Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0?

by Guest Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:06 pm

Richard F. Miller’s books include Harvard's Civil War: A History of the Twentieth Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry and States At War, Volumes 1-6, (UPNE, 2013-2018).

Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0? 169535-alkascfsf

Attack against Fort Sumter

A new arena in our burgeoning political circus has opened in the form of short-take political commentary: American Civil War, 2.0. Not restricted to 4chan, alt-left or alt-right, it grows instead from the fever swamps of what was once called the respectable middle. Examples of these predictions can be found here, here and here. And one knows it’s “a thing” when Twitter features a parody hash tag, #SecondCivilWar.

Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0? 169535-kjnsdfdsf

Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0? 169535-kjnsdfdsf

Few of these forecasters see a repeat of our last civil war. No attacks on a Fort Sumter followed by militia mobilization and hot war between rival governments. Most writers wisely modify Civil War 2.0 with adjectives such as “soft” or “cold” or other words short of “lethal.” But most articles do share a gist: The differences between so-called “Red” and “Blue” America are now irreconcilable, traditional political remedies that once peaceably managed conflict are irretrievably broken, and thus, a separation of some sort is, or will soon, be necessary. And if necessity can be made a virtue, it will be somehow peacefully managed.

Before exploring the likelihood of civil war, forgive a hedge. Historians should be the last to dismiss these kinds of literary trends. Fin de siècle Europe saw the publication of many dystopian novels envisioning the monstrous war that finally arrived in 1914. And if the events foretold in films such as Fail Safe and Seven Days in Mayor The Day After television series did not come to pass, they nonetheless offer a window on contemporary mindsets. Besides, America was founded in revolution and reformed by civil war. As Saul Bellow once observed through a character, “Nothing is so rum that it can’t be true.” Or, I would add, as might become true.

But is a civil war, soft, hard, cold or hot, in our cards? Color me skeptical. As a Civil war historian and a sometime journalist, I covered some tragically real insurgencies and counterinsurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan. They weren’t fought on Twitter or websites. Usually, they show up in Taliban night letters quickly followed by assassinations, or in market place IEDs that leave scattered body parts of innocent civilians. And despite our political differences, few Americans have an appetite for that kind of domestic conflict. Lefties and Righties still enjoy going to the mall. So I’ll default to a bumper sticker of my youth: “What if they gave a war and nobody came?” And at least for now, few Americans would come to a violent civil war. A car with Massachusetts’s plates can drive still through Texas without worrying overmuch about RPGs.

Real civil wars have a pattern. One or more consequential constituencies,
● Have grievances decades or even centuries in the making that they believe are existential; and,
● They cease believing that the current power structure offers redress of such grievances; and,
● They have the material capacity, sometimes with the help of self-interested third parties, to inflict sustained violence on opposing constituencies; and,
● They possess in sufficient mass the will and organization to inflict this violence as well as absorb the inevitable counterattacks.
I may be wrong, but there’s nothing in this list that screams, “America, 2018.”
As for a cold civil war or peaceable separation, it’s about time to expose the fraudulence of the construct on which such predictions are based: “Red” vs. “Blue” states. This meme, once convenient for summarizing presidential election returns, now corrupts many analyses of our domestic circumstance. Consider these points:
● Unlike 1860, the United States is now a highly integrated economic, social and legal polity. Class conflict has replaced sectional conflict, and little of what’s disputed—immigration, abortion, gun control—amounts to a rationale for disunion.
● But no region is actually “Blue” or “Red.” For example, in so-called “deep Blue” California, of 13,237,498 votes cast for Trump or Clinton, 33.8% voted for Trump. If you’re touting separation “because Trump,” or what you fear about his supporters, you’d better have a plan to deal with the 4,483,810 Californians who voted for Trump. The Cherokee Removal, a crime and stain on our history was the last time government enforced a mass population transfer. The alternative is secession within secession. For further reading, see West Virginia, State of.
● “Red” and “Blue” differences are much exaggerated, especially within dead tree and social media silos. A vote for Clinton wasn’t necessarily a vote to bust the Union and few of Missouri’s Trump voters envisioned expelling Illinois from the republic.

