Trump: Not a "Conservative" but an "Anti-Progressive"

[Person Man]

You mean a Reactionary?

[pbrower2a]

Anti-progressive?  Do we really need a new word to replace "reactionary"?

Are the only two options here "progressive" and "reactionary"? I mean, there are a zillion ideologies: liberal, libertarian, nationalist, mercantilist, interventionist, etc. that are neither inherently progressive nor inherently reactionary. It makes perfect sense to say Trump is neither progressive nor reactionary, though he is clearly actively anti-progressive while he couldn't care less about reactionaries.

Whether Trump himself is really reactionary is beside the point. His whole campaign was waged on classic reactionary themes such as Make America Great Again that invoke a past that never was.

If simple allusion to 'past' and 'future' are what makes someone a progressive or a reactionary, then only a moron could be either. Who really thinks that just because something was in the past it was either good or bad, or simply because we're heading a certain direction that makes it the right direction? A similar sort of argument can also be made for what some people consider the definition of conservatism, the idea that we should make slow careful changes (but never undo changes that have already been made because that would be reactionary). Who in their right mind could ever hold an idea as silly as that? Support the same positions as the progressives, just do it ten years later? All of these terms are silly and pointless when viewed as referring to the trajectory of time rather than a disagreement about which direction our politics will take while continually moving forward in time.

Anyway, Trump's theme was more restorational than reactionary: restoring America to its "rightful place" in the world.

Sometimes, going back to the old way is right (and not simply on the political spectrum). Elementary education decayed as the result of New Math and the look-say method, and there were reasonable alternatives to those well-intended but ineffective reforms. Don't get me to discuss the merits of the old liberal-arts approach to undergraduate education; with it we would end up with better teachers and less narcissism among the eventual leaders of business and government. But this implies a return to something proved effective in the past and unobjectionable from a moral standpoint.

An attempt to return to a mythologized past is far different from returning to something that worked better in the past. America does not return to greatness by condemning more people to poverty, especially if such implies malnutrition; to the business ethics of the Gilded Era; male chauvinism; or Jim Crow practice. The worst leaders typically have often offered a questionable ideal, such as the restoration of the 'glory' of the Roman Empire (Mussolini), the virility of of Teutonic barbarity (Hitler),  the cult of the samurai, admiration of such a tyrant as Nebuchadnezzar (Saddam Hussein), a twisted image of Simon Bolivar (H. Chavez), or even the alleged glory of the civilization that created Angkor Wat (the Khmer Rouge). The horrid KKK calls for the suspect glory of the era of planters exemplifying the alleged best of the Anglo-Celtic heritage, whatever that is.

It is best that any people recognize the faults in its past. Witch trials? Chattel slavery? Trail of Tears? Jim Crow? My Lai? we Americans need remember that, too, so that we not do it again.

After the attempt of this President and his Congressional lackeys to 'make America great again' only for well-connected people, I will be ready to make America GOOD again.  

[Badger]

"Giving into your most base desires, fears, and primal urges in reaction to a changing world is, actually, smart" - Every conservative think piece.

[TJ in Oregon]

I'm a reactionary and I'm proud of it.

Yeah, I'm starting to agree with this. Nationalist was dumb way for Trump to phrase it. It's not that I'm pro-America. Why would I support its oppressive liberal ideals?  He should replace all references to nationalist with reactionary in the re-election bid. A return to the better times is all we seek.

But you aren't Trump. Trump is far less reactionary and more nationalistic than you are. You're also more honest.

[TJ in Oregon]

Anyway, Trump's theme was more restorational than reactionary: restoring America to its "rightful place" in the world.

That is literally the definition of what it means to be reactionary.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I suppose one could argue that Trump is reactionary only in certain regards, but you'd hard pressed to find anyone who truly is a perfect reactionary, so quibbling in that way would be an attempt to render the term "reactionary" meaningless.

But if you take that definition as written, then virtually everyone is a reactionary in some way. For example, if the Wisconsin Democrats want to repeal Act 10 (the collective bargaining act) does that make them reactionary? They want to restore the status quo ante.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Until anyone has a good, thoughtful, legitimate ing reason to be against justice for people of colour, fairness for women, acceptance of queerfolk, and kindness to people with different religious beliefs, this whole damn thing is a sick joke. Truly.

I mean, "anti-progressive?" WTF is that? You feel insecure that you're asked to have an iota of consideration for people who are different? You're uncomfortable accepting that some people are born into circumstances that force them to confront bigger barriers than you, just because you're afraid of the possibility that maybe you didn't "earn" everything you have with "hard work" alone?

