Brainiac Five posted:

What an unhinged post.

RedSpider posted:

It's much more unsettling than you casually threatening to murder goons every five minutes.

RedSpider posted:

You casually rationalize violence towards political opponents whom you disagree with. This is a common and vindictive theme throughout your posting; more so than your terrible use of punctuation.

rudatron posted:

Eff, Why do you keep hurting yourself? Where is your self respect? No one happy with who they are and what there doing, would perform the behaviours you are displaying.

Nothing on the internet really matters, to a normal person. Because who cares, right? But not you, you're committed to, for some reason, continue this self destructive habit you've built up. Why? Really ask yourself that.

Like its just...sad. No one's out to get you dude, despite what you think. The negative reactions you are getting, from basically everyone, are entirely in response to your own actions.

JeffersonClay posted:

Internment was prison slavery. FDR had Japanese internees building infrastructure in Arizona for zero pay.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=4310157&page=1

Internees didn't even get trials.

rudatron posted:

The best thing the mods could do for you, is quarantine you to a select number of places (d&d chat, etc.), until you learn to communicate with people in a way that's not looking for confrontation, baiting responses to validate yourself.

Futuresight posted:

This doesn't change anything though. There was never any debate on whether internment was bad. The debate was over the circumstances surrounding them and what it says about the person. Here, I went and looked up this quote from the reparations legislation about the reason behind the internment: "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership". See how it contains war hysteria and a failure of political leadership? If the government ever got around to ending prison slavery and giving out reparations, the legislation would definitely make note of the race prejudice that played a large role, but would probably leave out the war hysteria and failure of political leadership. Because those things imply cowardice, weak convictions, or weak character. All of which do not apply to prison slavery. There is no cowardice to it. It's just straight up a coldly calculated policy to profit while making GBS threads on black people.

If you came out claiming FDR was the kind of person to right by minorities in the face of large pressure from opponents I'd call you out and use the example of internment to do so. And if you went FDR is not enough because we also need someone who is also strong on minority rights I'd think that a perfectly valid position to take. But if you're trying to discredit people who would like to see a president take an FDR-like approach to economics, by pointing out that FDR also did internment, then I'm going to call you out on your poo poo.

Brainiac Five posted:

I like the implicit argument that Hillary Clinton created prison slavery.

Brainiac Five posted:

Me: It's defending internment to say that Japan being at war with the USA is at all relevant to internment.

Bernie Voter: u a child molesting rapist and nazi

NewForumSoftware posted:

I like the implicit argument that every poster who disagrees with you did.

rudatron posted:

The civilians of the soviet union were the #1 biggest casualties during the war, complaining about rapes by red soldiers after their entire people had been targeted for extermination, is some real bullshit. Had the USSR done what the germans did to them, they would have depopulated germany by about 1/6th. Keep that in mind.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

rudatron posted:

gonna be honest, i feel like if my workplace was passing around naked photos of coworkers, i'd immediately copy that poo poo to my thumbdrive, then report it anyway

i feel bad for the victims and all, but imma keep the photos

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

rudatron posted:

It's what i think about you, dipshit.

You only think about race, you have this one-dimensional mind.

Now ye shall reap what ye have sown

This is a reckoning. Trump would not have won without your incredible support for him, which you created through antagonization.

Everyone will love each other, one day. But that day is not today. Thanks to you.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Ytlaya posted:

This is an astoundingly ironic post.

Ytlaya posted:

This is an astoundingly ironic post.

NewForumSoftware posted:

I think we can all agree that internment was bad. The real question is JeffersonClay agree that prison slavery is bad?

rudatron posted:

The entire internment derail came from JC trying to compare Hillary Clinton favourable to FDR, something that is a total joke if you're aware of the history here. It did not appear from people defending it, it was a stupid comparison by a stupid person.

rudatron posted:

They can believe whatever the gently caress they want to believe or speak any language they want. But there are practices that must change, as I understand them. I don't pretend to be informed on the subject, but as I know, sacred sites play a large role in Aboriginal culture, and as such, it stops centralization because some of them must live near these sites. In that case, aboriginal religion is getting in the way of their own standard of living, so their religion must be reformed, so that they can travel freely. They could adopt a stance of 'you must visit this site once in your lifetime' like with Muslim sacred sites, or do something transporting materials from those sacred sites, but something has to change. As I heard, they also have a distrust of science and medicine, which must also be reformed from outside. How that would happen, I'm not so sure. Undermining the witchcraft in native culture would help.

stone cold posted:

so are you claiming that Japanese interment was not a result of cold calculated racism but rather "war hysteria" (re: war racism), cowardice (racism), weak convictions (racism), or weak character (being a racist)

got it

Futuresight posted:

This doesn't change anything though. There was never any debate on whether internment was bad. The debate was over the circumstances surrounding them and what it says about the person. Here, I went and looked up this quote from the reparations legislation about the reason behind the internment: "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership". See how it contains war hysteria and a failure of political leadership? If the government ever got around to ending prison slavery and giving out reparations, the legislation would definitely make note of the race prejudice that played a large role, but would probably leave out the war hysteria and failure of political leadership. Because those things imply cowardice, weak convictions, or weak character. All of which do not apply to prison slavery. There is no cowardice to it. It's just straight up a coldly calculated policy to profit while making GBS threads on black people.

