Politics "WOKE" America

The downfall of this country will not come because of wokeness. It will come because of the far right crazies that are ready to have another civil war. Just to be clear I am against reparations and I am also any more preferential treatment for blacks, hispanics and women. I am for preferential treatment of poor people no matter their gender or race. I am also against open borders and for much stricter control of immigration and against chain migration. BTW I do not blindly follow the Dems or the Pubs and I criticize them both rather liberally. I have had a lot of Pub friends until they went overboard for Trump.
 
Edited for refusal to accept moderation.
 
The downfall of this country will not come because of woeness. It will come because of the far right crazies. Just to be clear I am against reparations and I am also any more preferential treatment for blacks, hispanics and women. BTW I do not blindly follow the Dems and the Pubs and I criticize them both rather liberally. I have had a lot of Pub friends until they went overboard for Trump.

The very fact you use Pubs instead of Republicans shows your true colors.

That's my last response to you. You're back on ignore.

Why do I keep on giving people second and third choices, thinking I might have a reasonable debate with someone, from which we both might actually learn something?

It's all just tribalism nowadays.

Btw, never voted for Trump ONCE. Sat out both presidential elections. Just couldn't vote for any of them.

Hope the Always Trump people were happy about how he lost the good fight because of his own stupidity, and hope the other tribe is going to be real happy with the mess Biden, their guy, is going to make of this country, or maybe I should say whoever is really calling the shots, because Biden should be home in bed or in a nursing home. I saw some video footage of him walking to a podium this morning and I honest to Christ felt so sorry for him; he can't even walk properly, much less chew gum at the same time, or construct a coherent sentence even if sitting down. Are people blind and deaf that they don't see that he's not right?
 
Edited by moderator.

I tell someone I'm removing his post for refusal to submit to moderation, and you quote it?

Are you in your right senses?
 
Edited for refusal to submit to moderation.
 
and in return, there are also no noble civilized people.



i'm not going to comment on whether people in america should have Columbus day or not, but that comparision is not exactly accurate. if those statues of germanic conquerors would be standing in italian cities because of large germanic populations still living there and admiring/celebrating those conquerors then it would be more comparable.

To be honest, I’m not a big fan of Columbus. The truth, however, is that history cannot be simplified into such blackness and whiteness. We can't negate his contributions to the world, such as knowledge of the Western Hemisphere and expansive knowledge of new cultures, farming techniques and technologies. With that being said, we shouldn't glorify flawed individuals like Columbus nor seek into minimizing the suffering he brought upon the indigenous people and Africans either. The thing is, that the history about Columbus has undergone many revisions and been interpreted by historians in a variety of ways. So, I kinda understand why he is vilified by Indigenous rights groups today. On the other hand, I also understand why the Italian Americans are protective of the Columbus Day. Hence, I do believe that there should be a separated holiday for indigenous people. Columbus Day was recognized in 1892 by President Harrison as a national holiday to mark the 400th anniversary of the discovery by Columbus. This holiday was recognized in part to address the fierce prejudice, widespread discrimination and the lynching’s Italian Americans faced in the America of the time. Thus, Columbus Day is an integral part of the American and Italian American heritage. It was created to affirm the US as a “nation of immigrants.” So, Columbus Day allows Italian Americans to collectively celebrate their coming to America. Therefore, it's not good to take away one group’s day of celebration and replace it with another group’s day of protest. The movement to replace Columbus Day puts Italo-Americans and Amerindians on a collision course. What I find highly problematic and unacceptable are the destruction or removal of monuments, statues and erasure of history by leftists. Woke leftists are trying to rewrite American history by forcing a name change for the Columbus Day. They try to erase Columbus from History.
 
You are not alone ... similar things are happening in Latin America. Because of the October 12 holiday, in almost all the countries of the continent all kinds of diatribes are said and written against Christopher Columbus and the Spaniards. They speak of genocide, and how idyllic the life of the natives was before the arrival of the colonizers. We all know that real brutalities happened during colonization ... but centuries passed, and the realities changed. Today there are countries with a common cultural heritage and language, and there was a miscegenation that is present throughout the continent. What should we who are the product of that mixture do ... commit suicide? The descendants of pure Europeans ... should they be deported to Europe? What to do with the descendants of Africans?
Isn't it time to leave history to be studied in books ... and look to the future?
 
