Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-08-2020, 07:00 PM
 
5,985 posts, read 2,890,859 times
Reputation: 9025

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel976 View Post
The fact that you consider him a staunch Republican is because, contrary to your claim of being middle of the road, you are far to the left. That is also why you judge this to be an “extreme right-wing site” when in fact we have many people, such as yourself, who are pretty far left.
Overall, I AM very middle of the road. Looking at my voting history, I have a very even split between voting for democratic and republican candidates. I am dismissed on forums that lean left because of my views are too conservative, just as I am dismissed on this forum (which leans extremely far right) for being liberal. It's actually amazing how similarly I am treated by the extreme left (of which there really aren't people on city data PoC) as well as the extreme right.

I participate in forums mid to extreme left wing (the exact opposite of City Data PoC), and the pushback I get from the left is just as strong as I get here. This country is so divided that rational thought pulling the best from both sides of the isle is frowned upon.

Last edited by Lekrii; 07-08-2020 at 07:12 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-08-2020, 07:12 PM
 
Location: bold new city of the south
5,821 posts, read 5,282,314 times
Reputation: 7118
Quote:
Originally Posted by andywire View Post
Why are they going after churches? Are they demanding reparations? Or have they given up hiding the fact that they are a Marxist organization hellbent on taking power by any means necessary?
''Atheism is a natural and inseparable part of Marxism, of the theory and practice of scientific socialism. Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism.''
''Atheism is the natural and inseparable part of Communism.''
Vladimir Lenin


Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii View Post
Why bring up black on black crime so much, then? It's such an odd response in threads about BLM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakeJones View Post
Because when you don't do anything about the 99% of black shooting deaths, the M doesn't exactly mean anything, does it?
Bingo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 07:15 PM
 
19,702 posts, read 11,955,517 times
Reputation: 17445
Loathsome behavior.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 07:22 PM
 
Location: Oklahoma
17,622 posts, read 13,438,260 times
Reputation: 17533
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriotic Dissent View Post
He that hath no sword, sell his robe and buy a sword. The bible does tell people to arm themselves so.
Yep, you never know when you might need to whack a high priest's ear off.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 07:53 PM
 
Location: Old Dominion
3,307 posts, read 1,200,566 times
Reputation: 1409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii View Post
BLM is a political platform, anymore. They have a website that pretty clearly spells out the goals. LGBTQ rights are written in those goals. In all the people I've talked to at BLM events, I've not seen a single person who doesn't think black on black crime is an issue. I really don't understand why the right wing brings that up, almost as if some people are trying to say the notion that black on black crime happens justifies police brutality against minorities.



Sorry, but I didn't put my tinfoil hat on this morning, and with respect, we've talked more than once. I am moderate myself and I don't see much of what you say aligning with liberal ideology.
See the problem is when people ask them to discuss the issue of black on black crime and the high violence in inner cities, people fall back on the trope that they are just about police brutality. So what is it? If the organization can advocate for LGBTQ rights, then why can't they advocate for ways to reduce violent crime in inner city communities? Terry Crews interviewed with Don Lemon, and Don Lemon was so condescending to Terry Crew's points. Once he brought up that BLM has more issues under their charter, Don Lemon immediately cut the interview.

I don't think many people say that black on black crime justifies policy brutality against minorities, again this painting anyone with a differing opinion from you as right wing and being okay with police brutality. I think people see what has been going on and the destruction (whether that is actually tied in with the movement or not) and they are tired of it. The social unrest lately has led to more black lives being lost than those of unarmed black people killed in the entire year of 2019.

Does being liberal have a set ideology that someone must buy into all perspectives that you agree with. I will concede that I haven't seen the evidence tying in George Soros with this movement, and I do agree that it is a talking point that typically comes from the right.

https://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...k-lives-matter
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 08:10 PM
 
Location: New York City
19,061 posts, read 12,605,372 times
Reputation: 14781
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecko_complex24 View Post
Terry Crews interviewed with Don Lemon, and Don Lemon was so condescending to Terry Crew's points. Once he brought up that BLM has more issues under their charter, Don Lemon immediately cut the interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzR8x_jlGaI
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 08:21 PM
 
Location: Old Dominion
3,307 posts, read 1,200,566 times
Reputation: 1409
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlakeJones View Post
Thanks for posting this video. It's a lot easier to view this way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 08:23 PM
 
5,985 posts, read 2,890,859 times
Reputation: 9025
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecko_complex24 View Post
See the problem is when people ask them to discuss the issue of black on black crime and the high violence in inner cities, people fall back on the trope that they are just about police brutality. So what is it? If the organization can advocate for LGBTQ rights, then why can't they advocate for ways to reduce violent crime in inner city communities? Terry Crews interviewed with Don Lemon, and Don Lemon was so condescending to Terry Crew's points. Once he brought up that BLM has more issues under their charter, Don Lemon immediately cut the interview.

