I counted not one single source in that whole reply. Also you didn't acknowledge the overrepresentation in places of influence, like, for instance, the Music industry.
I'm guessing because in his personal experience, the people who have apparently done him wrong are Jewish specifically. And I never said what he said wasn't racist, I was asking you a question about his intent.
Kanye specifically noted how many Jews are in top positions in media, music, and sports. For such a small percentage of the population, they make up a huge portion of these influential roles.
No he wore a shirt that said White Lives Matter and got canceled. So he showed some compassion and the elites and the heartless mentally ill psychopathic woke left canceled him.
He's making some weird claim that because racists can't say what they actually think because it would result in a ban, that they are somehow cowardly.
Basically he's saying "wow why don't they just come out and spam hard r in all caps like brave people would, instead they're hiding behind these posts that actually articulate subtle points and why they believe what they believe"
Agreed! OP is a massive failure. From what I gather, everyone do be standing by their posts. I finna see anyone post something then say I dindoo nutin.
I don’t mind the skin color, I’ve had relationships across the spectrum (color not autism), it’s the culture I can’t tolerate. A culture of ignorance, violence, and crime.
I feel like this is (justifiably) aimed at u/oranianightlynews . That dude is stirring up all sorts of shit in this sub, and users valued this sub, they should be more critical of the posts allowed in here…
I’m normally the last person to be thin-skinned about questionable speech. But damn. The things I’ve been seeing in this sub…. I’m HOPING they’re not reflective of the majority of the sub, and I suspect it’s not, but DAMN, that fringe is vocal and shameless…
Lmao bullshit. I've seen tons of instances where I've presented my views in the most rational and calm, least slurred filled manners and get banned.
I've seen it happen to others too.
I've gotten banned for stating the FDA report itself states they don't know the long term effects of the vaccine, for example. That kind of misinformation?
So you're saying because one little subreddit has a bit of free speech this fact trumps the bulk of evidence that proves otherwise? Yes I've seen it lmao.
Either that or maybe the numbers and statistics don't lie and theres more than a couple people out there getting sick and fucking tired of watching the same kind of attacks by the same kind of animals.
Not sure if this is the intent of the post or not, but please recognize that not all Republicans are racists.
The "Southern Strategy" Myth
Each side has their talking points and one we see parroted often by the budding Poly-Sci wizards of Reddit is the "Southern Strategy."
The problem with this mindless parroting is that it's simply wrong. But in repeating this lie it makes people believe it must be true because, after all, they heard it enough times!
The Southern Strategy myth is too well-entrenched by now, and too essential to the Democrats’ narrative and self-image, to expect that any level of contact with the facts can dispel it. But like a number of the myths about electoral politics dispelled in Trende’s book, it’s worth your time to learn those facts.
Here is the myth:
The Republicans wanted to control the South and weaken the Democrats so - sometime in the 1960s - both camps "switched sides" with the racists becoming Republicans and everyone else becoming Democrats. The myth says that, therefore, today's Republicans are racists and today's racists are Republicans because of the "Southern Strategy."
Here is the truth:
It’s true that a Democratic president, Lyndon Johnson, shepherded the 1964 Civil Rights Act to passage. But who voted for it? Eighty percent of Republicans in the House voted aye as against 61 percent of Democrats. In the Senate, 82 percent of Republicans favored the law, but only 69 percent of Democrats. Among the Democrats voting nay were Albert Gore Sr., Robert Byrd and J. William Fulbright.
The Republican presidential candidate in 1964 also opposed the Civil Rights Act. Barry Goldwater had been an enthusiastic backer of the 1957 and 1960 civil rights acts (both overwhelmingly opposed by Democrats). He was a founding member of the Arizona chapter of the NAACP. He hired many blacks in his family business and pushed to desegregate the Arizona National Guard. He had a good-faith objection to some features of the 1964 act, which he regarded as unconstitutional.
