But if they really are dumb bubbas (by average IQ), there presumably is a limit to how much you can teach one to fish, as in if enough of them can’t tell that after one, three, and five dots, next comes seven dots, are they ever gonna get good at hooking fish?
Ladies and Gentlemen, I present Exhibit “A”.
Of the bigotry of soft expectations? But if American blacks are innately (by genetics) fûcking stupid (by average IQ stats), doesn’t it follow that they are just less capable, so we should indeed tamp down expectations?
Democrats disagreed with this platform in 1860 and Democrats would disagree with it today.
Martin Luther King was a Republican.
Malcolm X said "A White American who identifies as a liberal is the most dangerous and deceitful thing in the Western Hemisphere.”
It is revisionist nonsense that "liberals" all magically switched parties one day.
I repeat:
"Please explain how the civil right movement and desegregation was actually a conservative movement and how opposing them was actually a liberal/progressive stance. Otherwise it is you who is being the revisionist. See if you can actually stay on topic and answer this or as usual you'll just predictably avoid and divert."
I didn't say anything at all about Republicans or Democrats. That's irrelevant to the question and only a diversion tactic by you.
How was the Civil Right's movement conservative? How was desegregation conservative?
Are you capable of answering the question rather than continually diverting the question to an argument over the history of the political parties? Are you capable of discussing an idea on its own merits?
Please explain why MLK was a republican if all of the enlightened liberals were Democrats.
Your black and white view of politics is absurd. Being "liberal" doesn't mean you can't be racist. Being "conservative" doesn't mean you must be racist. This notion you have comes directly from leftist revisionist nonsense.
The original "progressives" were Democrats. They are idolized to this day by the Democrats. Woodrow Wilson was openly racist. Margaret Sanger was openly racist and advocated for the elimination of the black race through eugenics. To this day her Planned Parenthood abortion mills can be found in every hood in the country.
"Please explain how the civil right movement and desegregation was actually a conservative movement and how opposing them was actually a liberal/progressive stance. Otherwise it is you who is being the revisionist. See if you can actually stay on topic and answer this or as usual you'll just predictably avoid and divert."
I didn't say anything at all about Republicans or Democrats. That's irrelevant to the question and only a diversion tactic by you.
How was the Civil Right's movement conservative? How was desegregation conservative?
Are you capable of answering the question rather than continually diverting the question to an argument over the history of the political parties? Are you capable of discussing an idea on its own merits?
Please explain why MLK was a republican if all of the enlightened liberals were Democrats.
I bolded the parts of my post you must not have read.
Do you understand the difference between 'conservative' and 'Republican'?
I never claimed that 'all the enlightened liberals' were Democrats. Why do you need to make things up?
I repeat:
How was the Civil Right's movement conservative? How was desegregation conservative? Are you capable of answering the question rather than continually diverting the question to an argument over the history of the political parties?
I'm not asking if the Civil Right's movement was Republican or Democrat. If that's your only argument, you don't have one. Is that your only argument then?
Please explain why MLK was a republican if all of the enlightened liberals were Democrats.
I bolded the parts of my post you must not have read.
Do you understand the difference between 'conservative' and 'Republican'?
I never claimed that 'all the enlightened liberals' were Democrats. Why do you need to make things up?
I repeat:
How was the Civil Right's movement conservative? How was desegregation conservative? Are you capable of answering the question rather than continually diverting the question to an argument over the history of the political parties?
I'm not asking if the Civil Right's movement was Republican or Democrat. If that's your only argument, you don't have one. Is that your only argument then?
I bolded the parts of my post you must not have read.
Do you understand the difference between 'conservative' and 'Republican'?
I never claimed that 'all the enlightened liberals' were Democrats. Why do you need to make things up?
I repeat:
How was the Civil Right's movement conservative? How was desegregation conservative? Are you capable of answering the question rather than continually diverting the question to an argument over the history of the political parties?
I'm not asking if the Civil Right's movement was Republican or Democrat. If that's your only argument, you don't have one. Is that your only argument then?
Only children argue about semantics.
So you got nothing.
Only a complete simpleton tries to argue the Republican always means conservative and Democrat always means liberal.
Please explain why MLK was a republican if all of the enlightened liberals were Democrats.
I bolded the parts of my post you must not have read.
Do you understand the difference between 'conservative' and 'Republican'?
I never claimed that 'all the enlightened liberals' were Democrats. Why do you need to make things up?
I repeat:
How was the Civil Right's movement conservative? How was desegregation conservative? Are you capable of answering the question rather than continually diverting the question to an argument over the history of the political parties?
I'm not asking if the Civil Right's movement was Republican or Democrat. If that's your only argument, you don't have one. Is that your only argument then?
Why do you think "conservative" means maintaining the status quo no matter what?
The political spectrum exists whether you find it inconvenient to your argument or not.
Democrats are on the left of the spectrum Republicans are on the right.
The idea that the political parties just traded ends of the spectrum one day is absurd.
This is such a childish understanding of politics... lol.
ok, please explain how supporting Civil Rights and desegregation was politically conservative.
Do you have anything other than the simpleton's argument that:
'RePUbLiCanZ MEANS ConSeRVaTiVE!'
Conservatives are more religious than liberals. The abolition movement was spearheaded by Christians.
Conservatives voted for Civil Rights for moral reasons.
Liberals voted for civil rights for political reasons. As liberal icon LBJ said after he signed the Civil Rights Act "I'll have them n*ggers voting Democratic for 200 years."
