JayJayH

Great point.
 
Whenever you deny someone equality based on factors they themselves cannot choose, you are empowering them in the long run. "Gay pride" exists as a direct result of oppression of gay people. It is legitimized by perceptions of current oppression of gay people. "Black pride" as a direct result of historic oppression of black Americans. Groups like BLM etc. are legitimized by perceptions of current oppression of black people. White nationalism and "white pride" is flourishing and is to many legitimized by perceptions of oppression of white people.
 
The far left race baiting machine are a bunch of useful idiots to the far right, just as how far right nutjobs are useful idiots to the far left.
This article nailed it: "How anti-white rhetoric is fueling white nationalism."

Honestly, the only way to end racism is for the mainstream to accept the following:
 
"Black people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Hispanics are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Asians are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"White people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
 
The far right does not abide by these rules. White supremacist groups are more than willing to attack people for their skin color, and websites like the Daily Stormer have no problem making that known. That's why they should be condemned, should be ostracized and shamed, and that's why you should be called out as a terrible person if you belong to any of those groups or share their sympathies. If you want a racially pure utopia, then perhaps you should yell at your grandparents for immigrating to a melting pot and leave the rest of us alone.
 
Meanwhile, far leftist media publications have no problems running stories declaring  "The white guy problem", "I don't know what to do with good white people", "10 things white people need to stop doing", and this beauty from Salon - "White men must be stopped: The very future of the planet depends on it" etc. I have not seen a Democrat public official condemn attitudes like this. Anywhere. A common thread is that "white people are not marginalized" in America - And this may be true. But unless this type of prejudiced nonsense is condemned for the trash it is, folks on the left are making a damn good job of convincing white Americans that they are marginalized.
 
Far right = racist trash.
Far left = race baiting trash at best, racist trash at worst.

This is what the far left does not understand about the current topic of race.
 
Neo-Nazis, the KKK, white supremacists groups etc. exist on the far fringes of the far right. They regularly receive swift, public condemnation from virtually every GOP politician. Even Trump's "support" for these groups was mostly an unhinged tirade of "they're disgusting", mixed in with a highly inappropriate "some good people on both sides." Trump's response was amateurish and weak, you can never condemn the KKK too much, but it was a condemnation nonetheless. Not a perfect analogy, but I cannot picture for one second that someone, even in Trump's circles, would ever apologize for tweeting a picture of a black 3-year-old because it triggered some racist nutjob somewhere.
 
What much of the left doesn't seem to understand is that their own talk about race has probably done more damage to race relations than some right-wing fringe group could ever do. Race mongers complaining about the skin color of a 3-year-old in an ACLU shirt used to exist on the fringes of the far left, ignored to death by the mainstream DNC. They are no longer the fringes. This lunatic may not represent a majority of ACLU members, but the fact that she actually received an apology from the ACLU is the type of divisive attitude that got Trump elected president in the first place. Essentially, what the ACLU said was "we understand how a white child can be offensive." What the ACLU's response should have been was "we're not sorry for a 3-year-old's skin color." Period.

Gotta tailor the responses to the audience. 

Great point.
 
Whenever you deny someone equality based on factors they themselves cannot choose, you are empowering them in the long run. "Gay pride" exists as a direct result of oppression of gay people. It is legitimized by perceptions of current oppression of gay people. "Black pride" as a direct result of historic oppression of black Americans. Groups like BLM etc. are legitimized by perceptions of current oppression of black people. White nationalism and "white pride" is flourishing and is to many legitimized by perceptions of oppression of white people.
 
The far left race baiting machine are a bunch of useful idiots to the far right, just as how far right nutjobs are useful idiots to the far left.
This article nailed it: "How anti-white rhetoric is fueling white nationalism."

Honestly, the only way to end racism is for the mainstream to accept the following:
 
"Black people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Hispanics are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Asians are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"White people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
 
The far right does not abide by these rules. White supremacist groups are more than willing to attack people for their skin color, and websites like the Daily Stormer have no problem making that known. That's why they should be condemned, should be ostracized and shamed, and that's why you should be called out as a terrible person if you belong to any of those groups or share their sympathies. If you want a racially pure utopia, then perhaps you should yell at your grandparents for immigrating to a melting pot and leave the rest of us alone.
 
Meanwhile, far leftist media publications have no problems running stories declaring  "The white guy problem", "I don't know what to do with good white people", "10 things white people need to stop doing", and this beauty from Salon - "White men must be stopped: The very future of the planet depends on it" etc. I have not seen a Democrat public official condemn attitudes like this. Anywhere. A common thread is that "white people are not marginalized" in America - And this may be true. But unless this type of prejudiced nonsense is condemned for the trash it is, folks on the left are making a damn good job of convincing white Americans that they are marginalized.
 