If you came out claiming FDR was the kind of person to right by minorities in the face of large pressure from opponents I'd call you out and use the example of internment to do so. And if you went FDR is not enough because we also need someone who is also strong on minority rights I'd think that a perfectly valid position to take. But if you're trying to discredit people who would like to see a president take an FDR-like approach to economics, by pointing out that FDR also did internment, then I'm going to call you out on your poo poo.

Futuresight posted:

Yes. I am claiming that internment was not primarily as a result of coldly calculated racism. It was racism. It just wasn't coldly calculated. And yes, in much the same way as we differentiate between murder in cold blood and murder done in the heat of the moment, I think there is a meaningful difference here. And no, that meaningful difference does not in any way excuse the act.

JeffersonClay posted:

There's no coherent argument where Hillary is a monster for benefitting from (but not instituting) a system of prison labor in Arkansas that doesn't also indict FDR (or Jimmy Carter) to a much more substantial degree. I don't want to indict any of them.

JeffersonClay posted:

There's no coherent argument where Hillary is a monster for benefitting from (but not instituting) a system of prison labor in Arkansas that doesn't also indict FDR (or Jimmy Carter) to a much more substantial degree. I don't want to indict any of them.

VitalSigns posted:

Still stopped short of saying that low emotional intelligence doesn't justify enslaving people though. All I've gotten so far on that question is "but her slaves really did have low emotional intelligence, probably"

VitalSigns posted:

Why not. What purpose does this cult of personality serve.

Refusing to criticize atrocities because someone we like benefited from those atrocities is a fundamentally conservative worldview.

Brainiac Five posted:

I don't think there's any meaningful difference. I also don't think Hillary Clinton is actually much more responsible for prison labor than you are.

Brainiac Five posted:

So we should purge FDR as a model in anything? Because that is what you are proposing for Clinton, and sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander, unless there's some implicit sexism whereby it's just different for the woman.

Futuresight posted:

She probably could have ended, at least temporarily, the use of slavery in the Arkansas governor mansion. I definitely couldn't have.

NewForumSoftware posted:

Yes, we should look forwards, instead of backwards at the history of racist politicians we've had. It's fair to look favorably on things like 90% tax rates on $1m+ but the politicians themselves were almost entirely human garbage.

What exactly do we get out of using FDR as a model?

Brainiac Five posted:

How exactly could she have done this, as the first lady of Arkansas?

Brainiac Five posted:

So we should purge FDR as a model in anything? Because that is what you are proposing for Clinton, and sauce for the goose should be sauce for the gander, unless there's some implicit sexism whereby it's just different for the woman.

NewForumSoftware posted:

She was held down and forced to use slavery at knifepoint?

Like her book was pretty clear, she didn't really have any moral qualms with it. I'm sure she does now (or at least would tell you that)

Brainiac Five posted:

VitalSigns posted:

Yes we should reject internment and not continue to defend it just because FDR did it.

JeffersonClay posted:

There's no coherent argument where Hillary is a monster for benefitting from (but not instituting) a system of prison labor in Arkansas that doesn't also indict FDR (or Jimmy Carter) to a much more substantial degree. I don't want to indict any of them.

rudatron posted:

I know I've touched a nerve. I know you're upset. But there isn't a way to get you to look your problems, without doing that.

Compare your rapsheet, on both of your accounts, to mine. Which is longer? Neither is a mark of pride, to be sure, but I can't see you as someone who's well adjusted, or who has a leg to stand on here.

Futuresight posted:

True. But FDR's internment policy does not undermine the good things people remember him for, because his good things were largely economic. It does undermine his overall character though of course, but that is not important to us here. The problem for Hillary and her supporters is that minorities issues are her thing. The two main reasons Hillary was pushed as better than Bernie were: 1) She was more electable 2) She was better on minority issues. 1 was spectacularly thrown out the window when she lost to Donald Trump though cries of Russia and Comey are used to try and defend her here. 2 is what we are discussing now and her attitude towards black prisoners working as slaves in the mansion she lived in is pretty relevant to that and it sits alongside other things like super predators as an indicator that people were blind to Hillary's actual views and qualities here.

Brainiac Five posted:

Thank you, white guy saying that black people are too stupid/ignorant to know anything about Hillary Clinton. We couldn't have a discussion about American politics without you.

Futuresight posted:

Pretty sure JC is white. Sorry if I'm wrong on that JC.

Brainiac Five posted:

Brainiac Five posted:

Are you aware that black people voted massively for Hillary Clinton in both the primary and general election? Because your theory requires that they be too stupid/ignorant to know that Hillary Clinton is super racist.

rudatron posted:

That guy who came in and made crazy accusations was taking the piss out of you, and your habit of doing exactly that, in case you missed the joke. Maybe you should reflect on that?

WampaLord posted:

Do you assume that every black person who voted for her was in love with her and not just making a logical choice?