Lurker > Esrac

ElatedVenusaur posted...

An important thing to keep in mind: even the Founders who were against slavery really didnt grasp just how evil it was. They didnt see black people as people, so the stakes seemed much lower to them. It was easy for them to prioritize their collective interest in presenting a united front against the British.
That was also true of basically all of the abolitionists John Brown being the most notable exception. White America was almost united in seeing black people as less. You could argue convincingly thats still a widespread view.

I wouldn't agree that they didn't see black people as people, save perhaps the more malevolent slave masters, though they generally did think of them as less intellectually capable than whites. I do think there was a certain level of disconnected compartmentalization with the founders who spoke against slavery, but still owned slaves.

Like Jefferson who wrote about how terrible slavery was and proposed legislation against it, but still owned his own slaves. I suspect, in his case, if he had not been in such significant financial debt, he may have emancipated them upon his death as Washington did. But that is just speculation on my part.

CommonJoe posted...

I dont think that played a factor. The Founders faced an emergent nation that as it was was only just holding together, and that unity remained tenous up until the post Civil War era when the US as a single nation finally became an accepted part of American identities.

A lot of the Founders early decisions were based around appeasing the South to maintain unity. A good example: The "militia" lines in the Second Amendment? There to ensure the South that their militias wouldnt be disbanded in favor of the national army.

The North needed the South to do what it wanted to do, but the same wasnt true in reverse. We have to remember that when we judge the Founders.

I think it did play a factor in the slave economy seeing a boom. The cotton gin is an invention that made cotton plantations much more profitable, and one that the founders couldn't have foreseen 20 years earlier.

But, yes, a lot of the political decisions they made before, during, and after the revolution required compromise with the states that were pro-slavery. I stated as much already. Without the southern states, there really would have been no chance at a successful revolution.

Refraining from freeing the slaves, with the intention to revisit the issue later, was probably the best choice they could have made at the time to maintain what unity they could. The early years of the US had a lot of disagreement over what form and direction the new nation would take.

CommonJoe posted...

Its also good to remember that in the context of the revolution slavery eas being looked at in a similar vein to how we view gay rights or drug legalization.

The moral arguments then and now are there, but you're talking about uprooting norms that have existed for decades, if not centuries. And at least during the Revolution, Southern slavery hadn't yet started to decline, so you couldn't make the "unviable to continue" argument that could have a century afterwords if you were to ask if slavery would have really continued if the South won. It wouldnt have as the industrial revolution would have rendered it largely obsolete.

So were the Founders cowards regarding slavery? No, but thats like saying refusing to be a total paragon of virtue is cowardice, and in any age thats simply unrealistic.

Well, there is an argument to be made that slavery as an institution was gradually on it's way out, which may have been why the founder felt setting the issue aside for later was a viable option, until the cotton gin was invented. That caused a significant boom in the southern cotton plantation economy, which would've increased demand for slave labor and prolonged the practice longer than may have been foreseen in 1776.

So, in reality, the founders prior, during, and after the revolution were not a monolith and it was a complicated issue.

There were founders who had abolitionist sympathies and goals, but political compromises had to be made, because a number of states still relied on slavery to maintain their economy, to ensure there was any union to be had at all.

For example, Jefferson had abolitionist sympathies written into his original draft of the Declaration of Independence, admonishing the crown for its role in enslaving and transporting African slaves to the Americas, but that segment was edited out in committee. He expressed some unkind words about the practice and even advocated for some possible solutions, granted he failed to emancipate almost all of his own slaves.

We already know some of the colonies were pro-slavery and others worked on legislation for gradual emancipation of the slaves.

PBusted posted...

They should also confine and put down all the white supremacists, transphobes, and incels and anyone who enable them on there as well because itd be only a matter of time before they killed someone too.

This is an exceptionally dumb post. Those are not immutable characteristics in the way pedophilia is.

Not to suggest it's easy, but you can talk a white supremacist out of being a white supremacist and you can, theoretically, get an incel laid. But no amount of therapy, conversation, counseling, etc
is going to make a pedophile stop being a pedophile.

Edit: That said, if you want the government to round up and deal with actual neo-Nazis, then I can get behind that. They are as much a traitor to the US as Confederates.

Vivec posted...

Which makes it even odder that Tim felt the need to support this in any way

Huch! Aber es variiert wahrscheinlich.

"We should allow pedophiles to join society and give them therapy" is just a couple steps away from "we should accept pedophiles as they are."

PBusted posted...

Speaking from experience? You used to be a heavy 8-Chan defender.

8chan was a platform where anyone could make any board about anything. Some people using it for kiddie porn is incidental.

I defended the existence of 8chan, but I had also acknowledged that there were a couple boards on there that enabled pedophilia. If I recall, my exact words regarding one of those boards was "if that isn't child porn, it is as close to it as you can possibly get to it".