Sadly for this moment in time, social media has become an influence multiplier, whose pathways of unbounded ids are coupled with the routine portrayal of political extremism as representative. The result is a daily replay of something like Orson Welles’s famous 1938 radio hoax, “War of the Worlds,” true fake news about an alien invasion that reportedly led to panic in the streets.

The updated version is a mountain of “truthiness” about shadowy Russians, political murders, FBI plots, stolen elections, Kenyan births, and Donald J. Trump, slave to Vladimir Putin. The growing cult of Civil War, 2.0, is truthiness-as-prediction. It says more about elite anxiety, bipartisan virtue signaling, and the replacement of hard analysis by the studied ignorance “social” media. As that journalist of our moment, Michael Wolff declared with perfect sincerity, “If it rings true, it is true.”
Civil War, 2.0? Nah. I’ll stick with one of my late mother’s favorite sayings: “Always try to separate the noise from the thing that makes the noise.”

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/169535

by Original Quill Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:25 pm

In the US? The US is continuing with the last Civil War. Guns, lawlessness, racism, white nationalism and xenophobia...nothing new in our neighborhood. Laughing

by Guest Wed Aug 22, 2018 8:36 pm

Original Quill wrote:In the US? The US is continuing with the last Civil War. Guns, lawlessness, racism, white nationalism and xenophobia...nothing new in our neighborhood.

In california?

wow

by Original Quill Wed Aug 22, 2018 9:49 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:In the US? The US is continuing with the last Civil War. Guns, lawlessness, racism, white nationalism and xenophobia...nothing new in our neighborhood.

In california?
wow

Californians are the good guys. Barely a decade over when the civil war started, they immediately joined the non-slavery group upon statehood. Same with other west coast states. That's how we came to be a west coast and northeast collation of liberals. The south are the other guys.

by Guest Wed Aug 22, 2018 9:52 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

In california?
wow

Californians are the good guys. Barely a decade over when the civil war started, they immediately joined the non-slavery group upon statehood. Same with other west coast states. That's how we came to be a west coast and northeast collation of liberals. The south are the other guys.

Ohhhhh,so you are basially xenophobic towards Non-Californians.

Thanks for clarifying

by Eilzel Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:07 am

Truth is confining it to twitter and youtube, plus the many, many comforts western populations enjoy today, mean that thankfully that won't be any civil wars in America in our lifetime. People blow hot air but ultimately no one really wants to disturb their relatively comfortable lives.

by Original Quill Thu Aug 23, 2018 1:33 am

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Californians are the good guys. Barely a decade over when the civil war started, they immediately joined the non-slavery group upon statehood. Same with other west coast states. That's how we came to be a west coast and northeast collation of liberals. The south are the other guys.

Ohhhhh,so you are basially xenophobic towards Non-Californians.

Thanks for clarifying

Only southerners. Do Californians advocate racism? Guns? Protectionism? White supremacy? War? Macho sexism? Anti-Hispanic xenophobia? You're circumscribing the South, from Virginia on around to Texas, and the other states where the infection has set in. Set their boat loose.

If it's bad enough you've got to cut it adrift. We don't need another Civil war, we've already proved the marriage doesn't work. Just grant the divorce.

by Guest Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:38 am

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

Ohhhhh,so you are basially xenophobic towards Non-Californians.

Thanks for clarifying

Only southerners. Do Californians advocate racism? Guns? Protectionism? White supremacy? War? Macho sexism? Anti-Hispanic xenophobia? You're circumscribing the South, from Virginia on around to Texas, and the other states where the infection has set in. Set their boat loose.

If it's bad enough you've got to cut it adrift. We don't need another Civil war, we've already proved the marriage doesn't work. Just grant the divorce.

Well, Asians, blacks, whites, native Indians etc. All live in the south and you have condemned them all based on beliefs of some.

