Donald Trump

That's what they said about George W. Bush.

 

​When Nixon resigned I thought I'd never see a worse President. Then George W. Bush proved me wrong. Now we've elected an asshole that Bush wouldn't endorse but the Ku Klux Klan did! Heaven help us all!

 

The kkk is against illegal immigrants. I am OK with them on that issue.
Are you saying you disagree with the kkk on every issue?

 

But this what I don't understand. How is it that the concept that black lives matter as much as white lives and any other lives is harmful? Is it only good that black lives matter less than others?

And what about the reason the movement started----are they just supposed to sit back while black men are being murdered police all over the country? Should it be ok that they get stopped for a broken tail light, and then get killed for no reason? Is it right that they get killed for something as minor as selling single cigarettes on the street? Is it right that a healthy well-balanced female college student who knows her rights, and yet is still arrested despite having done nothing wrong other than to state her rights, and then mysteriously dies in jail? (And the police violence is spilling over into the white communities, which is the point of BLM----that a stand has to be taken and they are taking it for everyone----but nonetheless, it is a far, far worse problem in black communities.)

Is it right that 1 in 17 white males will be incarcerated at some point in their life times, while 1 in 3 black males will be? Or are you saying that black people are basically a bunch of criminals? What about the problem that has been demonstrated over and over and over again that black men go to jail and prison for the exact same crimes that white people get community service and/or probation for.

Isn't the harm already being committed, or should we just maintain the status quo? Is that what the balance is? Do black lives not matter?

Because the message in the election last night was to Make America Great Again---but the vision that is given to us as a great America is the one that conservative America makes out the 1950's to be. That was a country where black people had their own drinking fountains, and could not sit at white counters, and where there were rural towns where all colored people had to leave by sundown.

 

Sure. What has BLM done to improve relations between blacks and the police department? What has BLM done for their community aside from destroying black businesses and neighborhoods with looting and arson?

 

The concept of any life mattering is inherently flawed. Not because it is wrong but because it is in opposition to no lives mattering. If we could find the balance between these two extremes humanity would prosper. Instead we install moral indictments and claim the superiority of one extreme over the other.

 

Some are happy it seems
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0GFRcFm-aY
= Time will tell

 

Because the police have done so much for race relations---so much we have to film them with phones to stop their promotion of race relations. Yes, there are good cops, but there are far too many bad cops, and systemic racism has been found to exist in police departments all over the country.

BLM designed itself after the civil rights movements of the 60's. It uses a confrontational approach because, for some reason crying mothers at funerals demanding a change, or black community leaders speaking out, or black people standing up for their rights as they are unconstitutionally detained (only to be beaten with a baton, tased, or shot for speaking up), does not seem to be getting the word out to anyone about the problem. They have readily expressed that they are willing to sit down and talk, but they are not going to just sit back when the next blak person is unjustifiably killed or tased in hopes that the police will talk with them and make everything all right.

They do not condone looting or arson, and it is against the very ideals they were founded upon. This does not happen at their protests. Looting and arson are features in just about every riot, including those done by white people,such as the labor disputes a century or so ago. Since the 1950's every single riot has occured over racial problems, after some injustice has ignited the anger that has been building up in the ethnic community. BLM is not responsible for the looting and arson, and if we want to place blame, it is certainly no more so than the police departments comitting the injustices.




I think this quote from Wikipedia (Black Lives Matter page), is very telling:

"The U.S. population's perception of Black Lives Matter varies considerably by race. According to a September 2015 poll on race relations, nearly two-thirds of African Americans mostly agree with Black Lives Matter, while 42% of white Americans are unsure or do not have an opinion about Black Lives Matter.[6] Of white people surveyed, 41% thought that Black Lives Matter advocated violence, and 59% of whites thought that Black Lives Matter distracted attention from the real issues of racial discrimination. By comparison, 82% of black people polled thought that Black Lives Matter was a nonviolent movement, and 26% of blacks thought that Black Lives Matter distracted attention from the real issues of racial discrimination."

 

nigga please..

 

Good evening all, I see you've all woken up alive and back on the Internet. Funny that. I thought the world was going to collapse, the planes fall out of the skies and everything else in between but nope, HF still as active as always and the number one topic, straight back to wife sharing!

:seeya:

 

^^^ That all happens in January when Trump takes over.

 

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaa


HAH!

