Cool story, bro

Snapshots:

1. This Post - archive.org, megalodon.jp*, ceddit.com, archive.is*

^{I am a bot. (Info / Contact)}

SMH TBH FAM.

How much more fucking low effort can you get?

This much more

https://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/6761zn/alright_guys_ill_finally_post_bussy_here_ya_go/

The tell tale sign of low effort:

sorted by controversial

I guess I could have not bothered to sort.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Drama/comments/65iimf/dortmund_bomb_attack_possibly_not_by_islamists/

I'll postshittier next time.

How about if you just don't bother to live? That would probably be for the best.

Lots of bad history in that thraed

People unironically saying the confederates were democrats need to take a long, hard look at a history textbook.

No, they need to be put down.

Am I missing something? They were mostly dems and whigs.

Factually, they were democrats, but there was a party switch where Republicans and Democrats switched ideals.

A good example of that is Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, who fought for working class Americans.

When I think of people who fight for working class Americans, I definitely don't think of the modern day federal Republican.

Factually, they were democrats,

contrast that with

People unironically saying the confederates were democrats need to take a long, hard look at a history textbook.

so, history says they were dems. history also says that ideology has changed. those two things are separate, yet equal, much like the schools before integration

My first comment was meant as a rebuttal who compare dems from 1800 with dems from today.

And the democrats, while not much better at fighting for working class rights, are at least not trying to take my healthcare away.

dems already priced me out of the healthcare market. thanks, obama. didn't get to keep my provider. prices skyrocketed up. free market all the way bud

you should get a job with benefits man

I'm retired!

If you can’t afford healthcare, it’s your fault. Don’t make excuses for your laziness.

Fuck your healthcare and fuck you leech.

Ow, the edge.

It's only the truth. Get a real job and pay for your own shit.

I doubt an actual leech could speak english, let alone use a keyboard.

Don't be ableist.

Man if only we had universal healthcare then you wouldn't have premiums like that.

I enjoy not dying of cancer waiting 10 months to visit a doctor, but thanks.

What makes you think you'll wait 10 months?

It's generally true, and in many cases, after the system busts, care standards go down. If I relied on "universal healthcare" here I would be a leg amputee after an accident. Instead, I had to pay 20000€ at a private hospital for surgery.

Nonsense, free healthcare has the same or better outcomes for less money, statisically. The US is the outlier.

Do you prefer dying of hunger after the surgery costs more than your net worth?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

It's simple. I care about my health more than that of obese binge drinking smoker amerifats. u mad?

ah, the classic "people getting ill is their own fault"

I mean, I'd support universal healthcare if we can exclude the fatties and smokers.

ah, the classic "people getting ill is solely their own fault"

Factually, they were democrats, but there was a party switch where Republicans and Democrats switched ideals.

This is demonstrably untrue for several reasons.

A good example of that is Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican before the switch, who fought for working class Americans.

When did Teddy Roosevelt become a democrat? He ran on a third party ticket because he was miffed that the republicans wouldn't nominate him.

this is demonstrably untrue for several reasons doesn't list a single one

wew

Well, I didn't want to bore anyone with a serious post, but if you insist...

While the south did change from reliably democrat to reliably republican, that doesn't indicate the sort of "flip-flop" some people describe. The Southern Realignment, as some call it, was the result of many factors ranging from demographic shifts to economic expansion due to industrialization. While the electoral shift becomes obvious during the late 60s/early 70s, those making this argument are trying to attribute a complex electoral change that happened over the course of decades to a single issue (race) in a much shorter period of time (five or ten years in the late 60s/early 70s).

Many people who make this argument seem to be saying that every "racist democrat" became a "racist republican." That's just doesn't make a lot of sense when you have more information and seriously think about it. In the first place, most of the people who were voting democrat in the south prior to 1970 are dead. More importantly, this particular bit of historical revisionism finds its strongest and deepest roots in the story of Strom Thurmond changing parties after passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Thurmond is held up as the prime example of all those democrats who became republicans. The problem with this is that every other prominent southern democrat, from George Wallace to William Fulbright to Robert C. Byrd remained democrats for decades, most of them until their eventual death.

It would also appear that many who make this argument haven't considered the shift in voting caused by new generations coming to the polls. The children of those old "racist democrats" didn't adopt their parent's politics. On top of that, migration has changed the electorate not just in the south but nationwide. The average person moves 11-12 times during their life, usually due to employment changes. This is not a new thing. You're trying to make a link between people who lived 50-60 years ago in a completely different environment and modern republicans that just doesn't make a lot of sense even under cursory examination.

This shouldn't even be something that needs to be discussed. Trying to hold a group of people or political party accountable for the actions a different set of people undertook 40-80 years is silly on its face. Even if it weren't silly on its face, blaming one party for the actions that no one argues were undertaken by the other is ridiculous in the extreme. This whole "racist democrats became racist republicans" argument only exists for one reason: so that some people can accuse other people of racism in an attempt to avoid having to actually discuss issues. It's the laziest, stupidest kind of partisanship and anyone who engages in it makes Donald Trump look like a Rhodes Scholar.

No one says that the parties switched instantly​.

This whole "racist democrats became racist republicans" argument only exists for one reason: so that some people can accuse other people of racism in an attempt to avoid having to actually discuss issues. It's the laziest, stupidest kind of partisanship and anyone who engages in it makes Donald Trump look like a Rhodes Scholar.

Good God, Fran...

No one says that the parties switched instantly​, the process was slower than that. Nonetheless, Republicans are absolutely the party of racists now. This isn't even a conspiracy theory or anything, this is something people responsible for the switch openly discuss.