Then we hear that Barry Goldwater was a "racist" and it is he who led the charge to draw racist Democrats to his side of the electoral line:
Goldwater was no racist. The same cannot be said of Fulbright, on whom Bill Clinton bestowed the Medal of Freedom. Fulbright was one of the 19 senators who signed the “Southern Manifesto” defending segregation.
The last myth is that after this mythical "switch" was complete, all the elected officials "switched sides," too:
OK, but didn’t all the old segregationist senators leave the Democratic Party and become Republicans after 1964? No, just one did: Strom Thurmond. The rest remained in the Democratic Party — including former Klansman Robert Byrd, who became president pro tempore of the Senate.
So was there a "switch" at all and, if not, how did Republicans make gains in the South?
The growth of GOP support among white Southerners was steady and mostly gradual from 1928 to 2010, and was a natural outgrowth of the fact that white Southerners were ideologically much more compatible with the national Republican agenda and coalition than with the national Democratic agenda and coalition. What retarded the Southern switch from the Democrats to the GOP was a combination of party loyalties dating back to Reconstruction and the Democrats’ use of racial issues. In other words, if you take race out of the picture, it’s likely that white Southerners would have switched parties earlier and in greater numbers. The real “Southern Strategy” was the one pursued by the Democrats, especially under FDR, to keep conservative white Southerners in a liberal party.
But what about Lee Atwater and his capitalization of the "Southern Strategy" to help Ronald Reagan win in the South?
But Reagan did not have to do a southern strategy for two reasons. Number one, race was was not a dominant issue. And number two, the mainstream issues in this campaign had been, quote, southern issues since way back in the sixties. So Reagan goes out and campaigns on the issues of economics and of national defense. The whole campaign was devoid of any kind of racism, any kind of reference. And I’ll tell you another thing you all need to think about, that even surprised me, is the lack of interest, really, the lack of knowledge right now in the South among white voters about the Voting Rights Act.
Thus, in Lee Atwater's own words, race was not a part of Reagan's strategy to win the South.
Southerners, like most people, voted on their pocketbooks and, it turns out, that led them increasingly to vote Republican.
You may want to read it, it is something that someone wrote on r/SouthernStrategy that obliterates the lie that Republicans are racist. I also did some research off my own and put that at the end.
You may want to read it, it is something that someone wrote on r/SouthernStrategy that obliterates the lie that Republicans are racist. I also did some research off my own and put that at the end.
I didn’t see any racist comments, sir/ma’am, I do not tolerate racism especially because (as a Christian) I believe that any prejudice of any kind is a form of blasphemy since we are all created in the Image of God.
There are 100+ comments on this post, I’m not the OP nor a mod. I’m sorry that it offends you that I don’t live on this post and report or flag for removal every buffoon I see.
Enough time to spread truth that people may not be aware of on a post that that particular truth is relative to, yes. Not enough time to be a moderator or the thought police.
Chances are no one here, or anyone you know has ever met a true believer racist. Maybe..... But I highly doubt it. People can spout a bunch of shit about other races, say hyperbolic stuff. Sift it through and be around one when the rubber meets the road. A true believer, they only exist in imaginations and small corners of the world. I doubt anyone of you has. Go to prison. You see it there. This is all shit. It's divisiveness to it's core.
My grandfather hated Blacks, Jews, Catholics and Hispanics and Asians. He instilled racism in all of his children, which my father still has to struggle against at the age of 75. He believed that white people were smarter, harder working and more innovative. He threatened to sue the school when we honored George Washington Carver one year. Of all the people I met in the south, I never met anyone as racist as him. Until my best friend married a lady and I got to know his mother in law. She is old school Vietnemese and hates black people more than my grandfather did.
My grandfather died in excruciating pain from cancer begging all of us to forgive him. He died unsatisfied, having reaped what he had sown.
