Civil Discourse

[Doug1066]

I have observed that many threads of a political nature often disintegrate into hurt feelings, name-calling and the like.  I believe this is mostly due to a lack of knowledge about the other person's values, that many things that were not meant as insulting are often taken that way by the other party.  The offender simply didn't realize the impact of what he was saying.  A comment that is innocuous among a group of like-minded people may be extremely offensive to somebody not a member of the group.  The person about whom the comment was made feels hurt and counter-attacks.  Three pages later someone calls out the offender who answers that he didn't say anything, yet the offending comment is hanging there, three pages back.  The offender's defense is "That's not an insult; HE started it."  WRONG!!  If the victim sees it as an insult, then it's an insult.

I would like to start this tread with people explaining what they believe and if possible, why.

[Myles]

17 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

I have observed that many threads of a political nature often disintegrate into hurt feelings, name-calling and the like.  I believe this is mostly due to a lack of knowledge about the other person's values, that many things that were not meant as insulting are often taken that way by the other party.  The offender simply didn't realize the impact of what he was saying.  A comment that is innocuous among a group of like-minded people may be extremely offensive to somebody not a member of the group.  The person about whom the comment was made feels hurt and counter-attacks.  Three pages later someone calls out the offender who answers that he didn't say anything, yet the offending comment is hanging there, three pages back.  The offender's defense is "That's not an insult; HE started it."  WRONG!!  If the victim sees it as an insult, then it's an insult.

I would like to start this tread with people explaining what they believe and if possible, why.

I see the same.   I hope you are not insinuating one group does it and another doesn't because I see it on both sides.   I myself will fall to their level at times.   If someone keeps posting their own assumptions and grouping all under a certain label, I may post some gibberish mostly sarcastically.  

[+Desertrat56]

23 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

I have observed that many threads of a political nature often disintegrate into hurt feelings, name-calling and the like.  I believe this is mostly due to a lack of knowledge about the other person's values, that many things that were not meant as insulting are often taken that way by the other party.  The offender simply didn't realize the impact of what he was saying.  A comment that is innocuous among a group of like-minded people may be extremely offensive to somebody not a member of the group.  The person about whom the comment was made feels hurt and counter-attacks.  Three pages later someone calls out the offender who answers that he didn't say anything, yet the offending comment is hanging there, three pages back.  The offender's defense is "That's not an insult; HE started it."  WRONG!!  If the victim sees it as an insult, then it's an insult.

I would like to start this tread with people explaining what they believe and if possible, why.

The problem with this is allowing someone to be the victim.  Offense is taken, not given, even when the intention is to give offense, no one has to take it.    There are no "victims" in a forum discussion.   If someone takes offense by something someone posted that is not specifically aimed at that person, it is up to the offended to speak up immediately and ask what was meant or explain why they feel the way they do (everyone has feelings and triggers), why is that so hard?   It is hard because everyone allows others their imagined victimhood.   Words on a forum are much different than someone taking a baseball bat and breaking your window or your knees.   What is that old saying, "sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me."  Unless you let them.  It is a choice and people need to take responsibility for their choices.

[Doug1066]

Responding to my own thread initialization:

I come from a long line of union people.  I had a grand-parent who was an IWW (International Wage Workers; Wobblies) member, as did my wife.  The Wobblies were Socialists.  Not the way conservatives use the term as an insult, or to scare their constituents, but the real thing.  Union organizing was illegal and they left more than one town just ahead of the police.  They were fighting for wages adequate to feed their families and for respect and dignity in the work place.  These efforts were often met with gunfire, including machine guns (Ludlow Massacre, Colorado, Rockefellers vs. miners; This is American history that you didn't learn in school.).  From this I learned that good guys sometimes have to kill police.

My great-grandfather came from Lisnafiffy, County Down, Ireland.  He was a refugee from the the Potato Famine, also called the Great Hunger.  Irish peasants were tenant farmers.who paid the rent on their houses/garden plots by growing grain for their landlord.  To feed themselves, they grew potatoes in garden plots.  The Hunger began when a blight attacked the potatoes.  As the crops died, people starved, yet there was plenty of food in the storage barns.  But the landlords, who were often mortgaged to the hilt, wouldn't make grain available for there own workers.  The grain was for export.  There was even a plan for the government to buy the grain, then recover the cost with a tax over the next several years.  But that was the time of rampant capitalism and the plan was never implemented.  Over a million people died and another million were forced to leave their homes.  And all the time there was grain in the barns that would have saved lives.  That's where us Irish immigrants learned that governments cannot be trusted.  Next time, we must open those barns ourselves.

