Liberal Forum

GHETTOBLASTER » 22 Jan 2024, 2:20 pm » wrote: ↑

22 Jan 2024, 2:20 pm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... s_in_China
READ AND WEEP MISTER "DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH" MUSH HEAD LIBTARD

Never in my life, let alone in this forum, have I written, "Diversity is our strength," nor any other typically kowtowing liberal idiom, for I am not a liberal. To understand communism is to know that communists disdain liberalism. Nonetheless, I wonder what ethnic groups in China have to do with what I have written herein. 
Thank you.

Be well
Good day
"Harvey Mushman" 

HarveyMushman » 23 Jan 2024, 8:39 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:39 am

Never in my life, let alone in this forum, have I written, "Diversity is our strength," nor any other typically kowtowing liberal idiom, for I am not a liberal. To understand communism is to know that communists disdain liberalism. Nonetheless, I wonder what ethnic groups in China have to do with what I have written herein. 
Thank you.

Be well
Good day
"Harvey Mushman"

 

HarveyMushman » 17 Jan 2024, 5:52 am » wrote: ↑
17 Jan 2024, 5:52 am
at least it isn't a racist, xenophobic, homophobic, anti-Jewish invective. Then again, the essence of Martin Heidegger may be afoot. 

Be well
Good day
"Harvey Mushman"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... s_in_China
https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/family-r ... port-finds
China is 90% one brand of chink and the rest is various other brands of fish heads, gooks and slopes.
Communist China is the antithesis of "diversity is our strength" and the epitome of Xenophobia and Homophobia.....  
 

GHETTOBLASTER » 23 Jan 2024, 9:13 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:13 am

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... s_in_China
https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/family-r ... port-finds
China is 90% one brand of chink and the rest is various other brands of fish heads, gooks and slopes.
Communist China is the antithesis of "diversity is our strength" and the epitome of Xenophobia and Homophobia.....

         The Chinks aren't keen on their Muslim Uyghur population either..... 

         Odd that Millions of Uyghurs have been arbitrarily incarcerated --- executed -- displaced -- sent to reeducation/ detention camps --  forced sterilization to reduce Uyghur women birthrates ------ and the UN isn't screaming Genocide .... The Rent-a-Mob isn't rampaging in the streets and blocking roadways..... College Snowflakes aren't skipping classes to protest on campus.... Chinkie Buffets & Take-Out aren't being boycotted.... 

Kobia2 » 23 Jan 2024, 11:10 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 11:10 am

         The Chinks aren't keen on their Muslim Uyghur population either..... 

         Odd that Millions of Uyghurs have been arbitrarily incarcerated --- executed -- displaced -- sent to reeducation/ detention camps --  forced sterilization to reduce Uyghur women birthrates ------ and the UN isn't screaming Genocide .... The Rent-a-Mob isn't rampaging in the streets and blocking roadways..... College Snowflakes aren't skipping classes to protest on campus.... Chinkie Buffets & Take-Out aren't being boycotted....

We both know that all it would take to see massive outrage from the Lemmings is for [[[Rachel]]] to command them.

 
 

GHETTOBLASTER » 23 Jan 2024, 11:18 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 11:18 am

We both know that all it would take to see massive outrage from the Lemmings is for [[[Rachel]]] to command them.

           Agreed...
On top of being incapable of fathoming an original thought by themselves, these miserable creatures are the most unauthentic, lockstep lying, parasitic creatures to ever infect this planet..... Their hypocrisy & selective rage is of comical proportion... Useless scumbags. 

GHETTOBLASTER » 23 Jan 2024, 9:13 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:13 am

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... s_in_China
https://www.scmp.com/lifestyle/family-r ... port-finds

  GHETTO BLASTER: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... s_in_ChinaREAD AND WEEP MISTER "DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH"... 

My response: "Never in my life, let alone in this forum, have I written, "Diversity is our strength," nor any other typically kowtowing liberal idiom, for I am not a liberal. To understand communism is to know that communists disdain liberalism. Nonetheless, I wonder what ethnic groups in China have to do with what I have written herein." 

In reaction, GHETTO BLASTER reproduced my post of 17 Jan 2024, 5:52 am, which reads: "At least it isn't a racist, xenophobic, homophobic, anti-Jewish invective. Then again, the essence of Martin Heidegger may be afoot." 

However, the terminal problem with GHETTO BLASTER'S "gotcha" is that the call for diversity or, more precisely, for the organizational framework known as "diversity, equity, and inclusion" is much different than anti-racism. The appeal for "inclusion" encompasses groups and structures irrespective of their dynamics, while anti-racism is merely the wish that human beings not be subjugated due to their pigmentation.  

In the case of inclusion, you may, for example, call to "include more women in public office" without regard for their respective political tendencies. In other words, although Nikki Haley, Candice Owen, and Liz Cheney are certainly women, they are political reactionaries who, to me, need to be rejected on that basis rather than on their being women. Ergo, the call for blanket inclusion fails because it is not appropriately discriminatory. And that is why I have never used the term "inclusion" in the sociopolitical sense.  Nevertheless, I still would like to know what China's many ethnic groups have to do with this. 

