Liberal Forum

omh » 30 Jun 2022, 1:30 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 1:30 pm

not statistically. intellect that on both sides in the mid 90's. late 90's they legislated the reform in loaning people that cannot pay back the loans to buy houses they couldn't afford. decade later kurpluck.

So many wrongs. ^ First, hate crimes are violent - unless they aren't. Crimes are not divided, as you appear to suppose, between violent one and hate ones. If you shoot  guy for being the wrong race, they don't treat it as nonvioent.  They just don't. Not even if they enhance your case as a hate crime. You might want to google, what the **** is wrong with me, that I need this explained TWICE.

Next, the american dream act was under bush, not clinton. It just was. Sorry.

Here - let HIM tell you, FFS:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEmf780PGCA&t=276s

Cannonpointer » 30 Jun 2022, 1:46 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 1:46 pm

So many wrongs. ^ First, hate crimes are violent - unless they aren't. Crimes are not divided, as you appear to suppose, between violent one and hate ones. If you shoot  guy for being the wrong race, they don't treat it as nonvioent.  They just don't. Not even if they enhance your case as a hate crime. You might want to google, what the **** is wrong with me, that I need this explained TWICE.

Next, the american dream act was under bush, not clinton. It just was. Sorry.

Here - let HIM tell you, FFS:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEmf780PGCA&t=276s

know what the difference is between transposing sequence of events and ignoring sequences of events? Holes intellectually created about the whole universe limited to perpetually balancing outcomes arriving here now. I get things out of sequence, but I don't leave anything to the imagination of anything else is possible corrupting what does take place evolving forward now.

whole different outlook happens rescuing your species from itself and saving realities forward to keep humanity in charge of tomorrows until extinction arrives.

FOS » 30 Jun 2022, 12:47 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 12:47 pm

uh states rights haven mattered since 1861. and yeah there was a war. and the states lost

How does this article sit with you?

https://qz.com/378533/for-the-last-time ... es-rights/

DeezerShoove » 30 Jun 2022, 2:43 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 2:43 pm

How does this article sit with you?

https://qz.com/378533/for-the-last-time ... es-rights/

its midwit stuff. i would agree that states rights was not the primary motive...but it is also stupid to pretend the war had no impact on states

FOS » 30 Jun 2022, 11:54 am » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 11:54 am

this here is an example of what white people have the potential to do when they lose all faith in the system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

we have a cultural expectation of fairness...unlike every other race.

so naturally the current state is terrified of white people losing faith in the system.

but at the same time, they clearly cannot help themselves...they have to keep **** over white people...their own hatred of whites seems like their biggest psychological weakness

I never would have known about this unless I stumbled into a movie about it.

FOS » 30 Jun 2022, 11:54 am » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 11:54 am

this here is an example of what white people have the potential to do when they lose all faith in the system: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Athens_(1946)

we have a cultural expectation of fairness...unlike every other race.

so naturally the current state is terrified of white people losing faith in the system.

but at the same time, they clearly cannot help themselves...they have to keep **** over white people...their own hatred of whites seems like their biggest psychological weakness
 

here is the great irony to your post, fairness is an intellectual doctrine passed down each generation. Eternal balance is a natural result with evolving equally timed apart in the mutual situation of adapt or become extinct.

FOS » 30 Jun 2022, 2:45 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 2:45 pm

its midwit stuff. i would agree that states rights was not the primary motive...but it is also stupid to pretend the war had no impact on states

It's an attempt to de-mythologize the states' rights stuff.
Of course, it had an impact on the states themselves and the country at large.

The Commerce Clause probably had/has more impact on states' rights than the Civil War.

DeezerShoove » 30 Jun 2022, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 3:03 pm

It's an attempt to de-mythologize the states' rights stuff.
Of course, it had an impact on the states themselves and the country at large.