As a college Freshman, a was a member of the Goldwater Youth, a group that supported Barry Goldwater's conservative campaign - blue suit, red tie, white shirt.  I was a student at Kent State (Class of 1971).  The Kent State shootings were instigated by J. Edgar Hoover in an effort to discredit the anti-war movement.  He found a patsy in Governor James Rhodes.  Nixon, Agnew, Reagan and other conservative politicians had been bad-mouthing students and imaginary "rabble rousers" who supposedly crossed state lines to incite riots.  I never met one of these, so I doubt their existence.  I dated a girl from Youngstown who was a student at Kent.  Nothing serious, but she was a friend.  In June of 1969 I took forestry summer camp and then moved to Idaho.  The following May, the murders happened.  I followed the newspaper articles that told how people I knew were being prosecuted for things like being President of the Student Body.  A professor I had was arrested and fined for speaking out against the travesty that was the trail.  This, more than anything else, turned me into a liberal.  Friends of mine, including the girl I dated, died because some conservative politicians traded their lives for red-neck votes.

After college I worked in the woods in north Idaho in some of the same camps my wife's grandparents had worked in.  I cruised timber and set up forest monitoring plots at $0.25/hour over minimum wage ($2.25/hour).  The camps were little-changed from what they were 60 years earlier.  In the winter ice ran down the walls inside the showers.  At the end of the season (usually around Thanksgiving) you got laid off with no unemployment or other benefits, just like 60 years earlier.  I began to see what it is like for workers who are desperately poor and working for a big employer (in this case, the US Forest Service).  The government (the people of the US) are among the worst abusers of the poor.

And that, basically, is why I am a liberal.

Doug

[Guyver]

1 hour ago, Doug1066 said:

I have observed that many threads of a political nature often disintegrate into hurt feelings, name-calling and the like.  I believe this is mostly due to a lack of knowledge about the other person's values, that many things that were not meant as insulting are often taken that way by the other party.  The offender simply didn't realize the impact of what he was saying.  A comment that is innocuous among a group of like-minded people may be extremely offensive to somebody not a member of the group.  The person about whom the comment was made feels hurt and counter-attacks.  Three pages later someone calls out the offender who answers that he didn't say anything, yet the offending comment is hanging there, three pages back.  The offender's defense is "That's not an insult; HE started it."  WRONG!!  If the victim sees it as an insult, then it's an insult.

I would like to start this tread with people explaining what they believe and if possible, why.

You would like us to explain what we believe in which regard?  With respect to politics, there’s a lot of not agreeing as standard practice.  And there is a long history in politics going back hundreds of years in this country and demonstrated in the last presidential election, with all kinds of personal attacks, insults, name calling and mud slinging.  So, if a person feels that somehow their arguments don’t give them an advantage, they will result to personal insults and trash talking.  I think the same thing happens here.

[Likely Guy]

The mantra here has always been, "Attack the message, not the messenger".

Stay true to that and you can't go wrong.

[Doug1066]

2 hours ago, Guyver said:

You would like us to explain what we believe in which regard?  With respect to politics, there’s a lot of not agreeing as standard practice.  And there is a long history in politics going back hundreds of years in this country and demonstrated in the last presidential election, with all kinds of personal attacks, insults, name calling and mud slinging.  So, if a person feels that somehow their arguments don’t give them an advantage, they will result to personal insults and trash talking.  I think the same thing happens here.

"...don't give them an advantage..." or perhaps doesn't feel that he is getting his message across.  That happens frequently when two are arguing, but neither is making any progress at convincing the other.  Both then conclude they are arguing with an idiot.  That is exactly the time not to lose your cool.