JFC

Condescending individuals like you, young, inexperienced, and having paid no dues to life, don't get it.  What has been discounted, disrespected, and disregarded is WORK and WORKING Americans.  Folks like you, who haven't worked much, haven't sacrificed for others (I mean REAL sacrifice, not just an afternoon as a counter-demonstrator.), and haven't pulled their weight.

I'll tell you what my morning was like.  After working 40 hours on my regular job that requires a college degree, on which I haven't gotten much in the way of raises over the last decade (except for when I was promoted), I took my 61 year old butt to a local restaurant, where I have a part time job cleaning the place up, and getting it ready for opening, cleaning floors and bathrooms.  As an extra duty, I cleaned nasty, greasy garbage cans and pipes on a hard tile floor despite some aches and pains that are, likely, undiagnosed osteoarthritis.  I do this so my 12 year old son can have some extras (namely,, particiation in speed roller skating).  

I'm not asking for sympathy, and I'll own my mistakes and choices, but if you want to talk about confronting bigger barriers, how about my 12 year old son, who is my adopted step-grandson.  My wife and I adopted him due to the out-of-control substance abuse of my oldest son and his birth mother.  He's been diagnosed with ADHD, and I'm not going to vouch for the pre-natal care he received,  I'm not asking for folks to applaud my wife and myself, but I want you to consider how much difficulty he's had at school, and how much ignorance I've put up with by folks from all sorts of sources who seem to believe that if I only spanked him more, he'd learn and pay attention.  

Now I realize that other folks have endured prejudices and barriers, but I also realize that the rate at which Americans commit crimes is not uniform across all demographics.  Yes the wrongs of discrimination need to end, but the disadvantages of many who claim "discrimination" are, in fact, the disadvantages that come from poor life choices, including the decision to commit crimes.  I'm not for discrimination (especially discrimination in employment) and while I don't sign off on sexual sin, I'm not for Scarlet Letters or Government Jackboots kicking down doors for activities between consenting adults.  But you'll forgive me if I express the concept that the FIRST consideration of any government ought to be the concerns of the folks who do the work of society and pay the taxes.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Obama years were not some sort of American Nightmare.  I voted for Obama in 2012 and I generally thought he was OK as President.  But the Obama years were years where those who didn't pay taxes, broke laws, and did little to contribute to the work of society had their grievances given top priority.  Rioters were referred to as demonstrators, illegal immigrants were presented at a political convention as "countrymen" and folks who actively resisted lawful arrests were made martyrs, while folks who cheered this on viewed coal miners as the real enemy, for their "attack" on "the environment" and cheered the loss of mining jobs.  And, yes, the media and many institutions overrun by liberal bias have more sympathy for select groups of "victims" than for folks who have followed the rules and find themselves out of jobs.  There was an "Enough is enough!" consensus on the issue of penalizing folks who took responsibility for their own lives and followed the rules and laws of society.

Decades of working, of supporting a family, of taking responsibility for both my life and the lives of my wife and children (especially minor children) has given me a worldview that only doing that can bring.  When you're adult enough to take on such responsibilities, and demonstrate enough grit to persevere in fulfilling them when the going gets tough, you'll have something with depth and weight to say.  Right now, you're merely pompous and inexperienced, and probably not up to what millions of folks do every day.  In my youth, I was a snotty know-it-all like you are now.  I now understand why folks blew me off.  Perhaps the maturing process will afford you the same experience.

And, perhaps, this is silly of me.  But your signature of Hillary and her mother (I think that's her.) laughing on a park bench.  It's easy for me to visualize her either laughing at the plight of ordinary, hardworking, culturally conservative law-abiding Americans when she's not lecturing them as Deplorable.  People like me OUGHT to be voting Democratic.  It's the attitudes of Democrats toward people such as myself that make it tough.  Trump, with all his imperfections, is willing to give at least lip service to honoring those who work and play by rules, as opposed to those who don't.  Yes, I get it' they're not actually doing that in the photo, but the imagery is easy to conjure up, and Hillary brought that on herself.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Anyway, Trump's theme was more restorational than reactionary: restoring America to its "rightful place" in the world.

That is literally the definition of what it means to be reactionary.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I suppose one could argue that Trump is reactionary only in certain regards, but you'd hard pressed to find anyone who truly is a perfect reactionary, so quibbling in that way would be an attempt to render the term "reactionary" meaningless.

But if you take that definition as written, then virtually everyone is a reactionary in some way. For example, if the Wisconsin Democrats want to repeal Act 10 (the collective bargaining act) does that make them reactionary? They want to restore the status quo ante.

Being reactionary isn't exclusively a right-wing phenomenon, tho it most often is found on the right.