You are not alone ... similar things are happening in Latin America. Because of the October 12 holiday, in almost all the countries of the continent all kinds of diatribes are said and written against Christopher Columbus and the Spaniards. They speak of genocide, and how idyllic the life of the natives was before the arrival of the colonizers. We all know that real brutalities happened during colonization ... but centuries passed, and the realities changed. Today there are countries with a common cultural heritage and language, and there was a miscegenation that is present throughout the continent. What should we who are the product of that mixture do ... commit suicide? The descendants of pure Europeans ... should they be deported to Europe? What to do with the descendants of Africans?
Isn't it time to leave history to be studied in books ... and look to the future?

Italo, one can always count on you to be a voice of reason.

Bless you.
 
Edited by moderator.

I tell someone I'm removing his post for refusal to submit to moderation, and you quote it?

Are you in your right senses?

what is this about ?


was this about catalans ?
 
what is this about ?
was this about catalans ?

My apologies; I only meant to remove the quote of Wanderer's statement which I EXPLICITLY said was deleted for refusal to submit to moderation.

Your statement had something to do with the fact you were taught Columbus was a Catalan. Where? In Australia?

I'd be very interested to see a citation showing that's what is taught in Australian schools. Or is this just more sticking it in the eye of the Genovese by a "Venetian", as you've done before.

Btw, as a point of curiosity, were you born in the Veneto or are you a second generation Australian of Veneto descent? I've always meant to ask. That would certainly explain your inability to read and write in Italian or to know Italian history.

No offense, of course; it's just good to know how much knowledge actually is behind people's statements.
 
Well, there's a precise statement for you: a hell of a lot of them were...

Thank you Mr. Obvious. Anyone who has taken American History knows that some of the signers of the Constitution were in favor of slavery and that's why those clauses are in the Constitution.

A debate takes two opposing sides, or doesn't it?

How do the opinions of one side of the debate invalidate the efforts of those who wanted it banned, at a time when in many places in the Americas it was still being practiced? Hell, how much better was the serfdom practiced until the early part of the 20th century in Eastern Europe.

Indeed, how does that invalidate what I said, which is that our children are being taught that all the Founding Fathers were slave owners and/or were in favor of slavery? That ok with you? You don't think that's a lie?

Get a grip and give some thought to the times in which they lived, and stop judging the people of the past by the standards of today. Give them the credit for being eons ahead of where other political ideologies wound up, which was using the guillotine to bring about democracy.

As for Washington, you besmirch him by using a simplistic reduction of what was a complicated man and situation. If one reads his private papers as well as the public ones, one can see that his attitude toward slavery changed over the course of his lifetime. He started out a typical southerner of his time, born into slavery, just as much as his slaves were born into it. Over time that changed. " Moral doubt about the institution first appeared in 1778 when Washington expressed reluctance to sell some of his enslaved workers at a public venue or split their families. At war’s end, Washington demanded without success that the British respect the preliminary peace treaty which he said required return of escaped slaves without exception. His public statement on resigning his commission, addressing challenges facing the new confederation, made no explicit mention of slavery. Politically, Washington felt that the divisive issue of American slavery threatened national cohesion, and he never spoke publicly about it. Privately, Washington considered plans in the mid 1790s to free his enslaved population. Those plans failed because of his inability to raise the finances necessary, the refusal of his family to approve emancipation of the dower slaves, and his own aversion to separating enslaved families. His will was widely published upon his death in 1799, and provided for the emancipation of the enslaved population he owned, one of the few slave-owning founders to set them free. Because many of his slaves were married to the dower slaves, whom he could not legally free, the will stipulated that, except for his valet William Lee who was freed immediately, his enslaved workers be emancipated on the death of his wife Martha. She freed them in 1801, a year before her own death, but she had no option to free the dower slaves, who were inherited by her grandchildren."

You might try reading his actual will. I found it quite moving.