Far right = racist trash.
Far left = race baiting trash at best, racist trash at worst.

Honestly, the only way to end racism is for the mainstream to accept the following:
 
"Black people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Hispanics are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Asians are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"White people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
 
The far right does not abide by these rules. White supremacist groups are more than willing to attack people for their skin color, and websites like the Daily Stormer have no problem making that known. That's why they should be condemned, should be ostracized and shamed, and that's why you should be called out as a terrible person if you belong to any of those groups or share their sympathies. If you want a racially pure utopia, then perhaps you should yell at your grandparents for immigrating to a melting pot and leave the rest of us alone.
 
Meanwhile, far leftist media publications have no problems running stories declaring  "The white guy problem", "I don't know what to do with good white people", "10 things white people need to stop doing", and this beauty from Salon - "White men must be stopped: The very future of the planet depends on it" etc. I have not seen a Democrat public official condemn attitudes like this. Anywhere. A common thread is that "white people are not marginalized" in America - And this may be true. But unless this type of prejudiced nonsense is condemned for the trash it is, folks on the left are making a damn good job of convincing white Americans that they are marginalized.
 
Far right = racist trash.
Far left = race baiting trash at best, racist trash at worst.

Honestly, the only way to end racism is for the mainstream to accept the following:
 
"Black people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Hispanics are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"Asians are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
"White people are bad" = Unacceptable. Period.
 
The far right does not abide by these rules. White supremacist groups are more than willing to attack people for their skin color, and websites like the Daily Stormer have no problem making that known. That's why they should be condemned, should be ostracized and shamed, and that's why you should be called out as a terrible person if you belong to any of those groups or share their sympathies. If you want a racially pure utopia, then perhaps you should yell at your grandparents for immigrating to a melting pot and leave the rest of us alone.
 
Meanwhile, far leftist media publications have no problems running stories declaring  "The white guy problem", "I don't know what to do with good white people", "10 things white people need to stop doing", and this beauty from Salon - "White men must be stopped: The very future of the planet depends on it" etc. I have not seen a Democrat public official condemn attitudes like this. Anywhere. A common thread is that "white people are not marginalized" in America - And this may be true. But unless this type of prejudiced nonsense is condemned for the trash it is, folks on the left are making a damn good job of convincing white Americans that they are marginalized.
 
Far right = racist trash.
Far left = race baiting trash at best, racist trash at worst.

This is what the far left does not understand about the current topic of race.
 
Neo-Nazis, the KKK, white supremacists groups etc. exist on the far fringes of the far right. They regularly receive swift, public condemnation from virtually every GOP politician. Even Trump's "support" for these groups was mostly an unhinged tirade of "they're disgusting", mixed in with a highly inappropriate "some good people on both sides." Trump's response was amateurish and weak, you can never condemn the KKK too much, but it was a condemnation nonetheless. Not a perfect analogy, but I cannot picture for one second that someone, even in Trump's circles, would ever apologize for tweeting a picture of a black 3-year-old because it triggered some racist nutjob somewhere.
 
What much of the left doesn't seem to understand is that their own talk about race has probably done more damage to race relations than some right-wing fringe group could ever do. Race mongers complaining about the skin color of a 3-year-old in an ACLU shirt used to exist on the fringes of the far left, ignored to death by the mainstream DNC. They are no longer the fringes. This lunatic may not represent a majority of ACLU members, but the fact that she actually received an apology from the ACLU is the type of divisive attitude that got Trump elected president in the first place. Essentially, what the ACLU said was "we understand how a white child can be offensive." What the ACLU's response should have been was "we're not sorry for a 3-year-old's skin color." Period.

They should apologize for their apology.

More examples of absolute politically correct abject stupidity
 
ESPN confirmed Tuesday it had decided to pull play-by-play announcer Robert Lee from the University of Virginia's Sept. 2 football game with William & Mary because it might be seen as insensitive because of the similarity of the announcer's name to Confederate General Robert E. Lee.
"We collectively made the decision with Robert to switch games as the tragic events in Charlottesville were unfolding, simply because of the coincidence of his name," ESPN's statement read, according to Clay Travis, host of Fox Sports Radio's "Outkick the Coverage."--"Snip"
 
 
 
 
 
https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/espn-asian-announcer-robert-lee/2017/08/22/id/809177/

More people like this need a voice. It's clear though the left only uses superficial aspects of humanity to play up their image of advocating rights and tolerance, but its clear by their violent approach to different viewpoints they're the worst people to be looking at as rolemodels for diversity. 