(Incidentally, Wisconsin Act10 was horrible legislation if you are conservative.  Even if you think that some public employees shouldn't be able to engage in collective bargaining, the ones that Act 10 exempted from the ban, public safety officers, are the ones that traditionally it was considered most necessary to not allow to engage in labor actions.  Act 10 was raw political sausage at its wurst.)

[Cold War Liberal]

Until anyone has a good, thoughtful, legitimate ing reason to be against justice for people of colour, fairness for women, acceptance of queerfolk, and kindness to people with different religious beliefs, this whole damn thing is a sick joke. Truly.

I mean, "anti-progressive?" WTF is that? You feel insecure that you're asked to have an iota of consideration for people who are different? You're uncomfortable accepting that some people are born into circumstances that force them to confront bigger barriers than you, just because you're afraid of the possibility that maybe you didn't "earn" everything you have with "hard work" alone?

JFC

Condescending individuals like you, young, inexperienced, and having paid no dues to life, don't get it.  What has been discounted, disrespected, and disregarded is WORK and WORKING Americans.  Folks like you, who haven't worked much, haven't sacrificed for others (I mean REAL sacrifice, not just an afternoon as a counter-demonstrator.), and haven't pulled their weight.

I'll tell you what my morning was like.  After working 40 hours on my regular job that requires a college degree, on which I haven't gotten much in the way of raises over the last decade (except for when I was promoted), I took my 61 year old butt to a local restaurant, where I have a part time job cleaning the place up, and getting it ready for opening, cleaning floors and bathrooms.  As an extra duty, I cleaned nasty, greasy garbage cans and pipes on a hard tile floor despite some aches and pains that are, likely, undiagnosed osteoarthritis.  I do this so my 12 year old son can have some extras (namely,, particiation in speed roller skating).  

I'm not asking for sympathy, and I'll own my mistakes and choices, but if you want to talk about confronting bigger barriers, how about my 12 year old son, who is my adopted step-grandson.  My wife and I adopted him due to the out-of-control substance abuse of my oldest son and his birth mother.  He's been diagnosed with ADHD, and I'm not going to vouch for the pre-natal care he received,  I'm not asking for folks to applaud my wife and myself, but I want you to consider how much difficulty he's had at school, and how much ignorance I've put up with by folks from all sorts of sources who seem to believe that if I only spanked him more, he'd learn and pay attention.  

Now I realize that other folks have endured prejudices and barriers, but I also realize that the rate at which Americans commit crimes is not uniform across all demographics.  Yes the wrongs of discrimination need to end, but the disadvantages of many who claim "discrimination" are, in fact, the disadvantages that come from poor life choices, including the decision to commit crimes.  I'm not for discrimination (especially discrimination in employment) and while I don't sign off on sexual sin, I'm not for Scarlet Letters or Government Jackboots kicking down doors for activities between consenting adults.  But you'll forgive me if I express the concept that the FIRST consideration of any government ought to be the concerns of the folks who do the work of society and pay the taxes.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Obama years were not some sort of American Nightmare.  I voted for Obama in 2012 and I generally thought he was OK as President.  But the Obama years were years where those who didn't pay taxes, broke laws, and did little to contribute to the work of society had their grievances given top priority.  Rioters were referred to as demonstrators, illegal immigrants were presented at a political convention as "countrymen" and folks who actively resisted lawful arrests were made martyrs, while folks who cheered this on viewed coal miners as the real enemy, for their "attack" on "the environment" and cheered the loss of mining jobs.  And, yes, the media and many institutions overrun by liberal bias have more sympathy for select groups of "victims" than for folks who have followed the rules and find themselves out of jobs.  There was an "Enough is enough!" consensus on the issue of penalizing folks who took responsibility for their own lives and followed the rules and laws of society.

Decades of working, of supporting a family, of taking responsibility for both my life and the lives of my wife and children (especially minor children) has given me a worldview that only doing that can bring.  When you're adult enough to take on such responsibilities, and demonstrate enough grit to persevere in fulfilling them when the going gets tough, you'll have something with depth and weight to say.  Right now, you're merely pompous and inexperienced, and probably not up to what millions of folks do every day.  In my youth, I was a snotty know-it-all like you are now.  I now understand why folks blew me off.  Perhaps the maturing process will afford you the same experience.

And, perhaps, this is silly of me.  But your signature of Hillary and her mother (I think that's her.) laughing on a park bench.  It's easy for me to visualize her either laughing at the plight of ordinary, hardworking, culturally conservative law-abiding Americans when she's not lecturing them as Deplorable.  People like me OUGHT to be voting Democratic.  It's the attitudes of Democrats toward people such as myself that make it tough.  Trump, with all his imperfections, is willing to give at least lip service to honoring those who work and play by rules, as opposed to those who don't.  Yes, I get it' they're not actually doing that in the photo, but the imagery is easy to conjure up, and Hillary brought that on herself.

