• 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!

Racism is dead

fair minded

Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2022
Messages
243
Reaction score
94
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Some yell "Racist" at every turn but white racism against blacks is now mostly a thing of the past.

Of course, there are a percentage point or two who still believe that crap but
what percentage of white conservatives want Clarance Thomas removed from the Court.

White liberals hate Thomas but I wouldn't say it was because they hated blacks.

Conservative blacks have gained full support from white and black conservatives.

Most people, black, white, and Hispanic, vote on the issues, not the color of a man's skin.
(Some folks haven't studied enough to vote rationally, but I don't see race as a major factor anymore.)

White conservatives strongly support a big black man in Georgia. (While black liberals hate him.)

White conservatives routinely quote Dr. Martin Luther King while black and white liberals hate Dr. King's quote asking us to "Judge a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin.

Ok, so racism is not dead but white racism against blacks is on it's last legs.



te conservative
 
Some yell "Racist" at every turn but white racism against blacks is now mostly a thing of the past.

Of course, there are a percentage point or two who still believe that crap but
what percentage of white conservatives want Clarance Thomas removed from the Court.

White liberals hate Thomas but I wouldn't say it was because they hated blacks.

Conservative blacks have gained full support from white and black conservatives.

Most people, black, white, and Hispanic, vote on the issues, not the color of a man's skin.
(Some folks haven't studied enough to vote rationally, but I don't see race as a major factor anymore.)

White conservatives strongly support a big black man in Georgia. (While black liberals hate him.)

White conservatives routinely quote Dr. Martin Luther King while black and white liberals hate Dr. King's quote asking us to "Judge a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin.

Ok, so racism is not dead but white racism against blacks is on it's last legs.



te conservative

So says a WHITE “conservative”. What would the great majority if blacks have to say about your claim? Have you ever actually asked a black person to honestly give you feedback as to whether he or she considers racism to be “a thing of the past”? Or do you only ask fellow white conservatives?
 
Some yell "Racist" at every turn but white racism against blacks is now mostly a thing of the past.

Of course, there are a percentage point or two who still believe that crap but
what percentage of white conservatives want Clarance Thomas removed from the Court.

White liberals hate Thomas but I wouldn't say it was because they hated blacks.

Conservative blacks have gained full support from white and black conservatives.

Most people, black, white, and Hispanic, vote on the issues, not the color of a man's skin.
(Some folks haven't studied enough to vote rationally, but I don't see race as a major factor anymore.)

White conservatives strongly support a big black man in Georgia. (While black liberals hate him.)

White conservatives routinely quote Dr. Martin Luther King while black and white liberals hate Dr. King's quote asking us to "Judge a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin.

Ok, so racism is not dead but white racism against blacks is on it's last legs.



te conservative
Before all this identity politics/woke nonsense came to the forefront of progressive politics, and prior to the race card becoming their #1 political strategy a decade or so ago, the country was steadily moving in the right direction when it came to race relations and elimination bigotry in our society just as it had been since the end of the 1960's. If that wasn't destructive enough, in the last 5 years or so they decided to create an all new generation of anti-white racists that quite frankly, our country may never be able to recover from.

.
 
Before all this identity politics/woke nonsense came to the forefront of progressive politics, and prior to the race card becoming their #1 political strategy a decade or so ago, the country was steadily moving in the right direction when it came to race relations and elimination bigotry in our society just as it had been since the end of the 1960's. If that wasn't destructive enough, in the last 5 years or so they decided to create an all new generation of anti-white racists that quite frankly, our country may never be able to recover from.

.

This is what I will expect from the white conservatives who join in this conversation. Lies about Democrats promoting racism when it is the Repubs who have used racism as a political tactic and strategy ever since Nixon’s “Southern strategy” way back in the 70S.
 
This is what I will expect from the white conservatives who join in this conversation.
The fact that you've made 2 posts on this thread and mentioned the race of the person you were responding to on both of them, couldn't have made my point any better.


Lies about Democrats promoting racism when it is the Repubs who have used racism.....

What side of the political isle supports racial segregation on college campuses?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left.

What side of the isle rejects MLK for saying “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left

What political party recently held a political meeting and refused entry to certain reporters based on the color of their skin?
Answer: The Democratic party.

What political activists have held meetings and gatherings where they have restricted who could speak based on their skin color?
Answer: Leftist and democratic political activists.

What party and their supporters have attempted to invalidate the expressed opinions of others based on the color of their skin?
Answer: Democrats.

What side of the isle hurls racial epithets at black people they disagree with politically?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left.

As a bonus...

What side has recently turned their backs on women by supporting men being allowed to compete in women's only sports?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left.

Lies indeed... pffff
 
So says a WHITE “conservative”. What would the great majority if blacks have to say about your claim? Have you ever actually asked a black person to honestly give you feedback as to whether he or she considers racism to be “a thing of the past”? Or do you only ask fellow white conservatives?

Watsup, you said what I was going to--and you said it a lot better than I would have.
 