Be well
Good evening
"Harvey Mushman" 
 

Kobia2 » 23 Jan 2024, 11:10 am » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 11:10 am

         The Chinks aren't keen on their Muslim Uyghur population either..... 

         Odd that Millions of Uyghurs have been arbitrarily incarcerated --- executed -- displaced -- sent to reeducation/ detention camps --  forced sterilization to reduce Uyghur women birthrates ------ and the UN isn't screaming Genocide .... The Rent-a-Mob isn't rampaging in the streets and blocking roadways..... College Snowflakes aren't skipping classes to protest on campus.... Chinkie Buffets & Take-Out aren't being boycotted.... 

There just radical Muzzies.
Isnt that what you would do to them?    
 

Succinctly, how would you describe yourself?

Three words - go.

murdock » 09 Jan 2024, 7:33 pm » wrote: ↑

09 Jan 2024, 7:33 pm

Siphilis infected ***.

Props for honesty - work on the spelling.
 

HarveyMushman » 23 Jan 2024, 8:16 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:16 pm

  GHETTO BLASTER: "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_e ... s_in_ChinaREAD AND WEEP MISTER "DIVERSITY IS OUR STRENGTH"... 

My response: "Never in my life, let alone in this forum, have I written, "Diversity is our strength," nor any other typically kowtowing liberal idiom, for I am not a liberal. To understand communism is to know that communists disdain liberalism. Nonetheless, I wonder what ethnic groups in China have to do with what I have written herein." 

In reaction, GHETTO BLASTER reproduced my post of 17 Jan 2024, 5:52 am, which reads: "At least it isn't a racist, xenophobic, homophobic, anti-Jewish invective. Then again, the essence of Martin Heidegger may be afoot." 

However, the terminal problem with GHETTO BLASTER'S "gotcha" is that the call for diversity or, more precisely, for the organizational framework known as "diversity, equity, and inclusion" is much different than anti-racism. The appeal for "inclusion" encompasses groups and structures irrespective of their dynamics, while anti-racism is merely the wish that human beings not be subjugated due to their pigmentation.  

In the case of inclusion, you may, for example, call to "include more women in public office" without regard for their respective political tendencies. In other words, although Nikki Haley, Candice Owen, and Liz Cheney are certainly women, they are political reactionaries who, to me, need to be rejected on that basis rather than on their being women. Ergo, the call for blanket inclusion fails because it is not appropriately discriminatory. And that is why I have never used the term "inclusion" in the sociopolitical sense.  Nevertheless, I still would like to know what China's many ethnic groups have to do with this. 

Be well
Good evening
"Harvey Mushman"

 Communist China IS a racist, xenophobic and homophobic monoculture.
BTW...when you typed..."diversity, equity, and inclusion is much different than anti-racism"....I had to read that twice just to be sure I read it right the first time.
No explanation is necessary  don't want or need for you to elaborate on that one.
 

GHETTOBLASTER » 23 Jan 2024, 8:45 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:45 pm

 Communist China IS a racist, xenophobic and homophobic monoculture.
BTW...when you typed..."diversity, equity, and inclusion is much different than anti-racism"....I had to read that twice just to be sure I read it right the first time.
No explanation is necessary  don't want or need for you to elaborate on that one.

Its amazing that so many Americans live and prosper there.

Never yet seen a whitey hanging from a rope.
 

Sumela » 23 Jan 2024, 8:58 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:58 pm

Its amazing that so many Americans live and prosper there.

Never yet seen a whitey hanging from a rope.

Up until very recent times how many White Americans ever lived in China...?
I see where  100,000 Americans have been  allowed entry to mainland China mainly to fill some talent gaps in the work force..so OK in a nation of 1.2 Billion that works out to 1 out of every 12,000 people you see walking around China is an American....  

GHETTOBLASTER » 23 Jan 2024, 9:10 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:10 pm

Up until very recent times how many White Americans ever lived in China...?
I see where  100,000 Americans have been  allowed entry to mainland China mainly to fill some talent gaps in the work force..so OK in a nation of 1.2 Billion that works out to 1 out of every 12,000 people you see walking around China is an American....

Sir.....

Wow, they control immigration? They control their ancient identity?

Makes sense, right?  Wish we did.

 

Cannonpointer » 23 Jan 2024, 8:37 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 8:37 pm

Succinctly, how would you describe yourself?

Three words - go.

Props for honesty - work on the spelling.
 

Lol, that you have to lie doesn't bother a sorry bastard like you at all does it?

HarveyMushman » 13 Jan 2024, 8:24 am » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2024, 8:24 am

With all due respect for LowIQTrash, it isn't a matter of my being "told that Nazi Germany [wasn't] socialist and fascism is capitalism in decay." It is my 40-year study of Marxian social science that informs me accordingly. By definition, I know that socialist societies are devoid of privately owned means of economic production. German society's means of production in the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s was entirely privately owned. Indeed, it was not only German capitalists who financed the Nazis' rise to power but also American capitalists. Only the thoroughly ill-informed are foolish enough to believe that the said capitalists would have provided such backing had the Nazis been socialists. 