Thinking black people and other minorities should have equal rights is condescending, but assuming someone you disagree with is not contributing to society, and dogwhistling that poor black people don't work, don't pay taxes, and are lazy, sexually loose, socially-deviant criminals is not condescending? Personal experience tells me that these tired, disgusting, and borderline libelous stereotypes are false.

[Beet]

Look, at the moment neither party respects everyone, although the Democrats are closer. The Republican party has those flaws which HagridOfTheDeep pointed out, and he is right on that. The Democratic party--or in any case, the coastal elements of it-- disrespects the white working class, especially coal miners, as Fuzzy pointed out. The common fault of both is that they base politics on identity, rather than values. In reality, both are the same. And when anyone challenges that, or calls for a higher politics, they are immediately shot down with cynicism. The result is a race to the bottom in social and political mores.

[Beet]

In retrospect, the 2014 midterms were a canary in the coalmine for the problems with the Democratic party. The Democratic candidate for Senate in Iowa, was caught insulting Iowa farmers in the most demeaning terms, while Democratic party officials in Kansas -- a Republican friendly state in any year -- were caught trashing towns within their own state with contempt. A far cry from the days of Howard Dean and the 50-state strategy.

In 2016, Hillary's "deplorables" comment was, in my personal experience, the most popular out of all the things she said among the Democratic base. The day after her comment, a friend of mine who had passionately supported Bernie Sanders, and spent most of August bashing the Clinton Foundation for being a corrupt racketeering operation, and HATED Hillary Clinton, e-mailed me to say that Hillary was right about the deplorables. Several times I heard, "You know, Hillary was right about the deplorables." Once, a local Democratic office in Pennsylvania where I was volunteering brought in some speakers and one said, to effect, that Trump supporters really were deplorable, and that got one of the biggest cheers in the whole office. Even now, whenever Trump does something horrible, left- leaning commentators online are quick to call others who defend him "deplorable." (now in this last case I believe it is a bit different, as these are online trolls/bots/or keyboard warriors)

The Democrats need to do better. Unfortunately, a lot of Democrats took from Trump's win a rebuke of Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go High," but this is not right. This is only an example of the notion that being surrounded by thieves will turn an honest man into a thief, whereas being surrounded by honest men who expect and enforce the same will turn a thief honest.

[BlueSwan]

This is an attempt to intellectualize reactionary politics with no underlying philosophy other than “lol owning the libs”

[Person Man]

"Giving into your most base desires, fears, and primal urges in reaction to a changing world is, actually, smart" - Every conservative think piece.

So we all should live like iguanas or walruses?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Until anyone has a good, thoughtful, legitimate ing reason to be against justice for people of colour, fairness for women, acceptance of queerfolk, and kindness to people with different religious beliefs, this whole damn thing is a sick joke. Truly.

I mean, "anti-progressive?" WTF is that? You feel insecure that you're asked to have an iota of consideration for people who are different? You're uncomfortable accepting that some people are born into circumstances that force them to confront bigger barriers than you, just because you're afraid of the possibility that maybe you didn't "earn" everything you have with "hard work" alone?

JFC

Condescending individuals like you, young, inexperienced, and having paid no dues to life, don't get it.  What has been discounted, disrespected, and disregarded is WORK and WORKING Americans.  Folks like you, who haven't worked much, haven't sacrificed for others (I mean REAL sacrifice, not just an afternoon as a counter-demonstrator.), and haven't pulled their weight.

I'll tell you what my morning was like.  After working 40 hours on my regular job that requires a college degree, on which I haven't gotten much in the way of raises over the last decade (except for when I was promoted), I took my 61 year old butt to a local restaurant, where I have a part time job cleaning the place up, and getting it ready for opening, cleaning floors and bathrooms.  As an extra duty, I cleaned nasty, greasy garbage cans and pipes on a hard tile floor despite some aches and pains that are, likely, undiagnosed osteoarthritis.  I do this so my 12 year old son can have some extras (namely,, particiation in speed roller skating).  

I'm not asking for sympathy, and I'll own my mistakes and choices, but if you want to talk about confronting bigger barriers, how about my 12 year old son, who is my adopted step-grandson.  My wife and I adopted him due to the out-of-control substance abuse of my oldest son and his birth mother.  He's been diagnosed with ADHD, and I'm not going to vouch for the pre-natal care he received,  I'm not asking for folks to applaud my wife and myself, but I want you to consider how much difficulty he's had at school, and how much ignorance I've put up with by folks from all sorts of sources who seem to believe that if I only spanked him more, he'd learn and pay attention.  