Like I said blatant xenophobia

by 'Wolfie Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:51 am

Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0? 3755771736

Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0? 2347854014

Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0? 1284863816

Should We Be Worried We’re Heading for Civil War 2.0? 479860004

"Civil War 2.0"

Sounds like a good name for a video game; or a punk rock band..

by Original Quill Thu Aug 23, 2018 4:30 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Only southerners. Do Californians advocate racism? Guns? Protectionism? White supremacy? War? Macho sexism? Anti-Hispanic xenophobia? You're circumscribing the South, from Virginia on around to Texas, and the other states where the infection has set in. Set their boat loose.

If it's bad enough you've got to cut it adrift. We don't need another Civil war, we've already proved the marriage doesn't work. Just grant the divorce.

Well, Asians, blacks, whites, native Indians etc. All live in the south and you have condemned them all based on beliefs of some.

Like I said blatant xenophobia

I've said it repeatedly, and I'll repeat once again: the righteous ones are free to immigrate to the west coast. I was born in Massachusetts, yet I gravitated here. Others are free to do the same.

It's a natural sorting, that should take place. What gun-toting, southern white nationalist wants to mingle in a crowd of snowflakes? They won't be well received the first time they go into a bar and shout death to all dem nigggas! They will find themselves more comfortable in Georgia. They will stay in the south, quite naturally.

The liberal ones will want to immigrate west. They will be welcome...as welcome as if they were born here. California will be the mecca for those who subscribe to the original foundations of this country. Natural sorting of good vs. bad.

by Guest Thu Aug 23, 2018 5:40 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

Well, Asians, blacks, whites, native Indians etc. All live in the south and you have condemned them all based on beliefs of some.

Like I said blatant xenophobia

I've said it repeatedly, and I'll repeat once again: the righteous ones are free to immigrate to the west coast. I was born in Massachusetts, yet I gravitated here. Others are free to do the same.

It's a natural sorting, that should take place. What gun-toting, southern white nationalist wants to mingle in a crowd of snowflakes? They won't be well received the first time they go into a bar and shout death to all dem nigggas! They will find themselves more comfortable in Georgia. They will stay in the south, quite naturally.

The liberal ones will want to immigrate west. They will be welcome...as welcome as if they were born here. California will be the mecca for those who subscribe to the original foundations of this country. Natural sorting of good vs. bad.

Even worse. You are claiming that if people choose to want to remain where they live. No matter if Muslim, Jew, Christian ect. As well as black,white, Latino, Asian etc. You have now cast them as unrighteous.

Natural sorting? You mean like how the Nazi's did to who they cast as undesirables?

Seems to me, you are playing the same symphony just using different instruments

Like I said you are emphatically xenophobic

Seems more like California under your dictatorship. Is more like 1930's Germany

by Original Quill Thu Aug 23, 2018 7:50 pm

Didge wrote:Even worse. You are claiming that if people choose to want to remain where they live. No matter if Muslim, Jew, Christian ect. As well as black,white, Latino, Asian etc. You have now cast them as unrighteous.

Didge, your first sentence above has no ending. You have constructed it as a modus ponens argument (if, then), but left the entire conclusion off. How can I tell what you are saying? An 'if-then' argument must have a condition and a consequence, otherwise it says nothing.

Didge wrote:Natural sorting? You mean like how the Nazi's did to who they cast as undesirables?

Not at all. By “natural” what I am asserting is that people have a right to chose for themselves where they want to live. Would you deny that right?

I am simply betting people will want to be with their own kind, that’s all. White supremacists will not feel comfortable with lefty snowflakes. They will stick with the south. And leftys will not like living under Jim Crow laws and separate but equal segregation, with everyone carrying guns. So they will gravitate to more freedom and self-determination. All of that is natural in that people will choose for themselves.