Moreover, following WWII, Ford, GM, Crysler, and other corporations shamelessly requested and received "reparations" from the US government for damages "inflicted" upon their manufacturing facilities in Germany by Allied bombing raids. Had Nazi Germany been a socialist society, (no) capitalist-owned businesses would have operated in it. 
(Ford, GM, and Crysler made trucks, tanks, and other implements of war for the Nazis.)

You just said a whole lot of stuff that DIDN'T explain away the incredible success of National Socialism.

I give all due respect to FDR for using socialist methods to save capitalism. I'm not saying it was a good thing that he did so - just that it reflected what the Romans called "virtu." That said, even Roosevelt's prodigious results paled in comparison to Hitler's. 

I believe that dismissing national socialism as "not real" rather begs the question - the question being, given its tremendous ability to uplift its people, why it is not superior to "real" socialism. 

I have bias neither toward nor against any particular ism. My concern is with the welfare of the people on whom the isms are enacted. My ism is humanism. The Russians' ism certainly appeared to **** the Russian people - and to really **** the Ukrainians. Reading you blaming the Kulaks was a shocker. I was under the impression that the agreement the kulaks were scapegoated was universal. Shows MY scholarship on the topic, I suppose.

The Americans' ism likewise **** the Americans - though the **** was less obvious and less immediate for a few reasons. One enormous reason is that for many generations, the brutality was enacted against "the other," to the profit of Americans. The nation had a policy of acquiring territory through settlers - and the myriad hardships this method occasioned those proxies were put at the door of the other. Officially encouraged/enforced westward expansion hid the systemic inequities of the original states, transferring them to the frontier. That there WAS a frontier provided the system a pressure relief valve, and provided the displaced a slim chance of hitting the lottery. Another thing was capitalism's slow takeover - it wasn't until late in the last century, for example, that a single restaurant on America's main streets was owned by the capitalists. The U.S. had a very strong free enterprise component from the very beginning - though it is anemic today and becoming more so all the time. 

From what I gleaned, you oppose capitalism even when enacted by the state - such as in the case of Singapore. I wonder if - in addition to your providing a more comprehensive and less dismissive critique of National Socialism - I might impose upon you to say precisely how a proper socialist state ought to order its economy if NOT through the application of the people's capital, and if you might critique the hybrid socialist/capitalist system in Singapore?
 
 

HarveyMushman » 13 Jan 2024, 8:27 am » wrote: ↑

13 Jan 2024, 8:27 am

Zeets2: "Yes, abuse and torture certainly were used on prisoner terrorists at Abu Ghraib. The big difference is that once those allegations were proven in the court-martial, 15 soldiers who committed those crimes were tried and convicted." 

The reality that there hadn't been a single suicide bombing in Iraq until 2004, roughly ten months after the US's illegal and cowardly invasion, is enough to know who the terrorists were. To be sure, the terrorism that unfolded in Iraq in 2004 was a direct result of the US invasion and brutal occupation of Iraq. 

 

Zeets is a cartoon fed by cartoons. 

His blithe declaration that the prisoners of abu ghraib were "terrorists" is pure foolish assumption. And the ease with which they convinced the rube that the evildoers were punished by scapegoating privates and corporals - well, like I said: Zeets is a cartoon fed by cartoons. 

murdock » 23 Jan 2024, 9:32 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:32 pm

Lol, that you have to lie doesn't bother a sorry bastard like you at all does it?

Interesting word choice - lie. 

Is it your contention that anyone was likely to believe that concocted exchange?

If you had said troll rather than lie, you'd have appeared more intelligent. 
 
 

Cannonpointer » 23 Jan 2024, 9:45 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 9:45 pm

Zeets is a cartoon fed by cartoons. 

His blithe declaration that the prisoners of abu ghraib were "terrorists" is pure foolish assumption. And the ease with which they convinced the rube that the evildoers were punished by scapegoating privates and corporals - well, like I said: Zeets is a cartoon fed by cartoons.

 

HarveyMushman » 17 Jan 2024, 8:52 am » wrote: ↑

17 Jan 2024, 8:52 am

Well, at least it isn't a racist, xenophobic, homophobic, anti-Jewish invective. 

What kind of invective do you prefer?
 

RebelGator » 18 Jan 2024, 8:32 am » wrote: ↑

18 Jan 2024, 8:32 am

Mushmouth, you're the latest in a long line of posters who want something for nothing. 

You won't be here in a month,  and everyone will be better for it.

You forgot to call him envious.

You're off your game.

You should have asked yourself the crucial question - What Would Hannity Say?
 

Cannonpointer » 23 Jan 2024, 10:05 pm » wrote: ↑

23 Jan 2024, 10:05 pm

…What Would Hannity Say?