I think that last part is wrong. There are plenty of secular, moderate Muslims who just want to live normal, daily lives, pray a bit here and there and get rid of the scourge that is Islamic orthodoxy. Unfortunately they're often silenced. British former Islamist extremist Maajid Nawaz is one of the people who changed my mind about this. His book Radical was excellent. Unfortunately, many of the left's ideal 'moderate Muslims' are religious ultraconservatives who don't like violence, but have no problem trying to insert religious orthodoxy into mainstream society either.
 
What a lot of folks on the left like to do is to take the Pat Buchanan religious types and pass them off as 'moderate' because they don't promote violence but still fit the picture of different enough to be diverse. That's how you end up with liberals applauding sharia apologist, hijab-wielding women like Linda Sarsour as symbols of feminism.
 
Unfortunately, you rarely ever see true moderate/secularists in mainstream media here in the U.S.
Especially after the Southern Poverty Law Center labeled Maajid Nawaz an islamophobic "Anti-Muslim Extremist."
 
 
 
 
 

I think that last part is wrong. There are plenty of secular, moderate Muslims who just want to live normal, daily lives, pray a bit here and there and get rid of the scourge that is Islamic orthodoxy. Unfortunately they're often silenced. British former Islamist extremist Maajid Nawaz is one of the people who changed my mind about this. His book Radical was excellent. Unfortunately, many of the left's ideal 'moderate Muslims' are religious ultraconservatives who don't like violence, but have no problem trying to insert religious orthodoxy into mainstream society either.
 
What a lot of folks on the left like to do is to take the Pat Buchanan religious types and pass them off as 'moderate' because they don't promote violence but still fit the picture of different enough to be diverse. That's how you end up with liberals applauding sharia apologist, hijab-wielding women like Linda Sarsour as symbols of feminism.
 
Unfortunately, you rarely ever see true moderate/secularists in mainstream media here in the U.S.
Especially after the Southern Poverty Law Center labeled Maajid Nawaz an islamophobic "Anti-Muslim Extremist."
 
 
 
 
 

I also think he's a terrible president, perhaps first and foremost for his lack of decency and failure to unequivocally and unapologetically denounce nazis on day one.
But it doesn't work that way. We live in a completely echo chambered world, where what you read and what people who support him read are completely different versions of reality.
 
Have a person read Slate for a month, and another read Breitbart for a month. One is going to believe everyone around him is an undercover klansman, while the other is going to believe all of his neighbors are slowly succumbing to sharia law. One is going to believe merely being a white male makes them a klansman lest they repent. The other is going to believe that white people are on the way to becoming slaves, lest something is done. They're not going to agree on anything, even objective, factual truths.
 
The main problem here is that Trump won the election in a clear electoral college victory - Meaning a larger geographic swathe of the country wanted him than Hillary Clinton in the White House. Even by popular vote he won nearly half. If he is impeached, then that's one thing, but the folks who voted for him are still going to number in the tens of millions, and they aren't going to change their minds about politics. Die hard Trump supporters have about as much faith in the RNC as die hard Bernie bros have in the DNC. The only way to really avoid future Trumps, or a left-wing lunatic version of Trump is to control the fringes of our own sides.
 
It's the GOP's job to call out hypocrisy and crazies on the far right. I don't trust a Republican who doesn't call out or acknowledge lunacy on the far right.
It's the Dems' job to call out hypocrisy and crazies on the far left. I don't trust a Democrat who doesn't call out or acknowledge lunacy on the far left.
 
Right now the fringes on both sides are being used as the useful idiots they are.

The far left no longer cares about MLK's actual vision. They only care about the MLK brand.
The vision is simple: Judge a person by the content of his/her xir (lol sorry I had to) character. Period.
The brand is malleable to your ideological needs.
 
If they cared about MLK's vision, they wouldn't be sizing people up by skin color, gender and sexual orientation, and there would be no regressive identitarian hierarchy of victimhood.
 
This is the point though - I don't think it would be out of bounds to call a school in Boston a "historically Irish school", or a school in Brooklyn a "historically Jewish school" if it was primarily attended by Irish or Jewish Americans historically. I actually graduated from a Lutheran college that was traditionally and historically Scandinavian. African-American is not just primarily a skin color, but a distinct culture with a shared history, cuisine and linguistic traits. Much like Italian-Americans, Russian-Americans, Japanese-Americans or what have you. I don't like hyphenated Americanism - We're all American first regardless of skin color (not me, because no N-400 yet), but you can't talk about American history without at least some mention of ancestry. Most white Americans can trace their ancestry back to countries, regions, even specific villages in Poland/Sweden/Italy/Croatia/Scotland etc.
 
