New Racist America?

[Doomblade403xxx]

Most of the name calling comes from the left? Where is your evidence of that? What about the slew of crazy folks that went up in arms when Obama got a second term, making dolls out of him with a noose around his neck, go crazy about him being in office - then telling non-trump supporters to get over it because they had to through 8 years of Obama presidency.

And what is this "you democrats" lol

Are we 12?

Well read your own follow up post to mine. I had the guts to admit to being a conservative in what is basically the lions den, and you basically said conservatives are racists, after I gave chapter and verse how horrible racism is and how it has no place in this country. I've been called a racist for the crime of disagreeing with a liberal. Told my opinion was offensive because it didn't fit their ideology.

I NEVER made a obama noose...

I was not an obama fan by any stretch, mostly because of obamacare, but I never used a racial word to name/describe him....

Point is we CAN have different views and this doesn't mean someone is waving a nazi flag

[la dame en noir]

Without Obamacare, I wouldn't have had insurance. Insurance in Georgia is fucking awful because the republicans voted against things like medicare & obamacare. I can't afford 150+ a month for Obamacare. When I lived in Michigan, I had Obamacare and only had to pay few of my doctors visits. Now I can get penalized if I can't pay for insurance or don't find a job that offers insurance. The ACA/Obamacare is not bad. In fact, many conservatives didn't realize they were the same thing and complained about losing it.

[Doomblade403xxx]

Penalties for not being able to afford insurance is communist.

[la dame en noir]

Welp, thats the world we live in now.

[Oniya]

Restricting a large economic bracket from getting healthcare is a setup for breeding epidemics.

[Vekseid]

I feel like people forget the basic American history they learned in school. The democratic and republican parties switched ideals in what...the 60s? So using that as an argument is completely irresponsible. Especially if we're talking about Trump's America where the KKK backs him 100% and the alt-right(aka neonazi's/white supremacy) are mostly made up of conservative people.

The Southern Strategy was invoked by Nixon in the late 60's, as LBJ noted with the civil rights act "We have lost the South for a generation." The roots of it go back to FDR's time, however, and the switch did not really start happening until the 90's with Clinton's election.

Back in the 90s as a kid I remember watching attack ads repeating 'liberal liberal liberal' in a rather familiar tone.

You know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAPeFRNtTP4

And the opposition to the ACA is entirely built on this.

The sole, singular reason that the United States does not have free health care for all, is to prevent you from getting free health care.

Because you are black.

That's it.

That is the only reason.

Some members on this forum have even made the outright argument that it would cost too much, using medicare costs for blacks as justification.

Has anyone ever obtained hard numbers on how many Bernie supporters jumped the aisle to vote Trump over Clinton? There certainly weren't any official repercussions, but if there's a possibility that the DNC's open and unapologetic bias cost Clinton the election in a few of the key swing states, that might qualify.

About 30% of Trump voters would have voted for Bernie or sat it out, according to polls. It's hard to tell, exactly.

There are a lot of reasons for Hillary's loss, because she lost by such a tiny, razor-thin margin. You can blame nearly anything.

The biggest issue, though, is twofold:

1) She was forced at many points in her career to sacrifice who she was, at one point or another, leading up to the 'public and private persona' debacle. This in turn makes her hard to relate to, for one. More importantly, however, it mutes her speaking ability, especially compared to the likes of Bernie.

2) Political stability is strongly correlated with home ownership. This is more for the younger folks who support Trump / were Bernie or bust. People who feel they have less ownership of society, so they start throwing spanners in the works.

Republicans are committing political suicide by ignoring the second issue.

Penalties for not being able to afford insurance is communist.

Do explain how the mandate correlates with state ownership of the means of production.

[la dame en noir]

@Vekseid || It's always nice when you show up! :)

[Doomblade403xxx]

It's easy...

Do you pay for anything you don't want in everyday life? If the state mandates you pay for something you cannot afford then fines you for not having it with the argument of fines...that's theft. We fought a whole revolution in this country over taxation without representation, and THIS is the exact same thing.