The Commerce Clause probably had/has more impact on states' rights than the Civil War.

well what really inspired the split was simply the election of lincoln, of course.

and he was clearly a president for the north that most people in the south hated.

but it became very clear that simply because the north had a much bigger population, the south was never going to be able to elect their own president..

that is objectively exactly what inspired secession in the first place.

no, people were not crying out 'we want slaves!' nor 'we want states rights!'. they were just saying '**** lincon!, **** the yankees!'. 

so ok slavery and states rights were  both tangentially related to the war...but unless you say that the war was caused by the election of lincoln you are kinda ****.

then the southern states were forced to sign, under durress, the 14th ammendment. Nobody wanted to, it was simply the terms of capitulation. 

so yeah, i would argue that the civil war was when the mask completely slipped off and the federal gvt showed its willingness to simply openly oppress any 'states rights' that bothered the federal government.

FOS » 30 Jun 2022, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 3:11 pm

well what really inspired the split was simply the election of lincoln, of course.

and he was clearly a president for the north that most people in the south hated.

but it became very clear that simply because the north had a much bigger population, the south was never going to be able to elect their own president..

that is objectively exactly what inspired secession in the first place.

no, people were not crying out 'we want slaves!' nor 'we want states rights!'. they were just saying '**** lincon!, **** the yankees!'. 

so ok slavery and states rights were  both tangentially related to the war...but unless you say that the war was caused by the election of lincoln you are kinda ****.

then the southern states were forced to sign, under durress, the 14th ammendment. Nobody wanted to, it was simply the terms of capitulation. 

so yeah, i would argue that the civil war was when the mask completely slipped off and the federal gvt showed its willingness to simply openly oppress any 'states rights' that bothered the federal government.

That was exactly why Lincoln chose Johnson as a running mate.
He had to bolster his chances with an appearance of national unity.

It was a series of events to be sure.
But states' rights were always going to erode regardless of a war or not.
Statesmen alluded to that well before any notion of a civil war.

FOS » 30 Jun 2022, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 3:11 pm

well what really inspired the split was simply the election of lincoln, of course.

and he was clearly a president for the north that most people in the south hated.

but it became very clear that simply because the north had a much bigger population, the south was never going to be able to elect their own president..

that is objectively exactly what inspired secession in the first place.

no, people were not crying out 'we want slaves!' nor 'we want states rights!'. they were just saying '**** lincon!, **** the yankees!'. 

so ok slavery and states rights were  both tangentially related to the war...but unless you say that the war was caused by the election of lincoln you are kinda ****.

then the southern states were forced to sign, under durress, the 14th ammendment. Nobody wanted to, it was simply the terms of capitulation. 

so yeah, i would argue that the civil war was when the mask completely slipped off and the federal gvt showed its willingness to simply openly oppress any 'states rights' that bothered the federal government.

I think the civil war had more to do with slavery than you do.  But I agree that the states were brutally subjugated
and some don't understand why Lee Harvey yelled "sic sempe= tyranis!" As he pulled the trigger 

Deezer Shoove » 30 Jun 2022, 3:23 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 3:23 pm

That was exactly why Lincoln chose Johnson as a running mate.
He had to bolster his chances with an appearance of national unity.

It was a series of events to be sure.
But states' rights were always going to erode regardless of a war or not.
Statesmen alluded to that well before any notion of a civil war.

The concept of states rights vs stated human rights to segregated people believing separate things are possible never agreeing on what isn't possible.

SJConspirator » 30 Jun 2022, 3:27 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 3:27 pm

I think the civil war had more to do with slavery than you do.  But I agree that the states were brutally subjugated
and some don't understand why Lee Harvey yelled "sic sempe= tyranis!" As he pulled the trigger

slavery was of course involved, but only insofar as how it represented cultural differences between the agrarian south vs industrial north. Slavery was a proxy for that.