Didge wrote:Seems more like California under your dictatorship. Is more like 1930's Germany

You tend to think in authoritarian ways, so I can see how you are confused. By 'natural', I am saying that it’s a matter of one’s own choice. There is nothing ‘natural’ about an autocratic system; it’s artificial and dictatorial. Nazis were authoritarian, so I understand that you would think like them, and jump to that conclusion. But I am saying quite the contrary.

by Guest Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:00 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:Even worse. You are claiming that if people choose to want to remain where they live. No matter if Muslim, Jew, Christian ect. As well as black,white, Latino, Asian etc. You have now cast them as unrighteous.

Didge, your sentence above has no predicate. How can I tell what you are saying? A sentence must have a subject and a predicate, otherwise it says nothing.

Didge wrote:So when I expose your methodology is no better than Trump. Where he wishes to deny people entry to the US. You clearly fail to see how complicitly you are the same. Its based on beliefs and the only differece being the type of belief

Not at all. By “natural” what I am asserting is that people have a right to chose for themselves where they want to live. Would you deny that right?

I am simply betting people will want to be with their own kind, that’s all. White supremacists will not feel comfortable with lefty snowflakes. They will stick with the south. And leftys will not like living under Jim Crow laws and separate but equal segregation, with everyone carrying guns. So they will gravitate to more freedom and self-determination. All of that is natural in that people will choose for themselves.

Didge wrote:But what about the people that live there already and want to come and live there that have politial views you are against? Your view as to what people want to do is based on your own view and not any reality to what people atually want.

You tend to think in authoritarian ways, so I can see how you are confused. By 'natural', I am saying that it’s a matter of one’s own choice. There is nothing ‘natural’ about an autocratic system; it’s artificial and dictatorial. Nazis were authoritarian, so I understand that you would think like them, and jump to that conclusion. But I am saying quite the contrary.

Its funny you should say that being as your views are Totalitarian. You only want to open the door to people who hold similar beliefs. Which is not different to the white supremacists or Britains First for example. You make the glaring mistake. Thinking that to solve a problem, is to push that problem away. That does not solve the problem. Its still going to be there. You tackle extreem beliefs with rational and reasoned views, challenging such poor beliefs

by Original Quill Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:19 pm

Didge wrote:Its funny you should say that being as your views are Totalitarian. You only want to open the door to people who hold similar beliefs. Which is not different to the white supremacists or Britains First for example. You make the glaring mistake. Thinking that to solve a problem, is to push that problem away. That does not solve the problem. Its still going to be there. You tackle extreem beliefs with rational and reasoned views, challenging such poor beliefs

Since none of what you say relates to what I have said, I'll leave you to talk to yourself.

As far as pushing the problem away, it's more like a mistake was made in the first place, in putting the two sides together. And it's irreparable.

The British-American colonies were two different economies and two different cultures. The North was a mercantile, industrial system, while the south was an agrarian, cash-cropping system, dependent upon slavery. The divisive issue was involuntary servitude...and with a white supremacist south, it still is today.

That is why rational argument between the north and the south, the liberals and conservatives, or if you wish, the Left and the Right, tends to fall out of reasonable discussion and into civil war. The very premises were separate. From 1776 to 2018, the same split remains. You call it "pushing away', but I would think after all this time, you might admit the union is never going to fuse.

I am just adjusting to reality, that's all.

by Guest Thu Aug 23, 2018 8:21 pm

So you are bowing out then

I guess answering would incriminate yourself and back what I stated already

by Ben Reilly Thu Aug 23, 2018 10:51 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Only southerners. Do Californians advocate racism? Guns? Protectionism? White supremacy? War? Macho sexism? Anti-Hispanic xenophobia? You're circumscribing the South, from Virginia on around to Texas, and the other states where the infection has set in. Set their boat loose.

If it's bad enough you've got to cut it adrift. We don't need another Civil war, we've already proved the marriage doesn't work. Just grant the divorce.

Well, Asians, blacks, whites, native Indians etc. All live in the south and you have condemned them all based on beliefs of some.

Like I said blatant xenophobia

I've said it repeatedly, and I'll repeat once again: the righteous ones are free to immigrate to the west coast. I was born in Massachusetts, yet I gravitated here. Others are free to do the same.

