Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Cancel Culture is FUCKING STUPID!!!

Collapse

Google Ads

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by DPR View Post

    All of this.

    The reason Jim Crow lasted until the 1960s was because white Southerners didn't view the Civil War as a defeat but rather a temporary setback. And why would they think it was a defeat? Many of the generals and officers got to go right back to their previous jobs. Or they got promotions within the UNION ARMY. Or they were elected to the Senate. Or became a fucking Chief Justice of the whole Supreme Court.

    I don't think we needed to salt the earth, but barring all Confederate politicians and officers from holding any office of power again would have at least been a minimum and we didn't even do that.
    Blame Andrew Johnson for that. He was an insecure bitch, that because of his awful upbringing and inferiority complex looked the other way as the elites were returned to power. Johnson thought that by letting it happen, that those people would finally accept him. They didn't, he was still "White Trash" to them, and here we are.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

      I’m not an expert on the civil war or reconstruction, and I don’t particularly care to be. Studying that shit to death is more of a southern thing and I didn’t go to school down there. That said, I do know what the aftermath of civil wars typically is throughout history around the world, and I don’t think we handled things poorly by comparison. I mean, it’s not at all uncommon for civil wars to cause entire countries to completely disintegrate into disorder for long periods of time and for everyone in said country to suffer tremendously. If the worst we saw was a single region being handicapped, that’s a win as far as civil wars go.
      Compare how improved Germany is in 80 years to the south in 150 and tell me things were handled properly.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

        Because the inevitable result would have been losing the support and compliance of the people of the south. What part of that don’t you understand? You may get off on the idea of imposing your morality on people and making them submit, but if the south proved anything, it’s that they weren’t going to be bullied into submission. They would have fought indefinitely in smaller, less controlled, and harder to reason with forms and the resulting death and destruction would have made the country even worse.

        Now compare that to what they actually did, which wasn’t perfect but ultimately lead to significant progress and helped integrate the south into the greater U.S. I understand and agree with the emotion behind what you’re saying, but emotions don’t end civil wars, they fuel them.
        No one was asking for a perfect solution, we were and still are asking for a solution in which we aren't getting lynched and harassed. The Union Army staying around and merely protecting our voting rights for a little while longer would have been a step in the right direction. The North using their power in Congress and in the Courts to not allow Jim Crow laws to proliferate would have been nice. Instead, the North bailed, and left us to our own devices for 100 years. We are 100-150 years behind where we should be, because of inactivity by those that could have helped prevent this, all in the name of order. Dr. King was right, the most dangerous white person isn't the Klansman, it's the white moderate because they care more about order than they do about their fellow citizen.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by DPR View Post

          Well, for starters you're calling a policy that allowed for some lynchings and the overall oppression of black people for another century a "prudent" move. I mean, I don't think I need to peel the onion back any further on that one.

          But you're also advocating that a strong police presence will stop or heavily mitigate crime in American cities in 2020. So, would a strong federal presence in the South not have mitigated most killings and stopped systematic racial discrimination? Why are you advocating for the South to be left to its own devices on how to handle racial issues but don't want neighborhoods in 2020 to do their own community watches?
          It was prudent, because more people would have died otherwise. Do you know what the word prudent means? It means acting and showing care or thought for the future. What they did was ultimately better for the future of the country, because there’s a very good chance we wouldn’t have one otherwise. It’s called big picture thinking, and our leaders employed it at the time because they understood the situation and people they were dealing with far better than you, me, or anyone alive ever could. And if you want to talk about emotion, these men lost some of their closest relatives and most cherished friends at the hands of the confederacy, do you really think you or anyone living now has anything close to the animosity for them that they did? How fucking arrogant is that?

          I didn’t say that, so I’m not going to respond to the rest of your bullshit. Also, there’s a big difference between an organized group of millions that formed a government and bands of retards waving signs and throwing fireworks. If you think those two things should be handled in anything close to the same way, then we’re wasting our time talking.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by DSMoneypit View Post

            Which part do you not believe? The cost of the game?

            https://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/sbs-...-captain-deck/

            This is a link to one of my competitive commander decks. You'll see the price it would cost to build this deck if you were to buy each card os between 2100 and 2600 dollars depending on card conditions. All but one of the cards is near mint, the volcanic island, the most expensive card, is light played.

            Or the fact that it's considered the most complicated game? I'll let MIT answer that.

            https://www.technologyreview.com/201...-complex-game/
            Assholes like you are why Paradox Engine got banned.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Foster4Prez View Post

              Compare how improved Germany is in 80 years to the south in 150 and tell me things were handled properly.
              Exactly, sometimes you need to lay down the law. Sometimes, an opponent is so incredibly awful, you can't give them a chance to do this crap again. Japan and Germany are far better off than the South, and those wars were fought with practically no quarter. The allies made it a point to say "We've tried being nice(WWI), now it's time to stamp this out".