...you're dumber than Trump.

You're the one that denied the objective fact that parties switched and Republicans are absolutely the party of racists now.

Man it was just explained to you why that isn't the case...

His explanation was incorrect and deliberately so.

It's not an "objective fact." It's a popular fiction, and one that only exists so that democrats can scapegoat others for the actions of their own party. Lyndon Johnson would not have been able to sign the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if republicans in the House and Senate had not forced its passage. It wasn't republicans who filibustered the bill. It was democrats, and the one most famous for his nearly 20 hours of bluster remained in a position of prominence in the senate until he died in 2010.

It's a popular fiction, and one that only exists so that democrats can scapegoat others for the actions of their own party.

Which is why the fucking GOP admits it happened.

Which is why the fucking GOP admits it happened.

If you're talking about Lee Atwater's alleged "admission" that Nixon's Southern Strategy targeted racist democrats, that's also a popular historical distortion. This one is based on a private interview Atwater granted to a political scientist named Alexander Lamis. You can read the full story of why what you think happened actually didn't here. The Atwater quote everyone says is the "republican admission" of racism was, like a lot of other popular misquotes of republicans, released without its full context until the interview tapes were recently made available. In this case, I think it's forgivable for you to believe this particular tall tale because it wasn't exposed as bullshit until a few years ago.

Lyndon Johnson...

That's nice, but I've already explained to you why this fairy tale isn't any more true than fat men dropping down your chimney with gifts in December. I understand that you're really attached to the Easter Bunny and racist republican boogeymen, but I think you're old enough now that you shouldn't expect a quarter under your pillow after you lose a tooth any more than you should continue to believe something that is patently retarded after it's been thoroughly explained to you why it's retarded.

the "republican admission" of racism was, like a lot of other popular misquotes of republicans, released without its full context until the interview tapes were recently made available.

ah the classic

why are you people doing this every single time? "here's evidence" "that evidence is all you have, pathetic" "here's more and more and more and more evidence" "that evidence is all you have, pathetic"

Because your "evidence" isn't evidence. It's lies, half-truths, distortions, and idiocy. "Why won't you just let me keep believing things that you can prove aren't true?" Because those things aren't true, and the only reasons you cling to them so desperately is because if we take away your ability to play the race card then you actually have to argue with people about issues instead of making weak-ass ad hominen attacks.

And why are you doing this every single time? Your condescension is unwarranted. This is a completely one-sided conversation, and you're consistently on the losing side.

Yes, it's completely one-sided, but not in the way you think. I've explained, using evidence and reason, why you're wrong. All you've done is go "nuh-uh, you're wrong." I even had to provide your example of a (single solitary) republican "admitting" the Southern Strategy was all about race for you. If you're under the impression that the facts don't matter and I'm "consistently on the losing side" because more people agree with you via up/down votes, then sure, pat yourself on the back. It's completely unsurprising that the same people who quote Black Science Man and his "it's still true even if you don't believe it" cover their ears and yell "LALALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" and believe that reality is decided by popular mandate and not the actual facts because you only care about the facts when they support your worldview and toss them dismissively in the trash when they don't.

Because your "evidence" isn't evidence. It's lies, half-truths, distortions, and idiocy.

Once again: your sole counterpoint was linking to a website that calls people libtards for believing in climate change.

Lyndon Johnson would not have been able to sign the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if republicans in the House and Senate had not forced its passage.

This is an example of Simpson's paradox and the fallacy of composition.

If you break down opposition to the CRA by states which were "ex-confederacy" vs "wasn't part of the confederacy", then Democrats in both groups were more likely to support the CRA than Republicans in the same group.

Indeed, many Dixiecrats switched parties over the civil rights movement, including famous examples like Strom Thurmond (who filibustered the CRA for longer than Robert Byrd did) and Jesse Helms.

and the one most famous for his nearly 20 hours of bluster remained in a position of prominence in the senate as a democrat until he died in 2010.

He also completely changed his views on race; apologized repeatedly and extensively over his past; said he was happy to continue apologizing; and in fact changed so thoroughly that the NAACP mourned his death.

I never said Teddy was a democrat.

He was a Republican, who existed, before the switch.

FACT: Whichever party I vote for - unflinchingly, every year - has never done anything bad ever

Stop wasting your vote on the green party.

They could win. Think of it President Roseanne Barr.

Think of it President Roseanne Barr.

Big even if not true.

This is what burgers actually believe.

The highest ranking general of the Confederate forces, Lee, was also critical of slavery though he still owned them (like how I'm critical of slaughterhouses but I still eat meat).

Since it is morally acceptable to kill slavers to free their slaves, I guess this means the vegans get to purge the carnivores. #eggfreemayocide

There is nothing wrong with the confederate flag. It's part of the history of the country. It should be flown proudly by anyone who chooses to do so.

88 replies

oy vey

http://i.imgur.com/LIB5UVh.png

kys

no u

u first

faget

I mean, it's true. Clearly visible retard identification is clearly in the public benefit. A dude with a faggy mustache ruined symbol patches being used for this sort of stuff, so this is the next best thing.

It's because there are still millions of backward bumfuck inbred rednecks in this country who couch their racism and whimsical melancholy for the days when you can own another person as "states rights" and "southern heritage" and related garbage.

inb4 that's why Trump won.

Although, unironically, this is why trump won.

Reddit doesn't believe that there is such a thing as the non-alt-right anymore.

The people here are quite honestly a danger to democracy.