Before all this identity politics/woke nonsense came to the forefront of progressive politics, and prior to the race card becoming their #1 political strategy a decade or so ago, the country was steadily moving in the right direction when it came to race relations and elimination bigotry in our society just as it had been since the end of the 1960's. If that wasn't destructive enough, in the last 5 years or so they decided to create an all new generation of anti-white racists that quite frankly, our country may never be able to recover from.

.

Grim, the points you are making are the ones that I hear a lot from my older relatives. They were around in the 1960's and looked forward to a future where race was no longer an issue. But every ten years or so, some stupid thing would happen to set it back. Because of that, many of them are now saying that it seems to be hopeless--which is really a sad thing to hear.
 
Some yell "Racist" at every turn but white racism against blacks is now mostly a thing of the past.

Of course, there are a percentage point or two who still believe that crap but
what percentage of white conservatives want Clarance Thomas removed from the Court.

White liberals hate Thomas but I wouldn't say it was because they hated blacks.

Conservative blacks have gained full support from white and black conservatives.

Most people, black, white, and Hispanic, vote on the issues, not the color of a man's skin.
(Some folks haven't studied enough to vote rationally, but I don't see race as a major factor anymore.)

White conservatives strongly support a big black man in Georgia. (While black liberals hate him.)

White conservatives routinely quote Dr. Martin Luther King while black and white liberals hate Dr. King's quote asking us to "Judge a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin.

Ok, so racism is not dead but white racism against blacks is on it's last legs.
Yeah - I guess none of Trump's Capitol insurrectionists were racists - because racism is dead. Right?

 
The fact that you've made 2 posts on this thread and mentioned the race of the person you were responding to on both of them, couldn't have made my point any better.




What side of the political isle supports racial segregation on college campuses?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left.

What side of the isle rejects MLK for saying “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left

What political party recently held a political meeting and refused entry to certain reporters based on the color of their skin?
Answer: The Democratic party.

What political activists have held meetings and gatherings where they have restricted who could speak based on their skin color?
Answer: Leftist and democratic political activists.

What party and their supporters have attempted to invalidate the expressed opinions of others based on the color of their skin?
Answer: Democrats.

What side of the isle hurls racial epithets at black people they disagree with politically?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left.

As a bonus...

What side has recently turned their backs on women by supporting men being allowed to compete in women's only sports?
Answer: Democrats and their supporters on the left.

Lies indeed... pffff

These are all lies.
 
Grim, the points you are making are the ones that I hear a lot from my older relatives. They were around in the 1960's and looked forward to a future where race was no longer an issue. But every ten years or so, some stupid thing would happen to set it back. Because of that, many of them are now saying that it seems to be hopeless--which is really a sad thing to hear.

I grew up in that same era and was subject to race discrimination.

Today? While there is a small fraction of the White population that still exhibit old school racism, they are not the problem.

The problem is being caused by the so-called "anti-Racists" who IMO are simply creating not only MORE racial discrimination, but they are also part and parcel of the ideological group seeking to divide people by sex, sexuality, gender "expression," you name it, they want to identify it as an oppressed group deserving not only equality but preferential treatment.

Hence things like the "Hierarchy of Oppression," 3rd-Wave Feminism, deconstruction of the sexes via Transgenderism, and so on.

All pointing to "White People," but most specifically "White Males" as the current "out-group" underserving of the slightest consideration, or respect.

If your poor relatives who grew up in the 60's are feeling "hopeless," IMO they have been made so by all the above and more.
 
Grim, the points you are making are the ones that I hear a lot from my older relatives. They were around in the 1960's and looked forward to a future where race was no longer an issue. But every ten years or so, some stupid thing would happen to set it back. Because of that, many of them are now saying that it seems to be hopeless--which is really a sad thing to hear.

The Repubs have ad a series of race-baiting tactics over the years that allows the latent racists in the nation to bent their “outrage”. A couple of decades ago it was to stir up resistance to an MLK holidsy. Today it’s yelling “CRT! “ every chance they get. Stirring up racism among whites has been a tactic and strategy of the Repubs for 50 years now.
 
I grew up in that same era and was subject to race discrimination.

Today? While there is a small fraction of the White population that still exhibit old school racism, they are not the problem.

The problem is being caused by the so-called "anti-Racists" who IMO are simply creating not only MORE racial discrimination, but they are also part and parcel of the ideological group seeking to divide people by sex, sexuality, gender "expression," you name it, they want to identify it as an oppressed group deserving not only equality but preferential treatment.

Hence things like the "Hierarchy of Oppression," 3rd-Wave Feminism, deconstruction of the sexes via Transgenderism, and so on.

All pointing to "White People," but most specifically "White Males" as the current "out-group" underserving of the slightest consideration, or respect.

If your poor relatives who grew up in the 60's are feeling "hopeless," IMO they have been made so by all the above and more.

Good analysis, Captain. And I'm sorry you experienced racism back then. (If you haven't already, please record--audio or video--your experiences, as they will be priceless to your descendants.)

Yes, I agree with what you described, which pits one faction against another. That's every bit as bad as traditional racism, and there's no excuse for it. I wish the public would recognize it when they see it and chastise those who try to use it for political (and even financial) gain.
 