Doug

[Doug1066]

While I am a liberal in the classic sense, to me it's not about liberalism vs. conservatism.  I'm a policy nerd.  It is policy that determines what gets done and how.  The clearest statements of a party's policy are its platform.  It's a plan of what they are going to do.  If you want to know what Democrats stand for, what they are trying to do, here it is in black and white, 92 pages of it:  https://democrats.org/where-we-stand/party-platform/

Now look up the Republican 2020 platform:  https://gop.com/about-our-party/  Some nice God-and-motherhood statements, but what are they going to do?  They don't say.  They did not create a plan or a promise.  If Trump had won, he'd be trying right now to run this country with no objectives and no idea what he was trying to do.  Sound familiar?

So why wouldn't a party create a plan by which to govern?  Maybe they have one they don't want you to know about.  In politics, nothing nice happens in secret.  I can only assume that they are up to something nefarious.

Doug

 

 

[Doug1066]

Before Trump took office, he let it slip that he would shut down government websites dealing with climate change.  If you're going to attack somebody, like climate change scientists, don't warn them first.  The dendrochronology community went into a blind panic.  Our most-important data is stored on the CDC's website, then over 9400 chronologies.  To lose those would shut down our climate research - that was the objective, after all.  The program administrators got busy and duplicated the database, finishing just days after Trump took office and issued his order.

But Trump didn't realize how the government works.  Orders don't come floating in on the breeze.  They come down from Washington, one department at a time.  By the time he figured this out and issued the proper orders to the proper departments, the duplication effort was nearly done.  Foot-dragging by a few supervisors gave time to finish the job and transfer copies of the database all over the world before CDC computers had to be shut down.  The Universities of Arizona and Tennessee have copies, as does Simon Fraser University in Canada.  I think East Anglia has one and there are several others in Europe.  In a way, it's a good thing Trump forced the situation because we didn't have a backup in 2013 and almost lost the whole bunch to a flood.

In this case, Trump's lack of scientific knowledge thwarted his anti-science effort.  Further complicating his life is the fact that bits and pieces of weather data are archived in hundreds of different repositories.  The University of Illinois keeps the weather records pre-1891.  I have around 50 chronologies in my computer including the entire state of Oklahoma, most of southwest Arkansas and a dozen or so chronologies from other parts of the world.  If necessary, the database could have been rebuilt from these pieces.

But anti-science has produced a real disaster with covid.  Trump had at his command, the research and public health expertise of the entire US government.  All he had to do was follow their advice.  But instead, he decided to sacrifice lives for votes.  He blew his chance to be the hero who fast-tracked the vaccine, getting the job done in record time.

You can't change what is by shouting it down, or ignoring it.  Not believing the science does not change the science, does not change what is.  Trump encouraged people to engage in wishful thinking about covid, killing tens of thousands.

It is this refusal to accept reality and deal with it that I find particularly disheartening about Republicans.  To me, they live in a dream world that will not, cannot, protect them when reality hits.  But even worse, they block effective action.

Doug

[spartan max2]

Idk. I feel like it's sort of always been that way. For as long. As I've been here atleast (2012)

[zep73]

If everybody could just stick to one simple rule, those threads could actually amount to something constructive:

Don't blame or accuse!

[RavenHawk]

I believe in GOD.  If you don’t like that term, then use Creator, Elohim, YAHWEH, or Supreme Being.  He goes by many names and has the appearance of those that believe in him from place to place.  If Moses or Abraham lived today, they would probably be CEOs and GOD would appear to them clean shaven, wearing a 3-piece suit.  I believe that he is eternal.  He created the aged universe, including evolution and the curiosity of man’s mind.  Man created science to explain GOD’s universe.  Science is so very young and inexperienced.  Because GOD created something, it is not good enough to say we don’t need to know more.  GOD expects us to use our curiosity to learn and explain how it all works.

 

I believe that GOD established this country through the Founding Fathers and the Founding Documents and guides her still today.  She is far from perfect and can only get better.  Her best days are still ahead of her.  So we don’t need fundamental transformation.  And any major distractions from the original intent is evil.  The world is full of evil.  I believe that the world is nothing but grays.  If you take the time to cut through the fluff, you can turn those grays to white or black (discern good from evil).  That doesn’t lessen any of the grays or other colors.  It makes things clearer.  Cuts out excuses.

