is deeply embedded in your psychology even if you cannot recognize it. In Spanish we refer to this nexus as "malicia indígena".

My argument has been that the more that your malicia comes out into the open, the more destructive it becomes. And it is this destructiveness that must be noticed and arrested. The *you* here is plural and refers to something sociologically perceptible.

And none of this have I backed away from or modified. These are still core ideas that I believe have substantial validity.
If that's your argument then you don't understand what subjectivity is. Different people value different things and those things are neither right or wrong but particular to them. It is the other side to objectivity, things who's value we can discern through measurement and observation.
You will argue and bicker until your last breath! You are the classic argumentative fight-seeking Jamaican! It is something that bubbles up out of your blood.

You are entirely wrong when you suggest that values are neutral and that right and wrong do not apply. Right and wrong are metaphysical categories. You reveal your postmodern locality with this assertion.
 
Last edited:
how do you interpret someone as being that can’t figure out how to get an ID? A smart white person?
That seems to be how you're interpreting it seeing as you're the one saying it. The judge however clearly says that Republicans were targeting ID's that black people were more likely than white people to have, so in that scenario blacks would of had ID's. Do you see how that works or do you need me to read it back to you slower?
 
Some of you think they are too stupid and there is no way you are talking about anyone other than black people. I hate people who lie and claim it is not blacks they are referring to.
Are you allowed to call me a liar? (You have labeled those who won't admit you are right as liars.)

Hint: sometimes it is about discriminating against Blacks, sometimes it is about unnecessarily making it harder to vote in general.
 
That seems to be how you're interpreting it seeing as you're the one saying it. The judge however clearly says that Republicans were targeting ID's that black people were more likely than white people to have, so in that scenario blacks would of had ID's. Do you see how that works or do you need me to read it back to you slower?
Here we go again using the opinion someone “in authority“ as the sole arbiter of truth. Why in the err should I care what a left wing judge says anyway? Even if he is saying blacks must be too stupid to get an ID?
 
Are you allowed to call me a liar? (You have labeled those who won't admit you are right as liars.)

Hint: sometimes it is about discriminating against Blacks, sometimes it is about unnecessarily making it harder to vote in general.
Yet you don’t say why only minorities find it hard. Why is that?
 
All that Pew has done is perform a limited statistical analysis, which is definitely based on a methodology, to determine that those in America with university education tend toward the Democratic Party.
That's right. Analysis shows those with higher education lean heavily towards liberal policies and the Democratic Party. Basically the complete opposite of what you implied about the Dissident Right.
However, in a general sense, I regard most universities today as centers of indoctrination in either a light sense but also in a more overt sense.
I hold Pew research in higher regard than your uninformed opinion.
I agree that one's ideologies and beliefs have a subjective element, but they also have to do with how broad a range of different ideas one is introduced to or in which one is grounded.
Doesn't really matter which subjective views your introduced to to understand that they are all subjective.
For this reason I did refer to the Millerman interview. His position is that the alternative side of the (political) coin is suppressed and the traditional, Left-Progressive side stressed.
Why should we care about this guys opinion?
I do not say that sound opposition to ideas from the Right perspective or right-leaning political philosophy are necessarily emotional, but rather that a great deal of today's opposition in popular culture let's say, or what is mediated through those mediating entities, is more often than not based in, grounded in, dependent on, an emotional argument.
And so are the emotional arguments of the Dissident Right.
You are a very good example of this. Even your use of the term 'White Wing' is infused with an emoted idea.
Actually that's an objective one. My reference to the white wing is a recognition that the Dissident Right has very few members who aren't white. That can be determined objectively.
I have not made any sort of defense of a platform that could be termed *white wing ideology*.
Are you denying that your ideology isn't very popular outside of white populations? Because that should be something you could counter with objective facts.
I have carefully defined that I think Caucasian-Europeans have a very specific and defined cultural base. I presented that idea pretty thoroughly here by including some concise description by Waldo Frank (BTW a very Progressive intellectual).
And yet white people in this thread and this country have rejected your culture and that base continues to shrink.
Over the course of weeks and months this has been, at least largely, my focus. Just this idea is intolerable to you and as I say what you do is to emotionally react against any idea that you imagine as threatening.
If you were intolerable to me how is I kept coming back here to debate you? 😂 Seems I've tolerated you just fine. What you've been is unconvincing. You've been unconvincing here as you're Dissident White buddies have been unconvincing in life. You're not any kind of threat to me. You're an amusing sideshow.
I further suggest that everything about *white culture* and also *whiteness* is similarly threatening to you.
😂