Now I realize that other folks have endured prejudices and barriers, but I also realize that the rate at which Americans commit crimes is not uniform across all demographics.  Yes the wrongs of discrimination need to end, but the disadvantages of many who claim "discrimination" are, in fact, the disadvantages that come from poor life choices, including the decision to commit crimes.  I'm not for discrimination (especially discrimination in employment) and while I don't sign off on sexual sin, I'm not for Scarlet Letters or Government Jackboots kicking down doors for activities between consenting adults.  But you'll forgive me if I express the concept that the FIRST consideration of any government ought to be the concerns of the folks who do the work of society and pay the taxes.  

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The Obama years were not some sort of American Nightmare.  I voted for Obama in 2012 and I generally thought he was OK as President.  But the Obama years were years where those who didn't pay taxes, broke laws, and did little to contribute to the work of society had their grievances given top priority.  Rioters were referred to as demonstrators, illegal immigrants were presented at a political convention as "countrymen" and folks who actively resisted lawful arrests were made martyrs, while folks who cheered this on viewed coal miners as the real enemy, for their "attack" on "the environment" and cheered the loss of mining jobs.  And, yes, the media and many institutions overrun by liberal bias have more sympathy for select groups of "victims" than for folks who have followed the rules and find themselves out of jobs.  There was an "Enough is enough!" consensus on the issue of penalizing folks who took responsibility for their own lives and followed the rules and laws of society.

Decades of working, of supporting a family, of taking responsibility for both my life and the lives of my wife and children (especially minor children) has given me a worldview that only doing that can bring.  When you're adult enough to take on such responsibilities, and demonstrate enough grit to persevere in fulfilling them when the going gets tough, you'll have something with depth and weight to say.  Right now, you're merely pompous and inexperienced, and probably not up to what millions of folks do every day.  In my youth, I was a snotty know-it-all like you are now.  I now understand why folks blew me off.  Perhaps the maturing process will afford you the same experience.

And, perhaps, this is silly of me.  But your signature of Hillary and her mother (I think that's her.) laughing on a park bench.  It's easy for me to visualize her either laughing at the plight of ordinary, hardworking, culturally conservative law-abiding Americans when she's not lecturing them as Deplorable.  People like me OUGHT to be voting Democratic.  It's the attitudes of Democrats toward people such as myself that make it tough.  Trump, with all his imperfections, is willing to give at least lip service to honoring those who work and play by rules, as opposed to those who don't.  Yes, I get it' they're not actually doing that in the photo, but the imagery is easy to conjure up, and Hillary brought that on herself.

Thinking black people and other minorities should have equal rights is condescending, but assuming someone you disagree with is not contributing to society, and dogwhistling that poor black people don't work, don't pay taxes, and are lazy, sexually loose, socially-deviant criminals is not condescending? Personal experience tells me that these tired, disgusting, and borderline libelous stereotypes are false.

There is no data I can find that does not indicate that blacks commit crimes, and commit violent crimes at the highest rate per capita of any demographic in America.  What is condescending is the refusal of seemingly everybody to discuss this, especially given the eagerness to discuss disparities in education, employment, income, etc.  

This is a sad and uncomfortable reality, so I understand why folks aren't eager to discuss this.  Most folks have an innate wish to deal with all folks individually, and not to blame everyone in a group for the minority in that group being dysfunctional jackasses.  But the statistics aren't kind, and they beg the questions as to why this is so, and why this continues.

What I resent is the refusal to discuss THIS aspect of inequality whenever folks propose some sort of "Conversation about Race".  Why is "institutional racism" OK to discuss, but this factor out of bounds.  And, yes, institutional racism is a legitimate issue in our society, and in criminal justice, but there is a desire on the part of the Hagrids of the Deep of the world to discuss these issues without discussing statistics by demographic on the sort of behaviors that result in individuals enduring more hardship and decreasing their employability and opportunity in greater society, regardless of race.

What folks like myself resent is the depreciation of the fact that we have tried to live our lives according to the laws and according to Biblical morals and are now subjective to a narrative that comes mainly from the Democratic Party, once the party of folks who worked and followed the rules, that essentially blames "institutional racism" for every social ill.  The reality of MY life, is that I am subject to personal responsibility for everything I do.  Mistakes are things folks pay for.  That's the reality in every person's life, like it or not.  Somehow, I don't see how I am responsible for the inevitable consequences of the wrong choices of others, on either an individual or group level.  

[Fuzzy Bear]

Thinking black people and other minorities should have equal rights is condescending, but assuming someone you disagree with is not contributing to society, and dogwhistling that poor black people don't work, don't pay taxes, and are lazy, sexually loose, socially-deviant criminals is not condescending? Personal experience tells me that these tired, disgusting, and borderline libelous stereotypes are false.