The Repubs have ad a series of race-baiting tactics over the years that allows the latent racists in the nation to bent their “outrage”. A couple of decades ago it was to stir up resistance to an MLK holidsy. Today it’s yelling “CRT! “ every chance they get. Stirring up racism among whites has been a tactic and strategy of the Repubs for 50 years now.

That's terrible, Watsup. Gosh, I wish there were a way for the public to learn to see those tactics and not fall for them.
 
Some yell "Racist" at every turn but white racism against blacks is now mostly a thing of the past.

Of course, there are a percentage point or two who still believe that crap but
what percentage of white conservatives want Clarance Thomas removed from the Court.

White liberals hate Thomas but I wouldn't say it was because they hated blacks.

Conservative blacks have gained full support from white and black conservatives.

Most people, black, white, and Hispanic, vote on the issues, not the color of a man's skin.
(Some folks haven't studied enough to vote rationally, but I don't see race as a major factor anymore.)

White conservatives strongly support a big black man in Georgia. (While black liberals hate him.)

White conservatives routinely quote Dr. Martin Luther King while black and white liberals hate Dr. King's quote asking us to "Judge a man by the content of his character not the color of his skin.

Ok, so racism is not dead but white racism against blacks is on it's last legs.



te conservative
ok
 
Watsup, you said what I was going to--and you said it a lot better than I would have.

Then why did you "like" this post?

Before all this identity politics/woke nonsense came to the forefront of progressive politics, and prior to the race card becoming their #1 political strategy a decade or so ago, the country was steadily moving in the right direction when it came to race relations and elimination bigotry in our society just as it had been since the end of the 1960's. If that wasn't destructive enough, in the last 5 years or so they decided to create an all new generation of anti-white racists that quite frankly, our country may never be able to recover from.

.
 
That's terrible, Watsup. Gosh, I wish there were a way for the public to learn to see those tactics and not fall for them.
Golly gee, emily, it's hard to ascertain what position you're taking in this discussion.
 
Then why did you "like" this post?

Reflechisse, I guess I sometimes click "Like" to acknowledge that I read, understood and/or appreciated the post. Even if the person made only one point that I agree with, I'll still click "Like." Maybe I shouldn't do that, since it might dilute my own arguments and be confusing. But I guess I just want the author to know that I did read the post. Thanks for calling that to my attention, though, and I'll try to be careful about that.
.
 
Last edited:
Reflechisse, I guess I sometimes click "Like" to acknowledge that I read, understood and/or appreciated the post. Even if the person made only one point that I agree with, I'll still click "Like." Maybe I shouldn't do that, since it might dilute my own arguments and be confusing. But I guess I just want the author to know that I did read the post. Thanks fo calling that to my attention, though, and I'll try to be careful about that.
.
You can do whatever you want, but a "like" implies that you agree or support the post in it's entirety -- not just parts of it.
 
Golly gee, emily, it's hard to ascertain what position you're taking in this discussion.

Reflechissez, I guess my problem is that I am so "middle-of-the-road" when politics are concerned. I'll take one position, then somebody will make a post that I agree with, so I'll change my opinion slightly, then somebody else will say something that will pull me the other way. I know that's not a good thing on a board that was created for political debates, and I should stick to my guns, but I want to be honest at the same time. I sincerely apologize for being so confusing, and I do thank you for calling that to my attention. I'll kind of sit back and think about things more before stating my position. Thanks again.
 
Reflechisse, I guess I sometimes click "Like" to acknowledge that I read, understood and/or appreciated the post. Even if the person made only one point that I agree with, I'll still click "Like." Maybe I shouldn't do that, since it might dilute my own arguments and be confusing. But I guess I just want the author to know that I did read the post. Thanks fo calling that to my attention, though, and I'll try to be careful about that.
.

You don't have to justify your actions to anyone. Nor should you feel compelled to do so.

Just like your ability to respond to someone, ignore them, start your own conversation, etc., you are not beholden to anyone or anything except the basic rules of the Forum.

Strangely, what just happened which prompted my response is emblematic of the problems I tried to explain to you in my earlier post. This idea that one must always adhere to dogmatic views, must comply with limits on who you talk to and what you can say, or how you choose to peacefully express thanks, appreciation, or other consideration on pain of being "outcast" is the problem.

So I say "LIKE" whom you wish, dispute or agree with people on a case by case basis as YOU so choose, and do not fear peer pressure. This is an anonymous Forum, and you just be you! :)
 
Reflechissez, I guess my problem is that I am so "middle-of-the-road" when politics are concerned. I'll take one position, then somebody will make a post that I agree with, so I'll change my opinion slightly, then somebody else will say something that will pull me the other way. I know that's not a good thing on a board that was created for political debates, and I should stick to my guns, but I want to be honest at the same time. I sincerely apologize for being so confusing, and I do thank you for calling that to my attention. I'll kind of sit back and think about things more before stating my position. Thanks again.
You don't have to change anything. I was just making an observation.
 
Back
Top Bottom