Also you see obamacare and say look at how many it covers...well lemme tell you what you don't see.

Medicare and medicaid have been shaved to the bone to the point where they hardly cover anything anymore. I work in health care. Do you know how many people I treat a month who don't get the meds they need because they can't afford the insurance, or because medicaid/medicare doesn't cover it? LOTS. ALOT of COPD patients NEED supplemental oxygen and inhaled corticosteroids for their illness. Big pharm is so out of control many of them have to make a choice...eat or buy they medicine. When they don't take the proper meds they get placed in the hospital. One inhaler of advair is almost 300 dollars and about half that with insurance.

Then lets take a look at what's happened with AZT and the EPIPEN. These meds went from affordable to outrageous and what did the government do about it. Both of them life saving drugs. Both of them necessary for people with specific ailments. Essentially if you have aids or a strong allergy we will gouge you.

Hell it didn't even stop there. Alot of hospital employees have been cut back to part time status because of obamacare. This means no insurance, they wont be able to afford a premium, thus more fines for the government. The whole system is a rigged taxation/fine scheme that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, and contrary to what people think, EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC on the racial spectrum is a victim of corporate and government greed.

So let us not pretend that the government really cares about any one of us as people. We are and always will be the backs on which the government fat cats rest. I WANT quite simply the ability to take care of me and mine with the minimum in government involvement and intervention. This means I don't need them telling me what to buy and when I have to buy it. When I need it, I'll get it myself.

[Vekseid]

You didn't answer the question.

How is the mandate communism?

[Azikt]

The Supreme Court ruled that the mandate is a 2.5% income tax on those who do not purchase health insurance that could have for less than 8.13% of their adjusted gross income.

Communism is a political theory that advocates for a society in which all property is publicly owned and everyone is provided for and works according to their abilities and needs.

Equating the two is a hard circle to square. I don't really see any obvious correlations, nor have I seen such outrage at the other ways in which the tax code has been used to encourage normative behaviors in the public such as marriage, having children, starting a business, etc.

[la dame en noir]

It's easy...

Do you pay for anything you don't want in everyday life? If the state mandates you pay for something you cannot afford then fines you for not having it with the argument of fines...that's theft. We fought a whole revolution in this country over taxation without representation, and THIS is the exact same thing.

Also you see obamacare and say look at how many it covers...well lemme tell you what you don't see.

Medicare and medicaid have been shaved to the bone to the point where they hardly cover anything anymore. I work in health care. Do you know how many people I treat a month who don't get the meds they need because they can't afford the insurance, or because medicaid/medicare doesn't cover it? LOTS. ALOT of COPD patients NEED supplemental oxygen and inhaled corticosteroids for their illness. Big pharm is so out of control many of them have to make a choice...eat or buy they medicine. When they don't take the proper meds they get placed in the hospital. One inhaler of advair is almost 300 dollars and about half that with insurance.

Then lets take a look at what's happened with AZT and the EPIPEN. These meds went from affordable to outrageous and what did the government do about it. Both of them life saving drugs. Both of them necessary for people with specific ailments. Essentially if you have aids or a strong allergy we will gouge you.

Hell it didn't even stop there. Alot of hospital employees have been cut back to part time status because of obamacare. This means no insurance, they wont be able to afford a premium, thus more fines for the government. The whole system is a rigged taxation/fine scheme that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer, and contrary to what people think, EVERY DEMOGRAPHIC on the racial spectrum is a victim of corporate and government greed.

So let us not pretend that the government really cares about any one of us as people. We are and always will be the backs on which the government fat cats rest. I WANT quite simply the ability to take care of me and mine with the minimum in government involvement and intervention. This means I don't need them telling me what to buy and when I have to buy it. When I need it, I'll get it myself.

you not wanting the government to have to control on what we do or have is literally what liberal minded people push for....