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Foster4Prez View Post

                Compare how improved Germany is in 80 years to the south in 150 and tell me things were handled properly.
                Yeah, because civil wars and foreign wars are totally the same. LMFAO.

                I’d also like to point out that a hardline strategy was employed after WW1 and directly caused WW2 by pissing off the German people enough to elect any asshole that promised them power and revenge. Just some food for thought.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Canedude08 View Post

                  Exactly, sometimes you need to lay down the law. Sometimes, an opponent is so incredibly awful, you can't give them a chance to do this crap again. Japan and Germany are far better off than the South, and those wars were fought with practically no quarter. The allies made it a point to say "We've tried being nice(WWI), now it's time to stamp this out".
                  Pretty sure it’s the exact opposite, but okay. The treaty of Versailles is probably the number one reason why Hitler rose to power and was able to get by with as much shit as he was.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

                    Pretty sure it’s the exact opposite, but okay. The treaty of Versailles is probably the number one reason why Hitler rose to power and was able to get by with as much shit as he was.
                    Note that they didn't even try to bargain with Germany following WWII. That was my point. Germany was split up, because the Allies realized that the Germans hadn't learned a damn thing from WWI. You look at the treaty of Versailles, it wasn't nearly enough, and it gave douchebags like Hitler an excuse to claim that Germany could have won that war, had the politicians not caved. Ironically enough, Hitler's viewpoint is extremely similar to the "Lost Cause" narrative you hear with dumbass Southerners.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Canedude08 View Post

                      Note that they didn't even try to bargain with Germany following WWII. That was my point. Germany was split up, because the Allies realized that the Germans hadn't learned a damn thing from WWI. You look at the treaty of Versailles, it wasn't nearly enough, and it gave douchebags like Hitler an excuse to claim that Germany could have won that war, had the politicians not caved. Ironically enough, Hitler's viewpoint is extremely similar to the "Lost Cause" narrative you hear with dumbass Southerners.
                      There was nothing to bargain with, dude. Their dictator committed suicide, their entire country was decimated, their leadership was complicit in mass genocide and countless war crimes, and public support for their regime was nonexistent by then. Hell, there’s countless stories of people throughout Germany that didn’t even know what was going on with the war until soldiers arrived in their town.

                      I get the feeling from reading your posts that you have a very good understanding of history, but that you view things through an emotional lens. That’s not a luxury that people who are responsible for deciding the fate of millions and no knowledge of what will happen in the future have. It’s easy to play Monday morning QB with events that happened ages ago, look at what happened afterwards, and claim you could’ve done better with the information we have now, but that’s not how the world actually works. I think the response of the international community after WW2 was very good, but if you think it’s because we beat people into submission and forced them to do things exactly how we wanted them to, then you’re just wrong.

                      Comment


                      • Keep in mind that half of Germany was immediately plunged into another brutal dictatorship while the other half faced an existential threat from them. Also, the Jewish population was like 5% of what it was pre Hitler- its fairly easy to deal with racial tension when one side is simply gone.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

                          There was nothing to bargain with, dude. Their dictator committed suicide, their entire country was decimated, their leadership was complicit in mass genocide and countless war crimes, and public support for their regime was nonexistent by then. Hell, there’s countless stories of people throughout Germany that didn’t even know what was going on with the war until soldiers arrived in their town.

                          I get the feeling from reading your posts that you have a very good understanding of history, but that you view things through an emotional lens. That’s not a luxury that people who are responsible for deciding the fate of millions and no knowledge of what will happen in the future have. It’s easy to play Monday morning QB with events that happened ages ago, look at what happened afterwards, and claim you could’ve done better with the information we have now, but that’s not how the world actually works. I think the response of the international community after WW2 was very good, but if you think it’s because we beat people into submission and forced them to do things exactly how we wanted them to, then you’re just wrong.
                          There's a reason why the Allies decided upon unconditional surrender. There's a reason why later on, the Potsdam Declaration was given to Japan. It wasn't about forcing people to do our bidding, it was sending the message that if you want to play this game, we won't stop until things are burnt to the ground and you can rebuild your society. Ironically enough, it was a lot more effective than what we did for the South. There's a reason why Germany, despite it's flaws as as society is far more liberal in regards to race than we are. There's a reason why Japan has come a long way in regards to viewing their neighbors, compared to their "Conquer every Asian that isn't Japanese" policy they had before.

                          FYI, if you are going to be a condescending prick, I'm not the one you want to pull that crap on. Let me guess, you're one of those people that any time a minority shows any emotion or is forceful in their opinions, you run to the "Angry Black Guy" narrative. We're talking about policies that have directly led to the deaths of millions of people. We're talking about policies that have doomed generation after generation of people like me to poverty and despair, with little chance of getting out. Excuse me for not being passive in regards to stating how I feel about that. The lost cause narrative was crap and the "You should have let the South continue to screw over blacks, because well....Doing something about it may have ticked the rednecks off" narrative is even worse.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

                            Because the inevitable result would have been losing the support and compliance of the people of the south. What part of that don’t you understand?
                            Dude, we still haven't gotten full compliance and it has been 160 years. You see what just happened in Georgia? White politicians doing their best to suppress the black vote so they don't have a voice in government.