I have white family members who I love very much who go to Nascar races and Monster Truck rallies and are as white and rednecked as they come. Hell my uncle Jim (through marriage) has a brother who lost a finger to a table saw accident. Is there anything whiter than that? And I love those guys.
 
And these observations go back some months now to suggestions I have made that the reason this is so is because you, as an African brought to the New World, have been forced substantially against your will to *labor* within that empire of the white man's will.
😂

That's funny every time. My parents immigrated here and I was born an American citizen and like it or not but my afro-asian Caribbean culture is also now part of American culture. Truth is I love this country and I love telling you how much me and mine, who've had great financial success in this country by the way, plan to exert our influence on it. 😁
This exposes *your problem* and that of a rebellious Black-American culture generally. Your resistance is deeply embedded in your psychology even if you cannot recognize it. In Spanish we refer to this nexus as "malicia indígena".
It's not my problem. My side is winning. 😁
My argument has been that the more that your malicia comes out into the open, the more destructive it becomes. And it is this destructiveness that must be noticed and arrested. The *you* here is plural and refers to something sociologically perceptible.
Facts say otherwise. Facts say when cuck boys tried to over turn democracy they recorded themselves being losers without any real strategy and all they accomplished was to lose even more support. 😂
And none of this have I backed away from or modified. These are still core ideas that I believe have substantial validity.
Trust me, I appreciate you coming back time and time again so I can laugh at you.
You will argue and bicker until your last breath! You are the classic argumentative fight-seeking Jamaican! It is something that bubbles up out of your blood.
😂
You are entirely wrong when you suggest that values are neutral and that right and wrong do not apply. Right and wrong are metaphysical categories. You reveal your postmodern locality with this assertion.
You mean right and wrong are made up categories. If you don't think so go ahead and tell me where they come from. 😂
 
Here we go again using the opinion someone “in authority“ as the sole arbiter of truth. Why in the err should I care what a left wing judge says anyway? Even if he is saying blacks must be too stupid to get an ID?
Judges are arbiters. That's what they do. Professionally. But dispute you being surprised about how government works, to get back on point, you're still the only one who's suggested black people are too stupid to get IDs
 
Right and wrong are metaphysical categories.

An opinion or maybe a belief. Not an absolute concept. There are religions, for example, that have differing beliefs on what is right.
 
Judges are arbiters. That's what they do. Professionally. But dispute you being surprised about how government works, to get back on point, you're still the only one who's suggested black people are too stupid to get IDs
Nope. Left wing judges and those like who feign upset about voter ID think blacks are stupid. The judge is an idiot. having a title doesn’t mean diddly. anyone who suggests that blacks can’t get an ID is an idiot or an elitist liberal who looks with scorn on black people.
It's not only about minorities, except for maybe in your opinion.
yeahhh, riiiggghht. Sell that to some liberal.
 
Nope. Left wing judges and those like who feign upset about voter ID think blacks are stupid. The judge is an idiot. having a title doesn’t mean diddly. anyone who suggests that blacks can’t get an ID is an idiot or an elitist liberal who looks with scorn on black people.
Except that's not what the judge suggested, it's what you keep suggesting.

Honestly what the point? It's a bad argument. You thought you had a clever one there except reality doesn't line up. You can't find anyone saying what you're claiming so in the end its just you. And obviously you because we have the posts to prove it. Unlike you. 😂
 
Except that's not what the judge suggested, it's what you keep suggesting.

Honestly what the point? It's a bad argument. You thought you had a clever one there except reality doesn't line up. You can't find anyone saying what you're claiming so in the end its just you. And obviously you because we have the posts to prove it. Unlike you. 😂
Projection is your only strong suit. Saying voter ID disenfranchised blacks means blacks are stupid, pure and simple. There is no way out of it.
 
Back
Top Bottom