 

Mutha fucker, damn that just looks so wrong

According to the New York Times Trump won over working class white folks. He looks the exact opposite of hero for the working class there

 

No president since 80 was for the working class

 

I understand what you are saying, but in the overly objectivist Modern World that we live in no life matters. To be more exact, every living thing is objectified into nothing more than an object and subject to a market value. We like to think that, at least among loved ones, we have an intrinsic value that makes our life worth more than a market value just by the mere fact that we are alive. But all too often, even that is not the case. It tends to be that who we love, or how we treat even our own children, is culturally programmed into us by a culture whose only true driving force is consumerism. We therefore cheat on spouses, or divorce them, we disown kids, parents are neglected, we screw over siblings…

Trump’s rise to power represents a deepening of this objectivist dialectic----a victory of the Cartesian ego---so long as that ego represents an American white male. I have heard many try to defend his victory as the triumph of anti-globalism rather than a racist, sexist, or xenophobic one. But it doesn’t matter how you paint it, Trump provides an objectification of the rest of the world, locally, nationally, and internationally. He will leave pain and broken souls on everything he touches if he follows through with his campaign promises. Almost every decision a president makes impacts the lives of individuals, usually in very significant ways. The country just handed this control over to a very narcissistic individual who cares only for himself—this is what he has consistently demonstrated his whole life, and anyone who can’t see that is incredibly naïve or quite ignorant.

If I understand what you are saying, you are suggesting that what we need is a balance between the subjective and the objective, placing ‘lives matter’ as the binary opposite of ‘no lives matter.’ But if we live in a world where no lives matter, how can we reach a happy equilibrium without a deconstruction of the ‘no lives matter,’ side, which can only happen by stressing the ‘lives matter’ side of the equation. I would argue, for example, that lives within white communities mattered far more in the America of the late 1800’s than they do now (by white communities, I am excluding minorities as we had a different understanding of race at that time). I would argue that lives mattered far more in the innocence of the 1950’s and 60’s than they do now. There is no moving from a binary opposite of ‘no lives matter’ to a happy equilibrium somewhere in between. We only continue in the same path. There has to be a deconstruction--a swing to the other side, if you will.

In my own philosophy, I agree that we need to find a balance between the objective and the subjective, but that we can only do this through a refocus on the subjective. However I do not see a stress on lives mattering or not mattering. I think it is a natural state that we place an intrinsic value on life (that lives matter), and that a lack of intrinsic value is the result of an alienation from both our own selves, and others. Returning to that natural state, to borrow from Jung, is a process of individuation.

On the other hand we could argue that very, very few people ever achieve any level of individuation in their lifetimes, but we also live in a culture that continuously works against individuation. And presently the very idea of lives mattering or not is defined by a Cartesian ego based industrial age version of the individual. In other words, a belief that individualism equates to a self-centeredness. But if everything is valued subjectively, if the individual is valued intrinsically as an individual, as opposed to an objective other; if every 'other' is an individual, then each individual would be valued highly, much as they are in, for example, indigenous communities. It would be the kind of individualism that existentialism sought (its fatal flaw being that it largely regarded existence as absurd, by taking the ‘necessary being’ out of Leibniz’ Principle of Sufficient Reason). It was the individualism of the hippie, which did try better than any other to date to value diversity and the individual.

In any event, we need a deconstructive dynamic to break down the status quo. Someone. or some group, needs to start saying that their lives matter, and the answer is not that ‘All lives matter,’ which rejects the premise of the first group that their lives matter as much as anyone else’s. The correct response should be, ‘yes your life matters as much as ours, so let’s work to make that happen.’

 

To your first I would reply that both extremes are inherently natural and that both are constants in various forms in our accepted reality. They are spontaneous as is all else existing in the moment of being.

We are primarily in agreement about Trump however I would say that his being now is simple manifestation of the same balance of spontaneity. Regarding object and subject I see this inherent balance in nature however as may be evident i see natural balance in everything and nothing. As such I do not see needing to find that balance only to accept it as being.

Life only exists in these moments of spontaneity or at least only singular life otherwise called Self. This is my chosen point of view. All views are natural and therefore all are flawed and perfect inherently. To me this is the Way of nature the Tao if you will forgive me further naming. What say you?

 

Anyway, like I was sayin', shrimp is the fruit of the sea. You can barbecue it, boil it, broil it, bake it, saute it. Dey's uh, shrimp-kabobs, shrimp creole, shrimp gumbo. Pan fried, deep fried, stir-fried. There's pineapple shrimp, lemon shrimp, coconut shrimp, pepper shrimp, shrimp soup, shrimp stew, shrimp salad, shrimp and potatoes, shrimp burger, shrimp sandwich. That- that's about it...