By all means, I'd be happy to see law enforcement confine and put down those particular posters.

Timohtep posted...

That's why we need to expand social services for that kind of thing. Therapies and counseling can do wonders for a person struggling with this. People like you who refuse to see people who have COMMITTED NO CRIMES as anything but literal monsters are spouting all this rhetoric that even non-offending pedophiles must die, which only drives then deeper underground. If there were resources available to these people, they may actually have a fighting chance of being a productive member of society despite their very serious and unfortunate flaws.

If a man is attracted to kids but is told by society his whole life that if he tells literally anyone so he can work through his frustrations, his life will be ruined and he'll probably die, that's an awful lot of fucking stress and 100% does not help in making sure that person is fucking stable, and WON'T diddle kids.

These people need therapy and counseling and we need to encourage them to seek it instead of going directly to "kill all of them". That only makes the problem worse.

"Reparative therapy" doesn't work. No amount of talking it out is going to make them not thirsty for little kids.

Vivec posted...

Yeah comparing pedophilia with homosexuality and implying that men will rape if they cant have a willing partner is pretty fucking yikes

I haven't done either of those.

SquantoZ posted...

Gotta love the "former liberal" lies that Trump supporters constantly spew. No, you were never liberal. Never. Like, not at all. No one goes from being liberal to an outright conservative trump supporter overnight.

Maybe not that sharp a turn, but most people generally do drift to the right as they get older.

And the left, as a whole, generally keeps pulling to the left with each generation.

Fair, next.

Timohtep posted...

Yeah that sounds pretty fucked up to me so I'm gonna big disagree.

No one who hasn't committed any crime deserves a sweeping death penalty and I will fight anyone about it.

(Obviously any molester gets what's coming to them )

Pedophiles will eventually offend. It's not a matter of if, it's when. And mostly likely already have. Whether they diddled their nieces and nephews, little siblings, or watch kiddie porn.

Like I said, expecting a pedophile to just go through life without ever indulging in their sexual desires is as unreasonable and unrealistic as expecting homosexuals to go through their lives without ever doing it. The difference is homosexuals' sexuality doesn't generally involve raping little kids.

Letting pedophiles join society is just going to entice them.

Timohtep posted...

No. If you're attracted to kids and are truly committed to bettering yourself and have never/will never touch a child, you have 100% rights to continue living. You cannot criminalize thoughts.

Just because you've fantasized about what it would be like to commit a crime doesn't mean you should be prosecuted.

Nah. Expecting a pedophile to get over their sexuality and not try fucking a kid is no different than people expected homosexuals to get over their sexuality. It is an unrealistic expectation.

There is no such thing as a non-offending pedophile. Their pedophilic urges are an immutable characteristic. Their existence is an offense that should be purged.

Timohtep posted...

I mean, uhhhhh

I absolutely respect them for pushing the boundaries of accepting non-offending pedophiles as members of society. I big support the sentiment behind some of this, but uhhhhh

I don't think this is it chief

Abort mission

Nah, bruh. Actively offending or not, pedos need to be expunged.

GoodOlJr posted...

Narcissa wright

Ha ha.

I remember Narcissa. They look like a goblin from D&D appeared in the real world and spent all day being mopey on a webcam.

Sounds pretty good. Makes me wonder if it would work well with chicken instead of sausage.

I unironically look forward to the trolling.

On the one hand, it seems unnecessary, since I don't think those mascots really represent the original caricature. At this point, Aunt Jemima just looks like a kindly old black lady and the image just represents pancakes and syrup. When was the last time they actually personified Jemima?

On the other hand, I really don't give a shit about brand mascots. It'll probably be just two less PoC representatives in corporate branding.

I look forward to the day when Karen tries to Karen at the wrong person and gets knocked on her ass.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=H1QKyB_0P0E

Shame you can't the say the same for his son.

NinjaWarrior455 posted...

For all the talk about law and order, conservatives sure love their wet dreams about anarchy in the streets

Don't be obtuse.

Conservatives don't want anarchy in the streets. But they will have a smug "I told you so" prepared if crime spikes when the police give the "abolish the police" crowd what they want.

You don't have a right to be provided any material goods. Including water.

However, a state that does provide clean fresh water to its populace is much better than one that doesn't.

I remember there was a survey a couple years ago that found 45 - 50% of women were also attracted to other women, but 60 - 65% of women were unwilling to date a man who has had sex with other men.

Hopefully never.

Sounds like a bullshit study.

He gets it for being a badass old man.

But I would dig seeing Adams or one of the Roosevelts on it.

Rika_Furude posted...

was chrome ever good?

right now the only two viable browsers are Firefox and the new Microsoft Edge

I haven't tried the desktop version yet, but the mobile version of Brave is easily my favorite mobile web browser.

Most kids are dumb, aimless, and ignorant. If you want them to have direction, you need to start early and actively instill it into them.