So what accounts for the disparity in crime statistics by demographic categories?

I'm listening.  Perhaps if folks will respond earnestly to THIS question, it might lead to a solution to THIS problem.

[KingSweden]

Thinking black people and other minorities should have equal rights is condescending, but assuming someone you disagree with is not contributing to society, and dogwhistling that poor black people don't work, don't pay taxes, and are lazy, sexually loose, socially-deviant criminals is not condescending? Personal experience tells me that these tired, disgusting, and borderline libelous stereotypes are false.

So what accounts for the disparity in crime statistics by demographic categories?

I'm listening.  Perhaps if folks will respond earnestly to THIS question, it might lead to a solution to THIS problem.

If only there was a history of denied opportunities that makes black people more likely to be poor and thus more easily turned to desperation, and if only there were a history of police abuse that makes many in the black community more likely to take the law into their own hands because the real law isn’t going to do Jack for them.

If only!

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

There is no data I can find that does not indicate that blacks commit crimes, and commit violent crimes at the highest rate per capita of any demographic in America.  What is condescending is the refusal of seemingly everybody to discuss this, especially given the eagerness to discuss disparities in education, employment, income, etc.  

This is a sad and uncomfortable reality, so I understand why folks aren't eager to discuss this.  Most folks have an innate wish to deal with all folks individually, and not to blame everyone in a group for the minority in that group being dysfunctional jackasses.  But the statistics aren't kind, and they beg the questions as to why this is so, and why this continues.

What I resent is the refusal to discuss THIS aspect of inequality whenever folks propose some sort of "Conversation about Race".  Why is "institutional racism" OK to discuss, but this factor out of bounds.  And, yes, institutional racism is a legitimate issue in our society, and in criminal justice, but there is a desire on the part of the Hagrids of the Deep of the world to discuss these issues without discussing statistics by demographic on the sort of behaviors that result in individuals enduring more hardship and decreasing their employability and opportunity in greater society, regardless of race.

Lol, wat? Who isn't saying we can't discuss these things? What is problematic is saying the discussion should stop at an acknowledgement that there are racial disparities in crime without trying to understand why those disparities exist, or without trying to put any sort of context around those for a deeper understanding, as you seem to be doing. I think most people you seem to disagree with would acknowledge that there blacks commit more violent crimes, they just aren't willing to easily attribute it to any sort of innate moral or cultural failing.

What folks like myself resent is the depreciation of the fact that we have tried to live our lives according to the laws and according to Biblical morals and are now subjective to a narrative that comes mainly from the Democratic Party, once the party of folks who worked and followed the rules, that essentially blames "institutional racism" for every social ill.  The reality of MY life, is that I am subject to personal responsibility for everything I do.  Mistakes are things folks pay for.  That's the reality in every person's life, like it or not.  Somehow, I don't see how I am responsible for the inevitable consequences of the wrong choices of others, on either an individual or group level.  

That's an incredibly false narrative. I can't believe you're writing that your demographic is a victim, and the only group "personally responsible" for their actions, in a post where you acknowledge above that institutional racism is a problem in society and the criminal justice system. Do you know anybody who has smoked marijuana? Did you report them to the police and, if you did, did they face legal consequence for breaking the law? Have you been pulled over every time you speed, or pulled over for speeding and had your car searched when you were not in fact speeding? Has your job application ever been turned down because your name was DaQuan or DeAndre? It's quite frankly garbage that you assert that you, a man burdened by your whiteness, are somehow the only type of person in this country who is held responsible for your actions, when there are several classes of people who are held "responsible" for preconceived notions (many of which are often false) about their class for which they are not personally responsible.

[JA]

It has been pretty obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of political philosophy and history that Trump and his base aren't Conservative. They aren't trying to conserve anything; they're past that point because they no longer believe the institutions are in their hands. Since the institutions and positions of power they once held no longer belong to them, they're determined to undermine, overthrow, or "restore" them to their previous state - under the dominance of White Christian heterosexual men.

Trump is more or less using this real reactionary element in American society for his personal benefit. For example, he's exploiting the suspicion aimed at federal departments and once respected conservative institutions because they're not aligned with him. He has fanned the flames of an existing reactionary element and rode it not only to the White House but continues to ride it for his personal benefit - even if the consequence is the total fracturing of American society and destabilization of our institutions.

True Conservatives would despise Trump for the damage he's causing to American society. Reactionaries love him because he panders to them and feeds them the red meat they crave; they don't aspire to "uplift" America or anything like that. Their politics is not inspirational or constructive; it's a politics of resentment, hatred, and destruction. They seek to rise to power from the ashes of the destroyed liberal, tolerant, multicultural America.