I don't think many people say that black on black crime justifies policy brutality against minorities, again this painting anyone with a differing opinion from you as right wing and being okay with police brutality. I think people see what has been going on and the destruction (whether that is actually tied in with the movement or not) and they are tired of it. The social unrest lately has led to more black lives being lost than those of unarmed black people killed in the entire year of 2019.

Does being liberal have a set ideology that someone must buy into all perspectives that you agree with. I will concede that I haven't seen the evidence tying in George Soros with this movement, and I do agree that it is a talking point that typically comes from the right.

https://www.latimes.com/entertainmen...k-lives-matter
One of the problems is how broad BLM is today. You can find someone who claims to be part of BLM who has a LOT of different views. I was part of a discussion on another forum (that leans pretty hard left) where quite a few ardent BLM supporters praised Crews for what he said. They were actively annoyed at fellow BLM protesters who were angry at Crews' comments. Their point was, even if they disagree with him that as soon as a movement or organization is unwilling to be self-critical, it becomes dangerous. There's a very large contingent of people in BLM who really appreciate comments like what Terry Crews made, and who will sit down and have a long talk with you, even if you disagree, because that helps keep the movement in check.

The problem is that makes for a bad news story. Putting the small minority who riot and protest on the news gets more views, and makes news outlets more money. No one wants to see stories about peace and rational discussion on the front page of Fox or CNN.

Another problem is how divided we are politically. 30% of people will be republican, no matter what, and 30% of people will be democrats, no matter what. The hard core republicans *know* liberals are evil, and look for any excuse to support that. The hard core democrats *know* conservatives are evil, and look for any excuse to support that as well. Media (left and right) play to that 60% of the population. The tricky part is finding the remaining 40% to actually have rational conversations with, and a very decent percentage of people in BLM (but absolutely not all) fall into that 40%. The 40% just isn't always very vocal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 08:26 PM
 
19,966 posts, read 7,799,148 times
Reputation: 6556
Quote:
Originally Posted by ecko_complex24 View Post
Thanks for posting this video. It's a lot easier to view this way.
Yeah really. How about if BLM wants to talk about anything else besides police brutality then they should start a new group. BLM is not really even about police brutality or blacks being killed.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-08-2020, 08:30 PM
 
Location: Old Dominion
3,307 posts, read 1,200,566 times
Reputation: 1409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii View Post
One of the problems is how broad BLM is today. You can find someone who claims to be part of BLM who has a LOT of different views. I was part of a discussion on another forum (that leans pretty hard left) where quite a few ardent BLM supporters praised Crews for what he said. They were actively annoyed at fellow BLM protesters who were angry at Crews' comments. Their point was, even if they disagree with him that as soon as a movement or organization is unwilling to be self-critical, it becomes dangerous. There's a very large contingent of people in BLM who really appreciate comments like what Terry Crews made, and who will sit down and have a long talk with you, even if you disagree, because that helps keep the extremists in BLM in check.

The problem is that makes for a bad news story. Putting the small minority who riot and protest on the news gets more views, and makes news outlets more money. No one wants to see stories about peace and rational discussion on the front page of Fox or CNN.

Another problem is how divided we are politically. 30% of people will be republican, no matter what, and 30% of people will be democrats, no matter what. The hard core republicans *know* liberals are evil, and look for any excuse to support that. The hard core democrats *know* republicans are evil, and look for any excuse to support that as well. Media (left and right) play to that 60% of the population. The tricky part is finding the remaining 40% to actually have rational conversations with, and a very decent percentage of people in BLM (but absolutely not all) fall into that 40%. The 40% just isn't always very vocal.
I agree that there are probably plenty of people associated with BLM that care about the issues the Terry Crews brought up. I do believe that the movement will start to splinter and there will be more radical parts of the movement forming along far left lines. Any large movement is susceptible to this though.

It just seems like the more radical parts of the movement have a lot of funding and political power behind them. I don't think it's a large democrat plot, but I do think that the democrat party may see a fracturing over things like the increasing cancel culture. The problem is we must be on the guard for these radical elements that are surfacing, we don't want to get into a situation of creeping normality. I think a lot of people dismiss how things in our society could shift for the worse, and they write off suspicions about this as being overly paranoid. I just think that we need to keep are guard up against radicals infiltrating institutions, whether they be from the right or the left.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top