[RedRose]

I don't identify as democrat or as republican, if only because I'm not American. BUT. I have both (and others) in my FB contacts, and the endless mud slinging is crazy. Unfortunately, while both sides bash the other candidate, I've noticed that there is one side who is more likely to attack other people, including people like me who are supporting neither. And those are not the Republicans. I've noticed it on forums, friends' walls...

[Lustful Bride]

I feel like this thread is starting to get kind of hostile and we are edging towards pointing fingers, accusations and defensiveness.

We're all friends here, and we are all on the same side, just in different ways.

[Valerian]

I don't identify as democrat or as republican, if only because I'm not American. BUT. I have both (and others) in my FB contacts, and the endless mud slinging is crazy. Unfortunately, while both sides bash the other candidate, I've noticed that there is one side who is more likely to attack other people, including people like me who are supporting neither. And those are not the Republicans. I've noticed it on forums, friends' walls...

I'm always surprised to hear this -- I don't know if it's something to do with regional variations or just sheer luck, but my experience has been the exact opposite.  These last few months I've unfollowed several people on Twitter, for instance (who I was originally following solely because they were fellow movie fans), turn into rabid Republican activists who are falling all over themselves to be as offensive as possible.  The response from the left has been for the most part quite tame.

But admittedly there's also always going to be observer bias.  If you're expecting a certain group to be offensive, then you will naturally be more likely to notice evidence that supports your opinion, and the same for groups you expect to be better behaved.  It's human nature not to like seeing anything that disagrees with our belief system because that can be incredibly jarring.  Generally the best way to change someone's views in the long term is for that change to happen gradually.  Sudden shocks only unsettle people for a short time and then, usually, result in them holding more tightly to their original convictions.

In other words, a little kindness and patience on all sides is going to go a lot farther than any kind of name-calling.  First you have to make sure that everyone remembers that we're all people, even when all you're seeing are words on a computer screen.

[TheGlyphstone]

Quite possibly/likely observer bias, but at least through my own filter, I see individuals of the liberal persuasion using attacks more frequently on individuals - calling a person racist or bigoted, implying they are a Nazi, take your pick, but applications across broad groups are rare (with exceptions for vague mass-coalition labels like "Trump Supporters" or "The Alt-Right", which I do call them out on for the failing of assuming a coalition is monolithic). Conservatives seem far more likely to issue attacks on groups - Muslims are all terrorists, Mexicans are lazy illegal immigrants, liberals are all hypocritical bleeding-heart cucks, transgenders are perverts sneaking into bathrooms, etc. But the conservatives (that I know personally) are simultaneously likely to see specific people as exceptions when presented with them.

[la dame en noir]

No one should be an exception to a group of any kind. :/ People aren't exceptions. It's like someone saying "I'm not racist, my best friend is black - I just think black people are more violent. My friend is the exception."

[RedRose]

To be totally honest, I expected my Democrat contacts to be more likely to accept diversity of opinion and my Republican contacts not to take gloves... And this isn't what happened on my FB.

I think I agree with Glyphstone, by the way.

[TheGlyphstone]

No one should be an exception to a group of any kind. :/ People aren't exceptions. It's like someone saying "I'm not racist, my best friend is black - I just think black people are more violent. My friend is the exception."

Yeah, it wasn't meant to be an endorsement of the behavior, just an observation of the phenomena.

[Lilias]

I had the guts to admit to being a conservative

Then could you please explain to us baffled ones what exactly do you think you are conserving?

[la dame en noir]

Yeah, it wasn't meant to be an endorsement of the behavior, just an observation of the phenomena.

I know! I was just giving an example for those that think that sort of behavior is okay.

[Trigon]

I think there will always be an element of aggression in these sorts of debates, especially when it comes to an online media such as Facebook, or an online forum (such as this one).

One the one hand, these debates are emotionally fraught, and unavoidably so. But especially when it comes to an online forum or social media, one does not see each other face to face, and do not expect to do so for the most part. So it can be very easy just simply let loose and not worry about any consequences.

