I really am done here. I don’t want to read whatever bullshit way you decide to spin this. I won’t be responding anymore.
1 Like
Is this the same KKK that was the enforcement arm of the democratic party, or a different KKK?
1 Like
Famous liberals giving speeches to large liberal gatherings and being applauded by the majority of liberals and the liberal media aren’t in the mainstream? Sure… ok bud.
I said the modern KKK. The KKK in both it’s previous hay days was a very different animal. It was actually founded as a means to get Dems back in power. If you want to find the philosophical descendants of the klan when it re-imerged as a segregationist movement, you might want to look to the party and people who are still holding segregationist marches and supporting the segregation of housing and classes in schools. Those people always were and still are Dems. The modern KKK of the right is strictly non-violent and completely neutered and irrelevant. They are powerless and discounted by mainstream right and left and there’s like 500 of them in the whole country. However, liberal segregationists are a serious part of modern mainstream liberal ideology.
1 Like
So quit obfuscating and answer the simple original question. Why does the left produce so much more violence?
Irrelevant? Does this look irrelevant to you?
Irish magazine questions whether its moral to assassinate Trump:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/3/village-magazine-puts-crosshairs-on-trumps-head-in/
I’ll go with this as the answer too. However, because its mainstream that means there is more attention brought to it. As some others have already posted this goes on with the opposite side of the political spectrum but they aren’t mainstream so they literally are just some fringe people cause problems, by definition.
Perhaps you can make that claim, but it does not descend into violence.
They are simply trying to shut down conversation with violence. That won’t work, people like Milo will double down and every violent act will make his points for him.
When you don’t have a point, you shout your opponents down, call them names and even get violent.
When, in a democratic society, where free speech is the right most held fundamental and immutable, you have to get violent to make your point, you have no point.
And shutting down conversation is precisely the problem.
Bingo and double bingo… Calling for a violent coup, or blowing up buildings is a problem.
A lot of the violent protestors have been revealed paid hooligans, apparently funded by Soros.
He’s a smart, albeit evil, guy, and I can’t quite figure out his agenda. All he managed to do is give Milo a lot of attention and make his book a best seller. So I am not sure the intent is to quash political opinions from the right.
Or maybe it is. For every Milo that gets promoted, there are probably a 1000 normal people who are afraid to speak up on campus due to the violent atmosphere.
For the better part of a decade it hasn’t been pleasant to be an observant Jewish person on almost any major US college campus — cat calls, threats, and just being shunned are pretty much the norm. The colleges do very little about it, unless they have no choice, especially if the perp is muslim.
The left in it’s recent iteration has become, very transparently, antisemitic. Very anti-Israel, very supportive of the Palestinians as evidenced of Obama’s last move of giving $221 million dollars to people who have vowed to run the streets red with Jewish blood.
Are they calling you ‘baby killers’ and ‘oppressors’ and dumb shit like that too?
Part of that is the left hates banking and wealth in general. The Occupy Wall Streeters were very anti semetic and called bankers “bad Jews”.
Yes Jews are involved in banking, but the reaaon is… wait for it… discrimination. In the middle ages Jews were only welcome (tolerated) in certain European nations. One stipulation was that Jews weren’t allowed to own land. Since the entire economy was based on land ownership it made sense to keep the ownership of it to people who swore fealty to the King.
So what are Jews to do to make a living? They became merchants, bankers, jewlers etc… anything they could do without owning land.
Ironically the left hates Jews because they were discriminated against.
Well, I am glad the antisemitic obama is out of power. Israel is going to get all the support their little hearts desire and I support Israel 1000000000%.
If memory serves, they largely got into specifically money lending and banking because it was largely considered unclean and beneath what fine upstanding non-jews were willing to lower themselves to.
1 Like
Well if you were a member of the aristocracy you had all the wealth you would ever need just handed to you in the for of land and fuedal labor. All you had to do was manage your estate properly and make sure your surfs didn’t starve or revolt. Why bother lending money?
Added to the can’t-own-land business is the fact that Christians couldn’t lend money at interest to other Christians under the law of the Roman Catholic Church. (And Jews could not to Jews.)
So the King and aristocracy would lend money to Jews (and vice-versa) and Jews would lend money to everyone else.
It was a critical part of shipping and trade and to smooth out flow of money during harvest, etc.
The left has always been varying degrees of antisemitic, with a large pause after WWII. We’re back to the norm.
Remember Roosevelt had the no-Jews-allowed policy before WWII because he deemed them undesirable.
The NAZI Party (National Socialist) was a center-left socialist party in Germany.
Etc.
I have no idea why they have such vitriol against Jewish people (nor why so many Jewish people in the USA identify as “left”). But the core of the Democrat Party is absolutely antisemitic.
Maybe its because they Jewish people the Democrats know are guys like Chuck Shumer and Rahm Emmanuel, both of whom are complete scum bags. If they were the only Jewish people I knew, I’d hate us, too.
That’s brilliant. I doubt anyone here is a good enough historian to know this answer but it makes me think.
In medieval Europe: So when a Jew lends a Christian money and they don’t pay, how do they collect? Does an armed angry man with curls and a shawl show up? That seems unlikely given their position in society at the time.
Or did everyone know the Jews were lending the “King’s” money, thus the Kings men show up to shake you down or throw you in debtor’s prison.