We also fought the deadliest war in our history because of slavery, brother against brother, on our own soil. Is that still not enough for you? Or do you want to debate me about whether Lincoln just wanted to save the Union rather than free the slaves? Given the simplicity of your analysis of Washington, I don't doubt it. You'll lose. I've read dozens of books on Lincoln and I assure you I know him and his motivations for every statement he made far better than you do.

Maybe you should go and tell the cities in England which grew fat and rich on the cotton from southern cotton fields to fuel their cloth mills to pay reparations too, or maybe a better idea would be to concentrate on the Arab and African countries where slavery is actually still practiced.

Americans in name only like you make me tired. I have no time to waste in debating people who because of their own indoctrination will oversee the downfall of this country.

WOKEDOM will be the death of this country, and that will be because people like you just don't get it.

And yet, a few years after the bloodiest civil war southern states started to pass laws to undermine the gains that blacks made. In the early 1900s, we have the rise of the KKK, the apotheosis of Robert E Lee and other traitors with statues cropping up in every Southern state, with schools being named after them. Blacks were being lynched, denied voting rights, had to use separate buses or be relegated to the back of the bus, separate bathrooms, separate but equal. Please keep on making excuses for the racism in this country.
 
My apologies; I only meant to remove the quote of Wanderer's statement which I EXPLICITLY said was deleted for refusal to submit to moderation.

Your statement had something to do with the fact you were taught Columbus was a Catalan. Where? In Australia?

I'd be very interested to see a citation showing that's what is taught in Australian schools. Or is this just more sticking it in the eye of the Genovese by a "Venetian", as you've done before.

Btw, as a point of curiosity, were you born in the Veneto or are you a second generation Australian of Veneto descent? I've always meant to ask. That would certainly explain your inability to read and write in Italian or to know Italian history.

No offense, of course; it's just good to know how much knowledge actually is behind people's statements.

We'll have very soon the DNA result of Columbus.


I've already opened a thread about it.


https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...lish-the-true-origins-of-Christopher-Columbus
 
As far as Washington is concerned here are fragments of a wikipedia article on him:

Washington's early views on slavery were no different from any Virginia planter of the time.[51] He demonstrated no moral qualms about the institution, and referred to slaves as "a Species of Property" during those years as he would later in life when he favored abolition.[116] The economics of slavery prompted the first doubts in Washington about the institution, marking the beginning of a slow evolution in his attitude towards it. By 1766, he had transitioned his business from the labor-intensive planting of tobacco to the less demanding farming of grain crops. His slaves were employed on a greater variety of tasks that needed more skills than tobacco planting required of them; as well as the cultivation of grains and vegetables, they were employed in cattle herding, spinning, weaving and carpentry. The transition left Washington with a surplus of slaves and revealed to him the inefficiencies of the slave labor system.[117][118]
There is little evidence that Washington seriously questioned the ethics of slavery before the Revolution.[118]

.................................................................

The historian Henry Wiencek concludes that the repugnance Washington felt at this cruelty in which he had participated prompted his decision not to break up slave families by sale or purchase, and marks the beginning of a transformation in Washington's thinking about the morality of slavery.[121] Wiencek writes that in 1775 Washington took more slaves than he needed rather than break up the family of a slave he had agreed to accept in payment of a debt.[122] The historians Philip D. Morgan and Peter Henriques[e] are skeptical of Wiencek's conclusion and believe there is no evidence of any change in Washington's moral thinking at this stage. Morgan writes that in 1772, Washington was "all business" and "might have been buying livestock" in purchasing more slaves who were to be, in Washington's words, "strait Limb'd, & in every respect strong & likely, with good Teeth & good Countenance". Morgan gives a different account of the 1775 purchase, writing that Washington resold the slave because of the slave's resistance to being separated from family and that the decision to do so was "no more than the conventional piety of large Virginia planters who usually said they did not want to break up slave families – and often did it anyway".[124][125]

As you see, all is not black and white in Washington's attitude towards slavery. Maybe by the time of his death, sensing that the end is near, he found religion so to speak, akin to many old people that become suddenly religious as the end of their lives draws near.
 
while we are on slavery ................I would like to know .............T. Jefferson status
he inherited 52 slaves from his father peter ( on his death )...Thomas was 21yo.

he then got another 135 slaves a year after his marriage to martha ( these are her slaves ) .................due to the death of her father.