 

One day there won’t be one race that dominates but all races will be minorities and equal.  But for now, we have a white dominance.  Nothing wrong with that.  Don’t get dominance confused with oppression.  We’ve had our battle with oppression but whites today are not responsible, no more than they are responsible for ending slavery.  That was different groups of whites & blacks of times past.  Every race in history has had its day in the sun.  Every race has grabbed the brass ring.  But they did not share.  They kept it to themselves and became great empires.  They don’t exist anymore.  It’s now the white race’s turn and one of the first things they did was to share.  Of the 5 greatest events or discoveries of the last 1000 years, you have the Renaissance, the Columbian Exchange, the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, and the Digital Revolution.  What they have in common is that these were due to the white race.  The entire world has benefited from these.  So much so that they really don’t belong to anyone exclusively anymore, but to everyone.  That is something to pat our backs a little, to be a little arrogant about. 

 

These things culminated in the creation of this country.  Yes, it was established by whites but every race or ethnicity that has come here for whatever reason has found their niche and have added to and changed this culture.  True change is made by the people, not government.  It is no longer a ‘white’ culture (it never really was), but neither are we multicultural.  We are just one culture made up of a melting pot (not salad bowl).  We are AMERICANS!  As one culture, this nation has a bright future ahead.  A white (of English ancestry) could probably go live in England for a time, but something would always not be right.  Ultimately, it would be the sensibilities of what is freedom, would be lacking.  Likewise, a black could go live in Africa for a time but would find that the only thing they have in common is the color of their skin.  Many may not realize how special this country is and there are many reasons for that.  Many do and they love her for that and are ardent patriots, no matter one’s color.  I have no tolerance for those that try to change that.  The Constitution is not a living document and the Bill of Rights are absolute!  If you don’t believe that, then kindly go someplace else.

 

Utilizing an idea I got from @Desertrat56, if the political spectrum is a circle, the top would be the center (AKA Conservative, Libertarian, Populist, Constitutional Republic, etc.).  That’s all the things that maximize individual liberty and freedom.  The extremes (Left and Right) wrap around (slide) to the bottom.  This point would be Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism, or tyranny, or any other flavor of Socialism you can think of.  What you notice is that at that point, the extremes meet together and become one.  Left vs Right has no meaning.  Any other form of government that might be somewhere on the circle will follow the extremes down due to gravity, leaving only the top center as a stable point.  It’s not a king-of-the-hill proposition where there is only room for one at the top (quite the opposite), but it would take a lot of work to climb back up.  Once fallen, the tendency is to blissfully stay there.  It is the ultimate gilded cage, the island of the lost (or damned).

 

[zep73]

15 minutes ago, RavenHawk said:

I believe in GOD.  If you don’t like that term, then use Creator, Elohim, YAHWEH, or Supreme Being.  He goes by many names and has the appearance of those that believe in him from place to place.  If Moses or Abraham lived today, they would probably be CEOs and GOD would appear to them clean shaven, wearing a 3-piece suit.  I believe that he is eternal.  He created the aged universe, including evolution and the curiosity of man’s mind.  Man created science to explain GOD’s universe.  Science is so very young and inexperienced.  Because GOD created something, it is not good enough to say we don’t need to know more.  GOD expects us to use our curiosity to learn and explain how it all works.

 

I believe that GOD established this country through the Founding Fathers and the Founding Documents and guides her still today.  She is far from perfect and can only get better.  Her best days are still ahead of her.  So we don’t need fundamental transformation.  And any major distractions from the original intent is evil.  The world is full of evil.  I believe that the world is nothing but grays.  If you take the time to cut through the fluff, you can turn those grays to white or black (discern good from evil).  That doesn’t lessen any of the grays or other colors.  It makes things clearer.  Cuts out excuses.

 

One day there won’t be one race that dominates but all races will be minorities and equal.  But for now, we have a white dominance.  Nothing wrong with that.  Don’t get dominance confused with oppression.  We’ve had our battle with oppression but whites today are not responsible, no more than they are responsible for ending slavery.  That was different groups of whites & blacks of times past.  Every race in history has had its day in the sun.  Every race has grabbed the brass ring.  But they did not share.  They kept it to themselves and became great empires.  They don’t exist anymore.  It’s now the white race’s turn and one of the first things they did was to share.  Of the 5 greatest events or discoveries of the last 1000 years, you have the Renaissance, the Columbian Exchange, the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, and the Digital Revolution.  What they have in common is that these were due to the white race.  The entire world has benefited from these.  So much so that they really don’t belong to anyone exclusively anymore, but to everyone.  That is something to pat our backs a little, to be a little arrogant about. 