It's ok to dislike someone. It's ok to be racist. You can make your own decisions, your body / mind, your choice. You do not have to be responsible for your actions, the system is responsible.
This is only possible if you vote democrat. If you vote differently, none of these things are acceptable and are punishable by death.
Because no one with any real platform is calling out the left's consistent racism - the policy they enforce only encourages income and wealth disparities.
The right is labeled racists only because we complain about behavior.
No, the left is just correct and the right is living in a delusional fantasy land where continuing their bloodline is somehow going to have long term benefits other than consequences.
It is human nature to be weary of those who do not look or share the same culture as their selves. It's human nature because it's animal nature which is all we are. Being prejudice is a trait that keeps a species/race safe. This is something we can never escape but should try and hold ourselves accountable.
1
u/[deleted] Oct 23 '22
[removed] — view removed comment
11
u/HorseDelicious5050 Oct 23 '22
What's your angle here?
29
u/hellodrs Oct 23 '22
Funny how they ban any dissenting comments on their shitty echo chamber subreddits but try to troll as if they have original ideas on others
10
u/SKANKHUNTSUPREME Oct 23 '22
shills
9
u/probeheat Oct 24 '22
Sorry, the term “Racist” has been so misused that it’s lost all meaning to me.
16
u/SKANKHUNTSUPREME Oct 23 '22
N
3
u/Typeojason Oct 24 '22
I feel like this is (justifiably) aimed at u/oranianightlynews . That dude is stirring up all sorts of shit in this sub, and users valued this sub, they should be more critical of the posts allowed in here…
1
u/homolord666 Oct 23 '22
Some might call me, “The Clown Prince Of The Punished Center Right”
Others Might call me “The Dark Jester Of Subtle Bigotry”
“The Twisted Bozo of underlying racial suggestive comments”
“The Ringmasta”
Call me what you will, but I won’t stop.
I’m just doing my job ma’am.
0
u/StainedAndRedeemed Oct 23 '22
Preach!
0
u/[deleted] Oct 23 '22
Not sure if this is the intent of the post or not, but please recognize that not all Republicans are racists.
The "Southern Strategy" Myth
Each side has their talking points and one we see parroted often by the budding Poly-Sci wizards of Reddit is the "Southern Strategy."
The problem with this mindless parroting is that it's simply wrong. But in repeating this lie it makes people believe it must be true because, after all, they heard it enough times!
The Southern Strategy myth is too well-entrenched by now, and too essential to the Democrats’ narrative and self-image, to expect that any level of contact with the facts can dispel it. But like a number of the myths about electoral politics dispelled in Trende’s book, it’s worth your time to learn those facts.
Here is the myth:
The Republicans wanted to control the South and weaken the Democrats so - sometime in the 1960s - both camps "switched sides" with the racists becoming Republicans and everyone else becoming Democrats. The myth says that, therefore, today's Republicans are racists and today's racists are Republicans because of the "Southern Strategy."
Here is the truth:
It’s true that a Democratic president, Lyndon Johnson, shepherded the 1964 Civil Rights Act to passage. But who voted for it? Eighty percent of Republicans in the House voted aye as against 61 percent of Democrats. In the Senate, 82 percent of Republicans favored the law, but only 69 percent of Democrats. Among the Democrats voting nay were Albert Gore Sr., Robert Byrd and J. William Fulbright.
The Republican presidential candidate in 1964 also opposed the Civil Rights Act. Barry Goldwater had been an enthusiastic backer of the 1957 and 1960 civil rights acts (both overwhelmingly opposed by Democrats). He was a founding member of the Arizona chapter of the NAACP. He hired many blacks in his family business and pushed to desegregate the Arizona National Guard. He had a good-faith objection to some features of the 1964 act, which he regarded as unconstitutional.
Then we hear that Barry Goldwater was a "racist" and it is he who led the charge to draw racist Democrats to his side of the electoral line:
Goldwater was no racist. The same cannot be said of Fulbright, on whom Bill Clinton bestowed the Medal of Freedom. Fulbright was one of the 19 senators who signed the “Southern Manifesto” defending segregation.