I don't really listen to podcasts these days. I used to listen. To The Adam Carolla Show, Penn's Sunday school, and Skeptoid a few years back.

These days, I mostly just watch/listen to youtube, but only some of the channels I sub to put out long-form, routine shows.

I'll listen to The Joe Rogan Experience, if he has a guest that seems interesting.

I'll listen to The Killstream, if I want to listen to a fat alt-right alcoholic get mad at shit and be a fat, drunk buffoon.

Mad at the Internet is probably my favorite.

You are the weebs and we are the hunters.

Zikten posted...

they don't think of their victims as fellow humans. they see it as putting down an animal.

I wouldn't even say that. I mean, no one puts down an animal by tying it to a tree, setting it on fire, cutting its belly open, and stomping its unborn baby to death.

If they were just putting her down, it'd be a bullet to the back of the head or something like that.

darkphoenix181 posted...

Actually in her netflix doc, she wanted to do stuff like this yeara ago but her producers and parents said no, don't be controversial

Did she, or did she say as much to handwave all the years she wasn't vocal?

I haven't seen that doc, so I have no idea.

I couldn't call anyone, but my data was fine. Never lost 4g LTE.

Zikten posted...

I rarely hear about white people shot by cops on the news. Or online or even talked about on here

It does happen. But it doesn't seem to be an almost daily thing like cops shooting black people

You can't trust news media.

They report more on black men being shot by cops for the same reason the report more on white girls going missing or killed.

I wonder if it was a serial killer or inspired, emboldened copycat.

Or weirdly symbolic suicide, but that seems unlikely.

Man, Zikten talking like a crazy person in this topic.

Ok. He wasn't drunk driving the very second they went to arrest him. He just drove drunk to a fast food drive through and passed out at the wheel. So, even if you don't want to admit he was caught in the act of a crime, we know he did commit a crime minutes prior.

So, arresting him would be totally fair. Unless you want to suggest someone must be caught in the act of a crime to be arrested for a crime, which would have unfortunate implications for other crimes.

Yeah. The wild west days of the internet was perhaps the best of it. Before so much was centralized on a couple massive platforms. When everyone was mostly anonymous.

Ok, so I suspect this has less to do with being a Karen or racist. This sounds like some of that gang-stalking insanity.

1337toothbrush posted...

You'll find that pretty much all the sources trying to shit on CHAZ/CHOP are far-right. Videos can be misleading and when selectively reporting, it can show an event in a different light.

Probably because the sources that aren't right leaning want them to succeed, so are less eager to report on dumb shit that they do. Granted right leaning sources might be too eager.

Regardless, I don't think you can call misleading on this case when the preacher ends up with a gay man hugging on him, refusing to let him go, kissing him, etc. And then a bunch of dudes taking him down into a chokehold while he screams "you're choking me".

ViewtifulGrave posted...

Hes not of earth. He doesnt have any real nationality or race relative to earth.

Your taking joke too seriously. If anything Superman would be Jewish since his co-creators are Jewish themselves.

Take a moment to reread what I said and reevaluate which of us is taking a joke too seriously.

ViewtifulGrave posted...

Technically Superman isnt white, hes an alien immigrant.

Bruh. Kryptonians are white. What do you think they are? Irish?

iPhone_7 posted...

Guardians of the Galaxy 2 leaned too heavily on comedy. All the moments that were supposed to be serious are quickly undercut by something comedic that is said or done.

Thor: Ragnarok only seems like it leaned too heavily on the comedy because the previous Thor films were so serious & boring.

Ragnarok did A LOT of comedic undercutting too, bruh.

Winnsock posted...

I saw that too. I really wish they hadnt done that.

I just think its amusing. I mean, how utterly expected of them.

StarsOfCCTV posted...

But then again a small pool of women could be dating many men. That doesn't explain where the imbalance comes from. If you had 100 women and 100 men and 100 women would date the top 10 men. Why would those 10 men put up with those bottom 90 women when they could have the top 10. What stops the women putting up with the bottom 90 men?

Those top 10 men will still fuck the lower 90 women. Look at it this way, you dont always want a 5-star meal. They're really great, but sometimes you just want a greasy double cheeseburger. Because it's different.

At least Mineta is occasionally funny.

Saw a video recently of a street preacher going in there.

Their response was to sexually assault him. Then a bunch of guys take him down to the ground and put him in a chokehold. They finally disperse when they realize other people are filming them choke-holding a guy who is screaming "you're choking me!"

Two. The first one and the one where they take care of a baby Tyranosaurus.

BobanMarjanovic posted...

The first time I watched it I thought it was a fair movie. I rewatched it the other day and it was hard to finish.

I'm not surprised.

I enjoyed it when I watched it at the theater, but I've never felt a desire to watch it a second time.

I say that as someone who has seen the first Thor three or four times over the years.