[SteveRogers]

Thinking black people and other minorities should have equal rights is condescending, but assuming someone you disagree with is not contributing to society, and dogwhistling that poor black people don't work, don't pay taxes, and are lazy, sexually loose, socially-deviant criminals is not condescending? Personal experience tells me that these tired, disgusting, and borderline libelous stereotypes are false.

So what accounts for the disparity in crime statistics by demographic categories?

I'm listening.  Perhaps if folks will respond earnestly to THIS question, it might lead to a solution to THIS problem.

It rhymes with “schpoverty.”

[Cold War Liberal]

Thinking black people and other minorities should have equal rights is condescending, but assuming someone you disagree with is not contributing to society, and dogwhistling that poor black people don't work, don't pay taxes, and are lazy, sexually loose, socially-deviant criminals is not condescending? Personal experience tells me that these tired, disgusting, and borderline libelous stereotypes are false.

So what accounts for the disparity in crime statistics by demographic categories?

I'm listening.  Perhaps if folks will respond earnestly to THIS question, it might lead to a solution to THIS problem.

I actually laughed out loud when I read this.

Slavery turned into Jim Crow, which included redlining, which systemically prevented most African-Americans from accumulating wealth (the average white family STILL has over 10x the wealth of the average black family, 80 years after redlining began). The War on Drugs was explicitly began with the intention of locking up hippies and black people, and thrived under every single President from Nixon through Trump (Obama's the only one who even tried to stop it, and he failed, for the most part). Unchecked police violence and LAW AND ORDER rhetoric coming from the government, along with a long, long, long history of horrible things the government has done to black people, leads to no small amount of distrust against the government and the police.

So! You're poor, in part because some rich guy from NY in the '30s told HOLC not to give home loans to your great-grandparents because they had a certain level of melanin in their skin, which made them high-risk, for some reason (hint: Social Darwinists believed that black people were frail and going to "go extinct;" the "strong primal beast" stereotype didn't begin until after Jesse Owens and other black athletes started excelling). You're looked down upon by those who have never had to walk a millimeter in your shoes (the kind of people who cry victim about how bad they have it and how much they have to work but also have over 5,000 posts on an online political forum) for not magically fixing your situation because of the American Dream mentality some people have about America. If you decide you want to walk to a convenience store in your neighborhood, or drive a car, or read a book in a car, or play outside with a toy gun while being 12 years old but also black, you get shot by police officers who apparently get scared too easily and shouldn't be in policing (but they get off anyway!). The government uses property taxes to fund schools, and your property is worth little for aforementioned reasons, so your local schools get little money, so they can't afford to actually teach you very well, which keeps you from getting a good job, and keeps you poor. Society tells you that the way to succeed is one way, but that way is not accessible to you because of systemic forces older than the country itself. So you decide to forge your own path because that's the only way you can support yourself. You're not proud of it, but it's all you can do to support your family and yourself. You have to take matters into your own hands, because the government has never supported (and often actively worked against) you, and the law and those who enforce it are not on your side 99 times out of 100.

But at least we elected a black President, so racism can't exist anymore... right?

(This is hopefully obvious, but maybe not: most African Americans don't experience this set of circumstances, but every single one of them has been affected by racism to one extent or another)

Just because a demographic does something more often than another demographic doesn't mean it's because it's inherent to the biology of that demographic. Correlation doesn't equal causation.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

Look, at the moment neither party respects everyone, although the Democrats are closer. The Republican party has those flaws which HagridOfTheDeep pointed out, and he is right on that. The Democratic party--or in any case, the coastal elements of it-- disrespects the white working class, especially coal miners, as Fuzzy pointed out. The common fault of both is that they base politics on identity, rather than values. In reality, both are the same. And when anyone challenges that, or calls for a higher politics, they are immediately shot down with cynicism. The result is a race to the bottom in social and political mores.

Ten years ago, I could see someone say "both are the same" about our political parties and I would generally agree, even though I saw some particularly troubling signs on the Republican side even then. Now, seeing that claim threatens to fill me with incandescent rage - at the willful ignorance and stupidity, if not open malevolence, required to make it.

No, the Democrats are not a particularly great or even good party by American historical standards. Focusing on virtue signaling rather than real interests, poor organziation, an entrenched establishment within the party supporting their own interests and those of the wealthy and poweful to whom they eagerly insist on selling themselves,  and on and on. The list of Democratic party flaws is large.