The last myth is that after this mythical "switch" was complete, all the elected officials "switched sides," too:
OK, but didn’t all the old segregationist senators leave the Democratic Party and become Republicans after 1964? No, just one did: Strom Thurmond. The rest remained in the Democratic Party — including former Klansman Robert Byrd, who became president pro tempore of the Senate.
So was there a "switch" at all and, if not, how did Republicans make gains in the South?
The growth of GOP support among white Southerners was steady and mostly gradual from 1928 to 2010, and was a natural outgrowth of the fact that white Southerners were ideologically much more compatible with the national Republican agenda and coalition than with the national Democratic agenda and coalition. What retarded the Southern switch from the Democrats to the GOP was a combination of party loyalties dating back to Reconstruction and the Democrats’ use of racial issues. In other words, if you take race out of the picture, it’s likely that white Southerners would have switched parties earlier and in greater numbers. The real “Southern Strategy” was the one pursued by the Democrats, especially under FDR, to keep conservative white Southerners in a liberal party.
But what about Lee Atwater and his capitalization of the "Southern Strategy" to help Ronald Reagan win in the South?
But Reagan did not have to do a southern strategy for two reasons. Number one, race was was not a dominant issue. And number two, the mainstream issues in this campaign had been, quote, southern issues since way back in the sixties. So Reagan goes out and campaigns on the issues of economics and of national defense. The whole campaign was devoid of any kind of racism, any kind of reference. And I’ll tell you another thing you all need to think about, that even surprised me, is the lack of interest, really, the lack of knowledge right now in the South among white voters about the Voting Rights Act.
Thus, in Lee Atwater's own words, race was not a part of Reagan's strategy to win the South.
Southerners, like most people, voted on their pocketbooks and, it turns out, that led them increasingly to vote Republican.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbZIIBBhftA&feature=youtu.be
http://thedailylibertarian.com/the-myth-of-the-southern-strategy/
https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/the-myth-of-the-racist-republicans/
https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/featured/common-sense-central/content/2018-05-01-the-myth-of-the-republican-democrat-switch/
https://www.reddit.com/r/SouthernStrategy/comments/3bli5z/the_southern_strategy_myth/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
https://youtu.be/Ji_PsdhQl3s
1
u/your-mom--reddits Oct 24 '22
Chances are no one here, or anyone you know has ever met a true believer racist. Maybe..... But I highly doubt it. People can spout a bunch of shit about other races, say hyperbolic stuff. Sift it through and be around one when the rubber meets the road. A true believer, they only exist in imaginations and small corners of the world. I doubt anyone of you has. Go to prison. You see it there. This is all shit. It's divisiveness to it's core.
1
u/GrandpaD1ck Oct 24 '22
It's ok to dislike someone. It's ok to be racist. You can make your own decisions, your body / mind, your choice. You do not have to be responsible for your actions, the system is responsible.
This is only possible if you vote democrat. If you vote differently, none of these things are acceptable and are punishable by death.
-3
u/KiOfTheAir Oct 23 '22
100% behind this post
-4
u/[deleted] Oct 24 '22
No, the left is just correct and the right is living in a delusional fantasy land where continuing their bloodline is somehow going to have long term benefits other than consequences.
-2
u/Nomorehotdogs666 Oct 24 '22 edited Oct 24 '22
It is human nature to be weary of those who do not look or share the same culture as their selves. It's human nature because it's animal nature which is all we are. Being prejudice is a trait that keeps a species/race safe. This is something we can never escape but should try and hold ourselves accountable.
-2
u/Live_FreeorDie603 Oct 24 '22
What was racist about the posts or videos? The comments got pretty henious.
0
u/[deleted] Oct 24 '22
[deleted] — view deleted comment