 

These things culminated in the creation of this country.  Yes, it was established by whites but every race or ethnicity that has come here for whatever reason has found their niche and have added to and changed this culture.  True change is made by the people, not government.  It is no longer a ‘white’ culture (it never really was), but neither are we multicultural.  We are just one culture made up of a melting pot (not salad bowl).  We are AMERICANS!  As one culture, this nation has a bright future ahead.  A white (of English ancestry) could probably go live in England for a time, but something would always not be right.  Ultimately, it would be the sensibilities of what is freedom, would be lacking.  Likewise, a black could go live in Africa for a time but would find that the only thing they have in common is the color of their skin.  Many may not realize how special this country is and there are many reasons for that.  Many do and they love her for that and are ardent patriots, no matter one’s color.  I have no tolerance for those that try to change that.  The Constitution is not a living document and the Bill of Rights are absolute!  If you don’t believe that, then kindly go someplace else.

 

Utilizing an idea I got from @Desertrat56, if the political spectrum is a circle, the top would be the center (AKA Conservative, Libertarian, Populist, Constitutional Republic, etc.).  That’s all the things that maximize individual liberty and freedom.  The extremes (Left and Right) wrap around (slide) to the bottom.  This point would be Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism, or tyranny, or any other flavor of Socialism you can think of.  What you notice is that at that point, the extremes meet together and become one.  Left vs Right has no meaning.  Any other form of government that might be somewhere on the circle will follow the extremes down due to gravity, leaving only the top center as a stable point.  It’s not a king-of-the-hill proposition where there is only room for one at the top (quite the opposite), but it would take a lot of work to climb back up.  Once fallen, the tendency is to blissfully stay there.  It is the ultimate gilded cage, the island of the lost (or damned).

 

Thanks for a very interesting insight into your thoughts and perspectives! It's like a revelation! I don't agree completely with it all, but I love that you share it!

[Doug1066]

How about some of you present your background?  How did you come to be liberal or conservative?  What do you think the other side's characteristics are?  What do you think your own side's characteristics are?  Myles has sort of a mix-and-match approach on a policy basis.  I think that's a good way to handle politics - think it through, first.  Let's hear from some others.

Doug

P.S.:  Thanks to Ravenhawk for an explanation of his thinking.

Doug

Edited June 18, 2022 by Doug1066

[Likely Guy]

1 hour ago, zep73 said:

Don't blame or accuse!

...and own what you put out there.

[zep73]

2 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

...and own what you put out there.

Yes. Everybody makes mistakes. I try to keep mine down to 1000 a week.

[Likely Guy]

6 minutes ago, zep73 said:

Yes. Everybody makes mistakes. I try to keep mine down to 1000 a week.

That few? Good for you. A 'mistake' is a lesson.

Some are cheaper than others.

[jmccr8]

1 hour ago, Doug1066 said:

How about some of you present your background?  How did you come to be liberal or conservative?  What do you think the other side's characteristics are?  What do you think your own side's characteristics are? 

Hi Doug

I don't side with any political group, over the years I learned that I didn't have rights I had privileges that I wasn't entitled to. I swore an oath to my country so that is the only gang I have ever banged for as an oath can only be given once. I take all aspects of who someone is into consideration so Don't project political meaning on people because of a party nor the individual 's statements as a reflection on the politics. I look at people for what they are, beings that want to make sense out of life limited as that perception may be.

I don't claim to be innocent of working someone to define or clarify their position and as of late have not been as active in discussions as I once was. I don't come here with the intent to win anything or force someone to change. Who I am is who I have always been, I walk alone and depend on me not a system, no matter what happens other than you blew up all my customers in that nuclear war won't change who I am or how I exist.

Edited June 18, 2022 by jmccr8

[Likely Guy]

48 minutes ago, Doug1066 said:

How about some of you present your background?  How did you come to be liberal or conservative?  What do you think the other side's characteristics are?  What do you think your own side's characteristics are?  Myles has sort of a mix-and-match approach on a policy basis.  I think that's a good way to handle politics - think it through, first.  Let's hear from some others.

Doug

My 'background' is as a simple human. I'm a Liberal. I believe in liberties.