It's a natural sorting, that should take place. What gun-toting, southern white nationalist wants to mingle in a crowd of snowflakes? They won't be well received the first time they go into a bar and shout death to all dem nigggas! They will find themselves more comfortable in Georgia. They will stay in the south, quite naturally.

The liberal ones will want to immigrate west. They will be welcome...as welcome as if they were born here. California will be the mecca for those who subscribe to the original foundations of this country. Natural sorting of good vs. bad.

Yeah, well, so many of the New Orleans residents couldn't get out of the way of Katrina, they had to try to weather the storm.

If you apply that to politics, you can storm right back at the storm. You can actually change things.

You realize a Democrat is poised to upset Ted Cruz in Texas? Do you realize what a blue Texas would mean for American history?

Your defeatism is actually disgusting. You sound like you've given up.

by Ben Reilly Thu Aug 23, 2018 11:29 pm

Accidental Courtesy [premiering Monday, February 13; check local listings] portrays African American musician Daryl Davis’s attempt to change white supremacists by gradually shattering their prejudices with his friendship. It’s a complicated, risky, and controversial pursuit, but Davis has succeeded in convincing numerous men to abandon their hatred to become reformed racists.

One of Daryl’s former white supremacist friends is Scott Shepherd, seen in the film, who was once a Grand Dragon in the Klan but is now an anti-racism activist who Tweets under the handle @ReformedRacist. How did Shepherd get from there to here?

Shepherd “made it his life’s mission to defeat the creed he once espoused, the people [he] once called friends have sent him death threats, yet still he carries on, desperate to atone for the sins of his past” [International Business Times]. At the Martin Luther King Center, Shepherd recently publicly apologized to the family of the slain Civil Rights leader for all the terrible things he once said about Dr. King. In a video of that discussion (below), with Daryl Davis alongside him, the Mississippi native revealed that he was raised by an African American woman, and blames having a broken home with an alcoholic father, along with self-loathing, for why he turned toward the Klan (which was basically in his backyard).

http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/blog/reformed-racists-white-supremacists-life-after-hate/

If a KKK member can change, anybody can change.

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 12:45 am

Ben wrote:Your defeatism is actually disgusting. You sound like you've given up

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 1:03 am

Original Quill wrote:
Ben wrote:Your defeatism is actually disgusting. You sound like you've given up

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

Its you being negative, where you think you can resolve a problem by pushing that problem away.

That is not how you tackle problems or help change them

What is even worse is you seem to assume everyone in the South is a white nationalist

What that really translates as. Is you not wanting to live next to Republicans, as you class them as white nationalists.

I back Ben's approach a million times over yours

For the Republicans to lose in Texas. Would create such a damaging effect on the Republican. It could see other states also change hands.

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 1:48 am

Didge wrote:Its you being negative, where you think you can resolve a problem by pushing that problem away.

It's not negative if it's something desired. In that case, it's a positive.

Read my post. The engine that energizes the separation--what I call 'natural' separation--is that it is desired by both sides. I don't want an Alabaman for a neighbor, and he doesn't want me for a neighbor. Those mutual forces guarantee a 'natural' division.

Now, do you see what I mean by 'natural' didge? You didn't understand before. It's self-motivating.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 1:54 am

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:Its you being negative, where you think you can resolve a problem by pushing that problem away.

It's not negative if it's something desired. In that case, it's a positive.

Read my post. The engine that energizes the separation--what I call 'natural' separation--is that it is desired by both sides. I don't want an Alabaman for a neighbor, and he doesn't want me for a neighbor. Those mutual forces guarantee a 'natural' division.

Now, do you see what I mean by 'natural' didge? You didn't understand before. It's self-motivating.

Really?

The Nazi's desired to remove the Jews, Slavs etc

How is that a positive thing, when as seen Jews, Slavs etc suffered at the hands of such a hateful belief?

I have read your post and you are empahtially xenophobic.