                            You may get off on the idea of imposing your morality on people and making them submit, but if the south proved anything, it’s that they weren’t going to be bullied into submission.
                            So instead we let it happen to black people because they could be bullied into submission because they were greatly outnumbered.

                            They would have fought indefinitely in smaller, less controlled, and harder to reason with forms and the resulting death and destruction would have made the country even worse.
                            You realize the KKK is/was a thing, right? We don't even have records on how many black people were still murdered in the South by lynch mobs because the white cops erased it. So even with this "compromise" we still ended up with these guerrilla death squads. Come on man.

                            Now compare that to what they actually did, which wasn’t perfect but ultimately lead to significant progress and helped integrate the south into the greater U.S. I understand and agree with the emotion behind what you’re saying, but emotions don’t end civil wars, they fuel them.
                            It's been 160 years and we're still arguing about the Confederate flag and Confederate "heritage" and black people are still being treated like shit across the country. Are you seriously calling this a win? Because in some alternate reality, there was the possibility of even more black people being killed even though there is no evidence to support this claim?

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Canedude08 View Post

                              FYI, if you are going to be a condescending prick, I'm not the one you want to pull that crap on. Let me guess, you're one of those people that any time a minority shows any emotion or is forceful in their opinions, you run to the "Angry Black Guy" narrative. We're talking about policies that have directly led to the deaths of millions of people. We're talking about policies that have doomed generation after generation of people like me to poverty and despair, with little chance of getting out. Excuse me for not being passive in regards to stating how I feel about that. The lost cause narrative was crap and the "You should have let the South continue to screw over blacks, because well....Doing something about it may have ticked the rednecks off" narrative is even worse.
                              Seriously. I don't know what Hookems is even trying to do here. Advocating for a policy that killed an untold number of black people and stole generational wealth from every black family until probably the last 30 years is fucking crazy talk.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Canedude08 View Post

                                There's a reason why the Allies decided upon unconditional surrender. There's a reason why later on, the Potsdam Declaration was given to Japan. It wasn't about forcing people to do our bidding, it was sending the message that if you want to play this game, we won't stop until things are burnt to the ground and you can rebuild your society. Ironically enough, it was a lot more effective than what we did for the South. There's a reason why Germany, despite it's flaws as as society is far more liberal in regards to race than we are. There's a reason why Japan has come a long way in regards to viewing their neighbors, compared to their "Conquer every Asian that isn't Japanese" policy they had before.

                                FYI, if you are going to be a condescending prick, I'm not the one you want to pull that crap on. Let me guess, you're one of those people that any time a minority shows any emotion or is forceful in their opinions, you run to the "Angry Black Guy" narrative. We're talking about policies that have directly led to the deaths of millions of people. We're talking about policies that have doomed generation after generation of people like me to poverty and despair, with little chance of getting out. Excuse me for not being passive in regards to stating how I feel about that. The lost cause narrative was crap and the "You should have let the South continue to screw over blacks, because well....Doing something about it may have ticked the rednecks off" narrative is even worse.
                                Let me just make something clear real quick: foreign wars and civil wars are different for the same reason that domestic conflict is different than conflict on the street. Just like a bad marriage that you can’t get out of, regardless of who wins or loses, you still have to live with these people. That means that the approach you take has to be modified to fit that reality, and that regardless of how deep your anger and differences go, you have to find a way to rise above it.

                                If you insist on being emotional about a topic and ignoring rationality, then I’m going to point it out. I don’t care if that pisses you off, and I’m not going to cower in fear because you think it means I’m perpetuating some stupid stereotype. So far during this conversation, you have outright refused to accept the possibility that the people who were alive and making the decisions they did made good ones based on the information they had. You’ve repeatedly injected knowledge about how things played out after the fact, things they had no way of predicting, and used it as justification for your opinion. You’ve also blatantly ignored the fact that civil wars always end this way if they end at all, and that history shows that going full on total war retard about it is a sure fire way to destroy a country entirely.

                                Nobody is happy about all of the bad things that have happened, but if you really think there was any way to force millions of people that went so far as to form a government and fight a war to see things your way or submit via violence and oppression, then you’re wrong. It was never going to go down that way, and if the people in power in the 1860s had your mentality, the entire country would probably still be in tatters. As I said before, the people who made these decisions lost their closest relatives and friends to these people, do you think they fucking liked them? Do you think they wanted the civil war to end the way it did, or do you think they wanted to kill every last one of them? You know the answer to that, and yet they didn’t do it, and why do you think that is? Because it wasn’t going to solve anything. It was only going to prolong and escalate a conflict that was tearing the country apart at the seams, and potentially open us up to foreign invasion or outright failed state status.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X