The necessary counterpoint is conservatism. There should be both, in a balance.

ETA: Mennonite/ScotsIrish

[zep73]

Politics in Denmark are not like in the US.
Our right wing parties focuses mainly on being business friendly, and the far right on limiting immigration and on the elderly.
The left is labour friendly. The far left focuses on helping the poor and those in need. Including immigrants.

The funny thing is though that very few ethnic Danes want to work with the elderly, so more and more immigrants and their descendants do that job.

I have been on both sides of this. I started far right, then entered a relationship and went far left, then became a genuine adult and ended in the middle.

[Grim Reaper 6]

8 hours ago, Myles said:

I see the same.   I hope you are not insinuating one group does it and another doesn't because I see it on both sides.   I myself will fall to their level at times.   If someone keeps posting their own assumptions and grouping all under a certain label, I may post some gibberish mostly sarcastically.  

I also read his comments and I certainly do not see where has done that, why did you say what’s bolded above?

Not being sarcastic at all, I would only and sincerely like to hear what made you feel like is some chance that was the case.

[Doug1066]

1 hour ago, zep73 said:

Everybody makes mistakes.

I thought I made a mistake once, but I was wrong.

Doug

[zep73]

1 hour ago, zep73 said:

Thanks for a very interesting insight into your thoughts and perspectives! It's like a revelation! I don't agree completely with it all, but I love that you share it!

Why do people laugh at this? I meant it! It wasn't a joke! No mocking! @Likely Guy @Manwon Lender

Edited June 18, 2022 by zep73

[Grim Reaper 6]

4 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

I believe in GOD.  If you don’t like that term, then use Creator, Elohim, YAHWEH, or Supreme Being.  He goes by many names and has the appearance of those that believe in him from place to place.  If Moses or Abraham lived today, they would probably be CEOs and GOD would appear to them clean shaven, wearing a 3-piece suit.  I believe that he is eternal.  He created the aged universe, including evolution and the curiosity of man’s mind.  Man created science to explain GOD’s universe.  Science is so very young and inexperienced.  Because GOD created something, it is not good enough to say we don’t need to know more.  GOD expects us to use our curiosity to learn and explain how it all works.

Thanks for your very interesting religious view of Gods role in mankind’s evolution, in a Universe that God created. and on a planet God created for mankind. I do however certainly agree that what mankind refer to as Science, is currently only in its infancy. The reason I believe that’s accurate is because throughout the Scientific communities of the Earth we have made advances in many many areas. However, because of undiscovered processes we are not able to comprehend as yet connecting the dots between these tangible advances are only theoretically connections  at this time.

4 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

I believe that GOD established this country through the Founding Fathers and the Founding Documents and guides her still today.  She is far from perfect and can only get better.  Her best days are still ahead of her.  So we don’t need fundamental transformation.  And any major distractions from the original intent is evil.  The world is full of evil.  I believe that the world is nothing but grays.  If you take the time to cut through the fluff, you can turn those grays to white or black (discern good from evil).  That doesn’t lessen any of the grays or other colors.  It makes things clearer.  Cuts out excuses.

Interesting so you believe that it was the hand of God that directly that caused the establishment of America and that God guided the thoughts / hands of the American founding fathers and the Constitution of the United States of America was designed by God to guide the path of America from its inception to this very day. It’s very interesting that according to your comments above that America even with Gods help isn’t perfect, and according to you America doesn’t need a major transformation because if we stay on current path our best days are still ahead of us, is that correct??

Ok here is something I don’t understand, you state that the world is full of evil, ( On this I agree ). Which projects nothing but gray areas, however we have the ability to see past the grey areas ( How do we fo this?? ) and this will allow one to see through the grey areas so we can turn those grey’s into White ( Good ) and Black ( Bad ) (. What makes the color White ( Good ) Black ( bad ) and by doing this it doesn’t take away from other colors it only allows things to be viewed more clearly and by doing this it prevents excuses. ( what excuses are you speaking about, and exactly how are the excuses prevented?? )

When you use the word Colors, do these colors represent people??

Do you also believe that since God insured the establishment of America, and that he guided the founding fathers to create our Constitution, that God also intended that America along with the American people would be the example for and the leader of  all peoples and Nations on Earth?