SJConspirator » 30 Jun 2022, 3:27 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 3:27 pm

I think the civil war had more to do with slavery than you do.  But I agree that the states were brutally subjugated
and some don't understand why Lee Harvey yelled "sic sempe= tyranis!" As he pulled the trigger

If you really want to get to the essence of what the Civil War was...I would say the core was a Norman vs Saxon conflict. 

The normans invaded England in 1066. as a people they had a culture that was greatly equestrian, agrarian, elitist, and centered around war and adventure. 

They basically were the innovators of the medieval knight, Lance and all.

It is very easy to see parallels with the us southern culture. And that is no accident. Because many of the cavaliers, who supported king Charles in the English Civil War, fled to the us south when they lost the war and Oliver Cromwell took over England. 

Saxons, on the other hand, were known to prefer fighting on foot and with the axe. They were egalitarian, they preferred isolation to adventure, and they preferred being practical over idealism and romance. 

And they were the population who inhabited the north...such as the puritans. The average Norman in England at the time was far too wealthy to consider relocating to New England. And the way the north developed was clearly a Saxon style of culture rather than a Norman style. 

So I would argue that this is what caused the north vs south culture clash. And although the north had more money overall than the south...the individual aristocratic plantation owners in the south...of Norman ancestry..also scoffed at democracy and also scoffed at the idea that population or railroads can win a war. Typical Norman attitude. 
 

It is interesting to note further global impacts of the Norman and Saxon migrations in history.

For example...when the bormans conquered England many of the noble Saxons fled to transylvania. (Odd choice but they did). Vlad the impaler came from Saxon ancestry. Transylvania is sort of the Yankees of Romania.

Sicily, meanwhile, was also conquered by the normans. And much of the unique cultural differences between Sicily and mainland Italy are the result of Norman rule. Sicily is the southerners of Italy.

FOS » 30 Jun 2022, 5:00 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 5:00 pm

If you really want to get to the essence of what the Civil War was...I would say the core was a Norman vs Saxon conflict. 

The normans invaded England in 1066. as a people they had a culture that was greatly equestrian, agrarian, elitist, and centered around war and adventure. 

They basically were the innovators of the medieval knight, Lance and all.

It is very easy to see parallels with the us southern culture. And that is no accident. Because many of the cavaliers, who supported king Charles in the English Civil War, fled to the us south when they lost the war and Oliver Cromwell took over England. 

Saxons, on the other hand, were known to prefer fighting on foot and with the axe. They were egalitarian, they preferred isolation to adventure, and they preferred being practical over idealism and romance. 

And they were the population who inhabited the north...such as the puritans. The average Norman in England at the time was far too wealthy to consider relocating to New England. And the way the north developed was clearly a Saxon style of culture rather than a Norman style. 

So I would argue that this is what caused the north vs south culture clash. And although the north had more money overall than the south...the individual aristocratic plantation owners in the south...of Norman ancestry..also scoffed at democracy and also scoffed at the idea that population or railroads can win a war. Typical Norman attitude.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hatfields-and-McCoys
 

SJConspirator » 30 Jun 2022, 5:51 pm » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 5:51 pm

https://www.britannica.com/topic/Hatfields-and-McCoys

This particular feud i would suggest is based on Celtic ancestry. 

The poor and middle class in the south was largely scottish. 

And scottish people love feuds. I'm basically half scottish and half Norman myself. 

The more I drink the more scottish I become. 
 

sootedupCyndi » 30 Jun 2022, 11:04 am » wrote: ↑

30 Jun 2022, 11:04 am

hmmmm. I've been wondering about these things. Why turn roe vrs wade over now?  sometimes i think its just done to create chaos.
And i do think roe vrs Wade was done on purpose now for some reason. yes.

There is something fishy about that.... Roe vs Wade was in place for decades, why over turn it now... and it was leaked months ago... did they ever find out who leaked it... seems nobody cares about that anymore... why not... there is an agenda behind it but what... create chaos and divert attention... but divert attention from what exactly... maybe we will find out but I doubt it...