But to claims that those flaws are equal to the Republicans' consistent choice, over thirty years, to champion ignorance, to destroy their own capacity for rational thought, to embrace a series of ever-thinner veils over racism and misogyny and xenophobia, to promote a vile shell of a religion, all culminating in a government with the intellect and moral authority of a rabid rat that is not merely failing, but actively destroying our nation all while gleefully following the petulant ravings of an immature aspiring tyrant, that is the act of either a despicable villain or a vile fool.

[Kingpoleon]

Thinking black people and other minorities should have equal rights is condescending, but assuming someone you disagree with is not contributing to society, and dogwhistling that poor black people don't work, don't pay taxes, and are lazy, sexually loose, socially-deviant criminals is not condescending? Personal experience tells me that these tired, disgusting, and borderline libelous stereotypes are false.

So what accounts for the disparity in crime statistics by demographic categories?

I'm listening.  Perhaps if folks will respond earnestly to THIS question, it might lead to a solution to THIS problem.

Gee, I don’t know. Maybe the fact that in places like New York City, there are jurisdictions where black people are ten to twelve times more likely to undergo stop-and-frisk than white people. Maybe the fact that black people have consistently been given worse or no education until 40-50 years ago affects the culture. Maybe the fact that FDR’s redlining continues to affect the black community to this day* has something to do with it. Maybe the fact that “certain neighborhoods” - that just happen to be black, regardless of income, - to this day have a heavier police presence than white neighborhoods results in more blacks being caught committing crimes. Yet we continue to see black people and BLM stereotyped as “violent thugs who hate the police” because of a few dozen marchers. Yet we continue to advocate for these “law and order” policies. Now you tell me - have I responded earnestly to THIS question?


*Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/24/upshot/how-redlinings-racist-effects-lasted-for-decades.html

[Famous Mortimer]

Why does being stopped and frisked make Black people kill each other at a higher rate than white people?

Also lol@redlining as an excuse

"How could Black people not be poor criminals? They were denied the right to live around white people and forced to live among other Black people."

Meanwhile, White people make due living in the middle of nowhere in the suburbs and when they do start moving to those accursed inner cities that Black people were forced to live in by redlining, those areas suddenly became the most valuable real estate in the world.

[Cold War Liberal]

Why does being stopped and frisked make Black people kill each other at a higher rate than white people?

Also lol@redlining as an excuse

"How could Black people not be poor criminals? They were denied the right to live around white people and forced to live among other Black people."

Meanwhile, White people make due living in the middle of nowhere in the suburbs and when they do start moving to those accursed inner cities that Black people were forced to live in by redlining, those areas suddenly became the most valuable real estate in the world.

"Hi, I'm Mortimer, and I condescend to people about redlining while simultaneously not knowing what redlining is, confusing it for segregation, and implying that it has nothing to do with wealth accumulation!"

Segregation is forcing people to live apart based on race. Redlining is doing that, then telling insurance companies not to give loans to people who live in "certain" (read: black) areas. If you can't see how that negatively affects black people, then I really can't help you.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

It has been pretty obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of political philosophy and history that Trump and his base aren't Conservative. They aren't trying to conserve anything; they're past that point because they no longer believe the institutions are in their hands. Since the institutions and positions of power they once held no longer belong to them, they're determined to undermine, overthrow, or "restore" them to their previous state - under the dominance of White Christian heterosexual men.

Trump is more or less using this real reactionary element in American society for his personal benefit.

Um, this is all what "conservative" means in America today. The "True Conservatives" you talk about don't exist in the United States today, no more than "True Communists" exist in 21st Century China. If conservatives didn't wants to be marinated in Trumpstink, then they ought not have spent decades encouraging exactly what he supports. Trump is discrediting the name of conservatism for a generation (if not more), and that is absolutely something conservatives have earned, fair and square.

[Beet]

It has been pretty obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of political philosophy and history that Trump and his base aren't Conservative. They aren't trying to conserve anything; they're past that point because they no longer believe the institutions are in their hands. Since the institutions and positions of power they once held no longer belong to them, they're determined to undermine, overthrow, or "restore" them to their previous state - under the dominance of White Christian heterosexual men.

Trump is more or less using this real reactionary element in American society for his personal benefit.

Um, this is all what "conservative" means in America today. The "True Conservatives" you talk about don't exist in the United States today, no more than "True Communists" exist in 21st Century China. If conservatives didn't wants to be marinated in Trumpstink, then they ought not have spent decades encouraging exactly what he supports. Trump is discrediting the name of conservatism for a generation (if not more), and that is absolutely something conservatives have earned, fair and square.

Yeah, the claim that Trump isnt' a conservative has always struck me as strange. These people's idea of a True Conservative is a tiny Washington elite... the Hillgoose and RINO Tom types. Trump is a conservative, albeit a dangerously erratic one.