Also, there the fact that an online medium can be the coldest form of expression, as it is very difficult to guess how someone is feeling on the other side, or interpret their intentions (since you can't see the other guy and infer from body language).

I suppose the only solution is you just have to be mindful of that, avoid launching ad hominems, and stick with the facts as best you can. And above all, avoid taking it personally. I know I try to!

[Vekseid]

I don't identify as democrat or as republican, if only because I'm not American. BUT. I have both (and others) in my FB contacts, and the endless mud slinging is crazy. Unfortunately, while both sides bash the other candidate, I've noticed that there is one side who is more likely to attack other people, including people like me who are supporting neither. And those are not the Republicans. I've noticed it on forums, friends' walls...

A part of this may be due to you not seeing dog-whistles, so to speak? I mean, this goes beyond fluency in the English language and into just being a part of American culture.

I mean, we have conservative papers actively calling for the murder of scientists.

You are not going to find similarly influential liberal papers doing the same to conservatives of any stripe.

Quite possibly/likely observer bias, but at least through my own filter, I see individuals of the liberal persuasion using attacks more frequently on individuals - calling a person racist or bigoted, implying they are a Nazi, take your pick, but applications across broad groups are rare (with exceptions for vague mass-coalition labels like "Trump Supporters" or "The Alt-Right", which I do call them out on for the failing of assuming a coalition is monolithic). Conservatives seem far more likely to issue attacks on groups - Muslims are all terrorists, Mexicans are lazy illegal immigrants, liberals are all hypocritical bleeding-heart cucks, transgenders are perverts sneaking into bathrooms, etc. But the conservatives (that I know personally) are simultaneously likely to see specific people as exceptions when presented with them.

Conservatives are more moved by individual stories than liberals are.

So you get things like "It feels like crime is going up!" even when it is going down. Because as crime gets rarer it is easier to focus on the times where it does happen.

No matter what, one murder is too many.

[Doomsday]

America is a settler colonial state, founded on genocide, land theft and slavery of indigenous people, its racism is nothing new.

Penalties for not being able to afford insurance is communist.

As a Marxist-Leninist, believe me when I say, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of communism.

[Lustful Bride]

America is a settler colonial state, founded on genocide, land theft and slavery of indigenous people, its racism is nothing new.

Be that as it may, for centuries we have been slowly improving on ourselves to not be that ugly side. And then just took a knock that sent us socially falling back by a decade or two. :./

As a Marxist-Leninist, believe me when I say, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of communism.

Not to mention that there are different forms of communism and ways that it can be applied. Or at least that's what ive been told, like the communism from back in the day is different than what the Soviet Union used, and that is different from how China applied its communism and etc.

I might be wrong though, im not an economics expert so *shrug*. :/

[Doomsday]

Not to mention that there are different forms of communism and ways that it can be applied. Or at least that's what ive been told, like the communism from back in the day is different than what the Soviet Union used, and that is different from how China applied its communism and etc.

I might be wrong though, im not an economics expert so *shrug*. :/

That's incorrect, sorry. There are many divergent theories on Marxism, but communism is generally agreed upon; Most lines drawn between leftist camps are on the question of imperialism, the necessity of the state in transition to communism, revisionism, etc.

The USSR and today's PRC are not communist strictly speaking. Communism is, in simplistic terms, a post-socialist society that is classless and nationless. Those two states you mentioned are socialist, they enforce a dictatorship of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie by means of state control.

The United States government doing and owning stuff is not socialism or communism because capitalism is a dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Actions like building highways or mandating healthcare are not socialism or communism, because those are mere acts, not a mode of production. I would not argue that state services like highways, Obamacare, etc. are bad, but they are fundamentally not socialist or communist programs.

The tl;dr of my long-winded rant is that calling Obamacare communist is incorrect and just an attempt to red-bait.