You don't want a Muslim, Jewish, Deomocrat, Black, White, Asian, Latino etc person from the State of Alabama living next door to you.

So yes I see, you are prejudiced

Night

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 4:18 am

Didge wrote:The Nazi's desired to remove the Jews, Slavs etc

How is that a positive thing, when as seen Jews, Slavs etc suffered at the hands of such a hateful belief?

I don't know what you are talking about.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:08 am

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:The Nazi's desired to remove the Jews, Slavs etc

How is that a positive thing, when as seen Jews, Slavs etc suffered at the hands of such a hateful belief?

I don't know what you are talking about.

I guess that is why you are going wrong then

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:09 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I don't know what you are talking about.

I guess that is why you are going wrong then

Didge, you've gone down another rabbit hole having nothing to do with the thread. I am simply saying, your trails are idiosyncratic and no one can follow you.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:18 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

I guess that is why you are going wrong then

Didge, you've gone down another rabbit hole having nothing to do with the thread. I am simply saying, your trails are idiosyncratic and no one can follow you.

Have I?

It seems to me, you are trying to deny the point you made

You claimed something to be desired is a positive thing. Where you advocated the very same methodology. As the Nazi's.

To seperate from what you both class as undesirables.

You went off not wanting a neighbour from Alabama. Which could be anyone from Muslim, Jew, black etc

You went off not wanting to be have white supreacists live where you live.

These are all methods the Nazis used

They rounded up Jews, communists, those on the left and sometimes right. Homosexuals, the disabled etc

You want to also seperate and deny people based on the beliefs they follow you do not like

It makes you the same as Trump on denying Muslim immigrants and refugees

Oh and for the record. What the Nazi;s saw as positive, caused the deaths of millions of Germans and the destruction of Germany

Go figure, now was their view to you to seperate, positive?

What this means Quill, is that you do not want to live in a free society. You want to dictate what people can believe in your society.

That is authoritarian

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:46 pm

As I said yesterday, I don't know what you are talking about. You meander so, that I don't know what you are referring to.

Can you be more specific?

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:49 pm

Original Quill wrote:As I said yesterday, I don't know what you are talking about. You meander so, that I don't know what you are referring to.

Can you be more specific?

Ben clearly understands

Maybe why you do not understand, is becuase your views are clouded emotionally

My points were very clear

It seems to me you are attempting to poorly avoid them

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 6:57 pm

Okay Quill

Simple questions

Would you allow someone to live next door to you or enter California. That advoates the death penalty for homosexuality?

Would you allow someone to live next door to you or enter California. That advocates racial segregation?

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:11 pm

Would I allow? I have no authority to allow, or disallow. Your question makes no sense.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:15 pm

Original Quill wrote:Would I allow? I have no authority to allow, or disallow. Your question makes no sense.

Never claimed you did

You said you did not want to live next door to white supreamcists did you not?

So let me rephrase for you

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advoates the death penalty for homosexuality?

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advocates racial segregation?

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:34 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Would I allow? I have no authority to allow, or disallow. Your question makes no sense.

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advoates the death penalty for homosexuality?

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advocates racial segregation?

I probably wouldn't even know.

Look at it from a more general, but relevant view. If we took a part of the country where those undesirable people predominate, and set it adrift...we would never be confronted with the problem...or be confronted to a lesser extent.

Now, if it comes to that, I can vote to separate the Pacific Coast states from the rest of the country. That I would do. So, ask me something that's in my purview.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:44 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advoates the death penalty for homosexuality?

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advocates racial segregation?

I probably wouldn't even know.

Look at it from a more general, but relevant view. If we took a part of the country where those undesirable people predominate, and set it adrift...we would never be confronted with the problem...or be confronted to a lesser extent.

Now, if it comes to that, I can vote to separate the Pacific Coast states from the rest of the country. That I would do. So, ask me something that's in my purview.

Point 1) Really?

When you were very clear earlier, based on my second question ?

Original Quill wrote:

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

So you are ducking out of answering

Point 2) So just like Trump then. He sees part of the Muslim world as having undesirable people and thus is setting them adrift. By not letting them in.