4 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

One day there won’t be one race that dominates but all races will be minorities and equal.  But for now, we have a white dominance.  Nothing wrong with that.  Don’t get dominance confused with oppression.  We’ve had our battle with oppression but whites today are not responsible, no more than they are responsible for ending slavery.  That was different groups of whites & blacks of times past.  Every race in history has had its day in the sun.  Every race has grabbed the brass ring.  But they did not share.  They kept it to themselves and became great empires.  They don’t exist anymore.  It’s now the white race’s turn and one of the first things they did was to share.  Of the 5 greatest events or discoveries of the last 1000 years, you have the Renaissance, the Columbian Exchange, the Enlightenment, the Industrial Revolution, and the Digital Revolution.  What they have in common is that these were due to the white race.  The entire world has benefited from these.  So much so that they really don’t belong to anyone exclusively anymore, but to everyone.  That is something to pat our backs a little, to be a little arrogant about

How will all of mankind’s races change into minorities and how would being minorities make all races equal.?

I am confused what battle with oppression are you speaking about, which apparently the White race won and because of that White race is has dominance and you say there’s nothing wrong with that. When and Why did that occur and why is Dominance ok??

When and what do you mean that two different groups of White and Blacks existed  in times past?

You say every race has had the brass ring or dominance  however they did not share does this include all races and if so what has the White race shared?

Ok so over the last 10000 years according to your Comments 5 of the most major events that occurred during this time period and the White race was responsible for all 5 of these events, can you guide me too where your information came from?

4 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

.  These things culminated in the creation of this country.  Yes, it was established by whites but every race or ethnicity that has come here for whatever reason has found their niche and have added to and changed this culture.  True change is made by the people, not government.  It is no longer a ‘white’ culture (it never really was), but neither are we multicultural.  We are just one culture made up of a melting pot (not salad bowl).  We are AMERICANS!  As one culture, this nation has a bright future ahead.  A white (of English ancestry) could probably go live in England for a time, but something would always not be right.  Ultimately, it would be the sensibilities of what is freedom, would be lacking.  Likewise, a black could go live in Africa for a time but would find that the only thing they have in common is the color of their skin.  Many may not realize how special this country is and there are many reasons for that.  Many do and they love her for that and are ardent patriots, no matter one’s color.  I have no tolerance for those that try to change that.  The Constitution is not a living document and the Bill of Rights are absolute!  If you don’t believe that, then kindly go someplace else.

Agreed

4 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

Utilizing an idea I got from @Desertrat56, if the political spectrum is a circle, the top would be the center (AKA Conservative, Libertarian, Populist, Constitutional Republic, etc.).  That’s all the things that maximize individual liberty and freedom.  The extremes (Left and Right) wrap around (slide) to the bottom.  This point would be Authoritarianism/Totalitarianism, or tyranny, or any other flavor of Socialism you can think of.  What you notice is that at that point, the extremes meet together and become one.  Left vs Right has no meaning.  Any other form of government that might be somewhere on the circle will follow the extremes down due to gravity, leaving only the top center as a stable point.  It’s not a king-of-the-hill proposition where there is only room for one at the top (quite the opposite), but it would take a lot of work to climb back up.  Once fallen, the tendency is to blissfully stay there.  It is the ultimate gilded cage, the island of the lost (or damned).

If what your saying is true, and the Political or any other Spectrum is Circular over time rotation must occur naturally do to our physical relationship to physics. If a large enough group of people choose to change their political affiliation and switched positions at the same time how much would this shift destabilize the circle and would a correction ever be possible?

4 hours ago, RavenHawk said:

 

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2022 by Manwon Lender

[Grim Reaper 6]

2 hours ago, zep73 said:

Why do people laugh at this? I meant it! It wasn't a joke! No mocking! @Likely Guy @Manwon Lender

Your comments and I quote “”(  Thanks for a very interesting insight into your thoughts and perspectives! It's like a revelation! I don't agree completely with it all, but I love that you share it!””)

Because to me the way you worded your comments were humorous, and my laughing emoji was directed at your comments not the subject material she shared. Such as ______________ it’s like a revelation the fact you added that made me laugh, it seemed out place with your other comments. I also read her entire post and I found it interesting, however I didn’t understand all if so I responded and asked questions.

Hope that clears things up!