Hemmings is from Martha slaves and not Thomas IIRC.

when did he release his 52 slaves and maintain only his wife's 135 slaves ?
 
Italo, one can always count on you to be a voice of reason.

Bless you.

Thank you very much Angela! These moral problems only afflict democratic societies ... dictatorships, whether political or religious, do not have that kind of conflict ... an "official morality" applies, regardless of whether people agree or not. ..
 
The Founding Fathers lived by the norms of their time, many of them were Visionaries, though Pragmatics, … they could not afford to lose the support of some of the Colonies by enforcing all of the inspiring passages of the Declaration of Independence, … changes of the norms had to wait for future times (it took a Civil War and one and half million dead and later Civil Right movements).

Norms change, … people are products of their time, we of our time, … your Grandparents and their Parents probably had views that would be viewed as extreme today, but were the norm at the time.
 
We'll have very soon the DNA result of Columbus.


I've already opened a thread about it.


https://www.eupedia.com/forum/threa...lish-the-true-origins-of-Christopher-Columbus

It doesn't matter one whit to me what he turns out to be; the principle is the same.

As for the dangers of "Wokedom", I would suggest people pay a visit to Portland to see it in action. My cousin made the mistake of her life choosing to practice there. Not that I didn't tell her it was a huge mistake and she shouldn't do it. The handwriting was on the wall years ago.

The children of immigrants fought for years to be judged on merit, not on our last names or religion or family background or incomeand this is where we end up? Stuyvesant High School should be closed, which taught the bright kids of poor New York families for years, because the vast majority of the students are of White and East Asian descent, and the majority, btw, of East Asian descent? The son or daughter of a struggling Korean fruit and vegetable shop owner isn't a minority for these purposes, of course.

For crying out loud, I had to take an entrance exam to get into my high school decades ago and then it was used to create tracked classes; it worked extremely well. Students who could learn quickly did so, those who couldn't learn as quickly had the time and attention they needed. Not everyone is cut out to go to Harvard. We need bus drivers, and hair cutters, and mechanics, and plumbers and electricians as well as lawyers and doctors and engineers. That's how it works all over Europe, but in the U.S. we're going to insist that every fourteen year old can handle high level math and science? Since when, no matter the race or ethnicity?

What will that do to society, but also what will that do to the students, and not just the really bright ones? Do these adults think the students don't know who can do the work and who can't? They know you're lying to them. Why torture kids who can barely master simple math with trigonometry or calculus? Or are we not going to need engineers any more, or scientists of any sort, so we just won't teach those subjects at all? Or maybe we'll teach them, but so slowly that the talented students will just tune out and not pay attention at all.

Don't the people pushing this not see that the only children who won't be stimulated in school and learn these subjects at the rate they should are the children of the poor? The rich will pay for tutors for their children.

It just proves that when people are brainwashed into an ideology they lose the ability to see reality and use any semblance of common sense.
 
@Torzio you made the WOKE arguments against Jefferson, as if it’s the only thing he ever did. … In a sense Jefferson is literally Our Founding Father (y T)

… you should see the Library, and the Pantheon like Jefferson Memorial, his Statue at the center is huge, surrounded by massive marble engraving of the Declaration of Independence, … You too would feel Proud, I think :)

TE4oueD.jpg
 
@Torzio you made the WOKE arguments against Jefferson, as if it’s the only thing he ever did. … In a sense Jefferson is literally Our Founding Father (y T)

… you should see the Library, and the Pantheon like Jefferson Memorial, his Statue at the center is huge, surrounded by massive marble engraving of the Declaration of Independence, … You too would feel Proud, I think :)

TE4oueD.jpg


what are you talking about

I am only interested on when he released his 52 slaves as he could not release his wife 135 slaves .............hemmings is part of his wife slave group................I thought after her death ( martha ) he would have done something different........maybe he could not , maybe her will stated otherwise

There was an act in some year, where the will could be contested .....I cannot recall when that year was
 

This thread has been viewed 122282 times.

Back
Top