George Wallace was a Democrat. Liberal ignorance is the toughest weed to pull out.
Wallace's bigotry was a conservative stance.
The civil rights movement was a liberal/progressive movement. To oppose it was conservative stance.
No one with any intellectual integrity tries to argue that any stance held by a Democrat is automatically liberal and any stance held by Republican is conservative.
Democrats and Republicans haven't always split down the liberal/conservative spectrum in same way they do now. Take slavery for example. Preserving slavery, clearly a conservative stance, was the position held by Democrats. Opposing slavery, clearly a liberal stance, was the position held by Republicans. Civil War era Republicans were the big government liberals. Today, people with those views would clearly tend to be Democrats.
LBJ was a liberal, progressive Democrat and known racist. Racists (like Joe Biden) have been within both parties and political ideologies. Not quite as simple as "liberals = good; conservatives = bad"
Not quite. In American, for example, you have an agricultural class where farms stay in generations for decades and maybe even centuries.
I'm not sure why you're asking those random questions however I'll just say underlining that, there was and still is an imperial/colonial project in place. You only have to look at the land mass of the Americas that represents a substantial part of the planet, from top to bottom, the principle institutions--the imposition of predominately one religion and a few alien languages/naming systems, and attendant institutional systems and processes.
An "agricultural class" LOL!!!
Farmers make up less than 1.5% of the American work force.
The United States was a colony. It rebelled and defeated it's colonizer.
The USA has never been an empire.
You're so busy pretending to be clever you're missing the forest for the trees.
I didn't mention the United States or the USA. You're missing the point; misunderstanding your ignorance as me "busy pretending to be clever".
Why do you think "conservative" means maintaining the status quo no matter what?
The political spectrum exists whether you find it inconvenient to your argument or not.
Democrats are on the left of the spectrum Republicans are on the right.
The idea that the political parties just traded ends of the spectrum one day is absurd.
To pretend that the parties haven't wavered back and forth across the spectrum on various issues throughout history is beyond absurd. To attach a value of 'progressive' or 'conservative' to a stance, based purely on the name of the party that supported it, is a simpleton's approach.
To pretend that ending slavery or segregation was a 'conservative' idea is completely laughable and shows that you have zero intent toward accuracy or integrity.
Ending slavery is inherently liberal and progressive.
Desegregation is inherently liberal and progressive.
Civil rights is inherently liberal and progressive
Opposing those movements was an inherently conservative stance.
We can argue all day about exactly where on the political spectrum each party was on at any particular point in history, but it's irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that the Civil Rights movement was, without question, NOT a conservative movement. It was disruptive and progressive, the very antithesis of conservatism.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
Why do you think "conservative" means maintaining the status quo no matter what?
The political spectrum exists whether you find it inconvenient to your argument or not.
Democrats are on the left of the spectrum Republicans are on the right.
The idea that the political parties just traded ends of the spectrum one day is absurd.
To pretend that the parties haven't wavered back and forth across the spectrum on various issues throughout history is beyond absurd. To attach a value of 'progressive' or 'conservative' to a stance, based purely on the name of the party that supported it, is a simpleton's approach.
To pretend that ending slavery or segregation was a 'conservative' idea is completely laughable and shows that you have zero intent toward accuracy or integrity.
Ending slavery is inherently liberal and progressive.
Desegregation is inherently liberal and progressive.
Civil rights is inherently liberal and progressive
Opposing those movements was an inherently conservative stance.
We can argue all day about exactly where on the political spectrum each party was on at any particular point in history, but it's irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that the Civil Rights movement was, without question, NOT a conservative movement. It was disruptive and progressive, the very antithesis of conservatism.
The Republicans didn't abolish slavery because it was the "liberal" thing to do they did it because it was morally right and their religious beliefs compelled them to do it.
The Republicans in 1860 have WAAAAY more in common with today's Republicans than they do with the Democrats.
You're stuck under the false assumption that "conservative" means never changing anything.
So you are trying to say that these quotes from MLK pretty much line up with typical conservative values of today?
Please show me a prominent modern day elected Republican saying things like this:
“I am much more socialistic in my economic theory than capitalistic,” he wrote, adding that capitalism had “out-lived its usefulness” because it had “brought about a system that takes necessities from the masses to give luxuries to the classes.”- MLK
“The evils of capitalism are as real as the evils of militarism and evils of racism.”
“[W]e are saying that something is wrong … with capitalism…. There must be better distribution of wealth and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism.”
“I am now convinced that the simplest approach will prove to be the most effective – the solution to poverty is to abolish it directly by a now widely discussed matter: the guaranteed income…"
“And one day we must ask the question, ‘Why are there forty million poor people in America? And when you begin to ask that question, you are raising questions about the economic system, about a broader distribution of wealth.’ When you ask that question, you begin to question the capitalistic economy. And I’m simply saying that more and more, we’ve got to begin to ask questions about the whole society…”
“Call it democracy, or call it democratic socialism, but there must be a better distribution of wealth within this country for all God’s children.”
“We must recognize that we can’t solve our problem now until there is a radical redistribution of economic and political power… this means a revolution of values and other things. We must see now that the evils of racism, economic exploitation and militarism are all tied together… you can’t really get rid of one without getting rid of the others… the whole structure of American life must be changed. America is a hypocritical nation and [we] must put [our] own house in order.”-
Sorry, but your entire argument of MLK is the same as a modern day conservative. Republicans: Same today, tomorrow and forever! ....just went home DEVASTATED.