If most black Americans had arrived through Ellis Island from Nigeria, Congo, Cameroon, Sierra Leone etc., and could trace their ancestry, it would be a different story. There would be no pan-African culture, cuisine or language. There would be Nigerian-Americans, Congolese-Americans etc. That didn't happen. West Africans were gathered by Arab and Atlantic slave traders and sold as slaves to work on plantations in Brazil, harems in the Middle East, cotton fields in the American south etc. Their culture, language and histories were erased.
 
Historically black colleges came about because of racial segregation, and that is why they are still primarily black.

Yep.
 
Honestly, it's just sad altogether. It makes absolutely no sense to try to erase one of the most decisive eras in American history. You can't know American history or government if you don't know or understand the civil war. On the other hand, it's extremely difficult not to when you get neo-nazi trash using them as some sort of martyr shrines.
 
That being said, I cannot take CAIR seriously when I haven't seen any push from CAIR to erase all history related to 1,000 years of the Arab slave trade.

On the one hand, I agree that the Civil War monuments aren't inherently a problem for most. They memorialize a horriffic but important moment in our shared history. The issue is that some people are of the belief that they honor individuals most decidedly fighting for the morally wrong side, but whom some people believe are fallen heros who deserved victory, and thus are seen as some sort of shrine to people possessed of similar beliefs to the Nazi's, Fascists and White Supremacist types leading the torchlight parade this weekend.
 
There is a valid argument the memorials are of historical significance. I get that.

The fact that Sweden has screwed itself over on PC and immigration isn't really some sort of unknown phenomenon in Scandinavia. When I talk to liberals in the U.S. about Sweden's problems, I often get accused of "watching too much Fox News." The reason Donald Trump can get away with "last night in Sweden" is because Sweden has tremendous problems directly resulting from its open immigration policy, and no one covers it for fear of 'playing into right-wing propaganda.' If people on the left were more honest about these things, Trump and Europe's rapidly growing populist movements wouldn't get away with half their bs.
 
'No-go zones' and the spread of Islamism in Swedish suburbs aren't a Fox News conspiracy. They're a well known and openly discussed problem in Scandinavia. It's ok to discuss this. It doesn't make you a Trump supporter or racist or other terrible things.
 
"There are actual morality guardians going around spitting on girls and mocking them"
 
From Norwegian state broadcasting (Norway's BBC. Not Breitbart) - Turn on CC and don't mind the terrible translation:
 
 

The fact that Sweden has screwed itself over on PC and immigration isn't really some sort of unknown phenomenon in Scandinavia. When I talk to liberals in the U.S. about Sweden's problems, I often get accused of "watching too much Fox News." The reason Donald Trump can get away with "last night in Sweden" is because Sweden has tremendous problems directly resulting from its open immigration policy, and no one covers it for fear of 'playing into right-wing propaganda.' If people on the left were more honest about these things, Trump and Europe's rapidly growing populist movements wouldn't get away with half their bs.
 
'No-go zones' and the spread of Islamism in Swedish suburbs aren't a Fox News conspiracy. They're a well known and openly discussed problem in Scandinavia. It's ok to discuss this. It doesn't make you a Trump supporter or racist or other terrible things.
 
"There are actual morality guardians going around spitting on girls and mocking them"
 
From Norwegian state broadcasting (Norway's BBC. Not Breitbart) - Turn on CC and don't mind the terrible translation:
 
 

The fact that Sweden has screwed itself over on PC and immigration isn't really some sort of unknown phenomenon in Scandinavia. When I talk to liberals in the U.S. about Sweden's problems, I often get accused of "watching too much Fox News." The reason Donald Trump can get away with "last night in Sweden" is because Sweden has tremendous problems directly resulting from its open immigration policy, and no one covers it for fear of 'playing into right-wing propaganda.' If people on the left were more honest about these things, Trump and Europe's rapidly growing populist movements wouldn't get away with half their bs.
 
'No-go zones' and the spread of Islamism in Swedish suburbs aren't a Fox News conspiracy. They're a well known and openly discussed problem in Scandinavia. It's ok to discuss this. It doesn't make you a Trump supporter or racist or other terrible things.
 
"There are actual morality guardians going around spitting on girls and mocking them"
 
From Norwegian state broadcasting (Norway's BBC. Not Breitbart) - Turn on CC and don't mind the terrible translation:
 
 

He also didn't win the Nathan's hotdog eating contest or the Mr. Universe contest because he wasn't in those contests either.

LOL. Jay likes Trump. Some people can't comprehend people with an open mind and an independent thought.

Two hours saved.