Seems like you are two peas in a pod

Point 3) So you are advocating a form of political Aparthied based on beliefs. This is exactly the goals of many far right groups in Europe in regards to immigration and Muslims

Go figure

So being as you already stated the answer to the second question I asked, earlier in the debate. Why is it you are afraid to answer the first, regarding those advocating the death penalty for homosexuality??

I also take it you would not want to live next to Arab Supremacists as well then?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism_in_the_Arab_world

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Arab_supremacy

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:52 pm

Original Quill wrote:Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

Yep, that's what I want.

What I want, and what I can achieve are two different things, as with anyone.

I can only achieve this by voting for a separate country. So, I would vote for a separate California.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:55 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

Yep, that's what I want.

What I want, and what I can achieve are two different things, as with anyone.

I can only achieve this by voting for a separate country. So, I would vote for a separate California.

So you answered question 2, why not my first question?

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advoates the death penalty for homosexuality?

If that is what you want on question 2, then you must back Trumps views against Arab Supremacists entering the US?

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 7:56 pm

Didge wrote:Point 2) So just like Trump then. He sees part of the Muslim world as having undesirable people and thus is setting them adrift. By not letting them in.

Seems like you are two peas in a pod

We all can have opinions. That said, they don't have to be the same opinion.

Trump's opinions are the exact opposite of mine. I think Muslims are wonderful people.

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:01 pm

Didge wrote:Point 3) So you are advocating a form of political Aparthied based on beliefs. This is exactly the goals of many far right groups in Europe in regards to immigration and Muslims

Aparthied was "a system of institutionalised racial segregation that existed in South Africa from 1948 until the early 1990s." It was codified in law.

I don't have the capacity to make laws, nor would I favor it. I just wouldn't want undesirable people for neighbors.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:04 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:Point 2) So just like Trump then. He sees part of the Muslim world as having undesirable people and thus is setting them adrift. By not letting them in.

Seems like you are two peas in a pod

We all can have opinions. That said, they don't have to be the same opinion.

Trump's opinions are the exact opposite of mine. I think Muslims are wonderful people.

So you refuse to answer the question

I guess it would again, incriminate you.

Who said anything about Muslims, when some Christians also advocate the same death penalty against Homosexuals?

Hence you want to make an exception for Muslims that do advocate hate against Homosexuals

It seems to me, you are elevating religious beliefs of religious believers, over the well being and rights of homosexuals

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:07 pm

Didge wrote:So you answered question 2, why not my first question?

I answered that three posts ago: What I want, and what I can achieve are two different things, as with anyone.

I am just a lone Californian that would like to see us disassociate from the southern US states. I would vote to achieve that...no more, no less.

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:11 pm

Didge wrote:I guess it would again, incriminate you.

You have strange misunderstandings. Criminality is defined here by the California Criminal Code and the US Criminal Code.

Care to enlighten us as to what criminal laws you are referring to?

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:11 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:So you answered question 2, why not my first question?

I answered that three posts ago: What I want, and what I can achieve are two different things, as with anyone.

I am just a lone Californian that would like to see us disassociate from the southern US states. I would vote to achieve that...no more, no less.

No you did not and still refuse to answer

You are sounding more and more hypocritial and in tune with the Far right. The more you wrap yourself up in knots here

by Original Quill Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:17 pm

Didge wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

I answered that three posts ago: What I want, and what I can achieve are two different things, as with anyone.

I am just a lone Californian that would like to see us disassociate from the southern US states. I would vote to achieve that...no more, no less.

No you did not and still refuse to answer

You are sounding more and more hypocritial and in tune with the Far right. The more you wrap yourself up in knots here

You don't ask questions very well. You throw shite against the wall to see what sticks. Methinks you are knowingly hiding the fact that you have lost, using this endless babble of meaningless nonsense to obscure the fact.

