Thank You very much Donald Trump!!!

Most of the stuff on your list you have posted up he has either put as fake news or can't be stuffed doing.
Promises need to be kept.
He's now going through an impeachment review.

 

Everything? Funny, I don't ever remember learning about the founding fathers gathering inspiration from the Iroquois Confederacy to form the new nation. I do remember learning all about slavery, and that it was literally the one and only reason the Civil War was fought. And all the evils of colonialism from those textbooks. And being forced to recite the super socialist Pledge of Allegiance every morning. I also remember October 12th 1992, the 500th anniversary of Columbus landing his boat, and how hyped up that day was as we were all indoctrinated that it was HE who discovered America, and that every society on earth was Flat Earther until Columbus changed everything. Of course I had to unlearn that bullshit later in life though. Too bad so many Americans believe otherwise.

 

Then why is the left's answer to every problem either one of two things:
1: A new regulation
2: Expanding a governmental entity

It's government supremacy. That's why

 

I was gonna neglect this post from a few days ago, but then I got inspired again:

Right here:

Which is why this discussion started in the first place. We've gone over this before. It's like talking to a non-playable character in an online video game.

Far left talking points like this led us to Kappernick convincing the whole country and most of the sheep on this board that the Betsy Ross flag is a hate symbol. As well as getting idiots like Pete Buttegghead saying we should tear down founding father monuments and rename places named after Thomas Jefferson and the rest of the founders. All because of this revisionist history that's constantly propagated in far-left circle jerks. Sure, let's discredit everything the founders did, and everything the country accomplished in 200 years, by painting it ALL as a white supremacist motive. All because slavery existed for a while .

[/QUOTE]

 

It’s a gross over simplification to say that socialists just want more regulations. Many just want a culture of government that recognizes community interests and is not bought and paid for by the ultra wealthy. Unfortunately may extreme capitalists want power according to their wealth and concentrated accordingly. We the people means the 1% don’t have a disproportionate say in our government.

 

Welcome to America. And I'm not actually bellyaching since I avoid the place. I know the score and I was not even slightly disparaging people like your relatives, so don't try to manufacture false outrage at nothing please, it sets a shitty example. If you think everybody at the VA gets the same consideration, you're not as involved as you seem to want me to think you are.

 

Thats never what you usually get with socialists though, they just turn into fat cats and hoard everthing for themselves...as well as implementing many policies that are the same as what the conservatives are doing just under a different name

 

It's taking care of problems neglected by, and cleaning up messes left by, the private sector, that's why.

 

While I don't claim to be an expert on Persian history, I think you'll find that what I said about Cyrus is accurate. Did you read the Boyce book I mentioned? I never said there was no slavery in the Persian empire before the Arab conquest. I simply was talking about the situation in the Achaemenid empire under Cyrus.That empire was long gone by the time the Arabs took over. The empire that immediately preceded them in Persia was the Sassanians, who seem to have made slaves of non-Zoroastrian combatants, as I previously explained. That shouldn't diminsh Cyrus' achievement, which was remarkable for the time. As for the Western world, if we credit Enlightened forms Judeo-Christianity with finally moving against slavery, as I did, a balanced view would also mention that fundamentalist forms of Christianity in the Southern U.S. used the Bible to justify it. You seem to be very selectively obscuring that important part of history and seem to be keenly interested in accentuating the positive role of Christianity while whitewashing the darker side. To suit your polemical goals?

 

Well, if you dont want those things done, and he didnt do them

Then what are you whingeing about?

 

I know nuffin riles me up more than someone not doing something I didn't want them to do in the first place.

 

Yes, thank you Donald trump for being the most stupid, ignorant, cruel, and inept President of all-time, as described in the new tell-all book "A Warning" written by anonymous

Senior Trump administration officials considered resigning en masse last year in a “midnight self-massacre” to sound a public alarm about President Trump’s conduct, but rejected the idea because they believed
it would further destabilize an already teetering government, according to a new book by an unnamed author.

In “A Warning” by Anonymous, obtained by The Washington Post ahead of its release, a writer described only as “a senior official in the Trump administration” paints a chilling portrait of the president as cruel,
inept and a danger to the nation he was elected to lead.

 

Srg

This gives the impression that those opposing these Christians were not also Christians – you could as easily reverse what you state

Nonetheless, in the Western world, Christianity was the thing that supported the Wests desire to keep slavery. And remember that the KKK was formed as a Christian movement.

Anyone doing any research would see that – if anything is was the move away from traditionally religious forms of thinking that had grown out of the enlightenment that changed things. It is interesting that also includes free market thinking (that saw slavery as a more expensive system than a waged based one) and socialist ideas of equality (I mean you mention the Quakers and many see them as an early example of a protosocialist movement.)

If you actually take out religion form the mix - because there were Christians on both sides - it quickly becomes clear this was a matter of money, capitalism, Britain made a fortune out of the slave trade (look at Bristol and Liverpool to name but two) and a lot of old money was tied to the trade it was that wealth that fought against the abolition of slavery.

So it could be better argued that it was established capital against a populist movement of the poorer and working class seeking greater equality in general tied to new economic ideas taking hold especially amongst the middle classes.

 

6

LOL Wow you sound like some toothless crone sitting out back on the porch in a rocking chair and gobbing into a spittoon and droning on about young people today

 

6

So your answer to tackling a problem is what – do nothing.

I mean every time you’ve put up ‘free market’ alternatives to government they have fallen almost immediately on their arse.

Look how can we take your criticisms of government (and lefties) seriously when your alternatives can’t be taken seriously?

You rant and rave but you have little to nothing to actually contribute, you have no answers or solutions, you just moan at those who have or are trying to find some. It’s just sad.

 

No, I've not read Boyce's book, or, frankly, even heard of it. I'll try to check it out and maybe put it on a wish list- perhaps you could write a review of it on HP (please let me know if you do). As I recall, you did say Persia ended slavery- perhaps better wording would have been that is stopped it for some period of time. Nonetheless, I will agree Zoroastrianism had some remarkable qualities (Wikipedia credits them with the concept of free will, an idea that challenged the Western Enlightenment), along with another, much later Persian religion, Bahais (whose "Vatican" today is in Israel). I don't know that a general prohibition of slavery really seeped into the social and legal traditions of Persians, but yes, Cyrus' achievement was notable. Nonetheless, I gather we have few records from Achaemenids and rely mainly on Greek and Hebrew sources for information about them. It seems to me a slender reed on which to base sweeping judgments.

As for Christian scripture being used to support slavery, yes, that ugly history does exist. I deem it to be an abuse of Jesus Christ's message. Well there has been a lot of that in history. I will point out that at one point, the Vatican declared that Indians in Latin America did not have souls: that gave the conquistadors pretty much free reign. Much of historical Christianity cannot be defended. But the fact that rejection of the very concept of souls being necessary to justify the awful things that were done points to the vital role played by the recognition of souls in freeing the Western world from the scourge of slavery.

I hope not to drive you away with this, but I'm actually enjoying our interaction now!

 

.