Now, if you have a valid question, rephrase it so that it has no framing, and is a simple, direct question. Otherwise, I'm bored.

by Guest Fri Aug 24, 2018 8:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Didge wrote:

No you did not and still refuse to answer

You are sounding more and more hypocritial and in tune with the Far right. The more you wrap yourself up in knots here

You don't ask questions very well. You throw shite against the wall to see what sticks. Methinks you are knowingly hiding the fact that you have lost, using this endless babble of meaningless nonsense to obscure the fact.

Now, if you have a valid question, rephrase it so that it has no framing, and is a simple, direct question. Otherwise, I'm bored.

I based this off your own views

Original Quill wrote:

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

I adapted your question to people hateful towards homosexuals and you still refuse to answer

So the questions again

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advoates the death penalty for homosexuality?

Would you want someone to live next door to you or want them to enter California. That advocates racial segregation?

by Ben Reilly Fri Aug 24, 2018 10:52 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Ben wrote:Your defeatism is actually disgusting. You sound like you've given up

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

I'm not being negative, I'm showing far more faith in humanity than you seem to have. You're being pessimistic, and painting millions of people with the same brush to boot.

by eddie Sat Aug 25, 2018 2:14 am

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Original Quill wrote:
Ben wrote:Your defeatism is actually disgusting. You sound like you've given up

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

I'm not being negative, I'm showing far more faith in humanity than you seem to have. You're being pessimistic, and painting millions of people with the same brush to boot.

Haven’t you ever read his “all white people should be flogged for being inherently racist” posts?

by Ben Reilly Sat Aug 25, 2018 2:48 am

eddie wrote:
Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Original Quill wrote:
Ben wrote:Your defeatism is actually disgusting. You sound like you've given up

Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

I'm not being negative, I'm showing far more faith in humanity than you seem to have. You're being pessimistic, and painting millions of people with the same brush to boot.

Haven’t you ever read his “all white people should be flogged for being inherently racist” posts?

Shoot me some links.

by eddie Sat Aug 25, 2018 2:50 am

i don’t need to. You’ve seen them and we’ve discussed them, remember?

by Ben Reilly Sat Aug 25, 2018 2:54 am

eddie wrote:i don’t need to. You’ve seen them and we’ve discussed them, remember?

For the sake of transparency.

by Original Quill Sat Aug 25, 2018 3:03 am

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

I'm not being negative, I'm showing far more faith in humanity than you seem to have. You're being pessimistic, and painting millions of people with the same brush to boot.

You are also avoiding calling people wrong, where they should be probably be jailed. I'm way beyond being fair to criminals. Southerners are white supremacists. I say remove them from our territory, and let them back in if they pass muster.

That means no white supremacists, no KKK, no Neo-Nazis...Get 'em the fuck outta here, alright? Stop with the pussyfooting.

by eddie Sat Aug 25, 2018 3:04 am

Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
eddie wrote:i don’t need to. You’ve seen them and we’ve discussed them, remember?

For the sake of transparency.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t24883p200-new-york-times-stands-by-editorial-board-hire-despite-racist-tweets?highlight=Tweets+racist#472923

And there’s more. As you know.

by eddie Sat Aug 25, 2018 3:10 am

Original Quill wrote:
Ben Mothafuckin' Reilly wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Stop being so negative, Ben. The fact is, I don't want to be neighbors with white nationalists. It's hardly defeatism to know what you want. I want a world without those cretins.

I'm not being negative, I'm showing far more faith in humanity than you seem to have. You're being pessimistic, and painting millions of people with the same brush to boot.

You are also avoiding calling people wrong, where they should be probably be jailed. I'm way beyond being fair to criminals. Southerners are white supremacists. I say remove them from our territory, and let them back in if they pass muster.

That means no white supremacists, no KKK, no Neo-Nazis...Get 'em the fuck outta here, alright? Stop with the pussyfooting.

“Southerners are white supremacists.”

All of them?

Like “all Muslims are terrorists”
Or “all Indians are terrorists”

Can you be clearer when you use your brush full of tar?

by Sponsored content