Repeat History

No one wants to hear actual history. It doesn't further anyone's political narrative, Right or Left.

TRUTH

That means we close gaps by voting Democrats because they actually closed many gaps we had in society. For example, they ended segregation.

Democrats defended segregation. Stop trying to rewrite history, and don't pull that idiotic switched theory on me, easily disproved with a simple timeline. Republicans overall were more likely to vote for Civil Rights than Democrats in the 1950s & 1960s. That is a fact.

Look at what happened in 1964 though

No, the South did. That's why they had it and the rest of us didn't. And we had to force them to stop.

An Aussie progressive projecting their bias

Also, who's "we"? I thought you were Australian?

You know what I mean

lol ok

Many if not most of those claiming to be Trumpers here are foreign. That's why they don't know the name of the state they live in, and start commenting between 3 and 5am EST and are gone bet 7 - 9pm.

I don’t know if they have republicans and democrats in Australia, but I’m pretty sure they have liberal and conservative parties. He can say we if he shares the values of an American party. And it isn’t that strange for foreigners to take an interest in American politics since all of the freedom and democracy in the world is dependent on the well being of America.

Still if he's gonna talk about it he should at least learn about it before he starts yapping. Democrats did not end segregation. they PROLONGED it.

False. Southerners prolonged it.
Northeners ended it first up North, then in the South. The latter by force.

And at that time the South was primarily dominated by...?
There's really no talking your way out of this.

Southerners. From the South. In the South.

Hope this clarifies things!

Did I do it right?

A little higher res would have been nice, but yeah.

Oh, wait, it doesn't designate the states according to the 2 species that live in them, Homo sapiens republicanensis or H sapiens democratiensii.

🤣🤣

The South was dominated by SOUTHERNERS?

Wow, I never knew! Man, you should be a private eye or something because you're VERY perceptive, more so than I am! I'm just an IDIOT when compared to your extraordinary intellect!

But in my idiot brain, I'm still wondering, which political party dominated the South? Probably just my moronic mind just wanting irrelevant information, I know, it's just a thought that's been bugging me. I wonder if there was a handy-dandy map that showed exactly that?

One could say the same of you. Sometimes the democrats are the evil racists, sometimes it’s the republicans. It depends on which decade, era, and who was in power at the time.😁

What do you mean "one could say the same of me"?

Both Parties were racist as was the entire country. A caste system based on race was part of American culture. This caste system did not start breaking down until after WWII. Please study some basic history so you don't sound so uninformed.

Which was my reply to that very same comment yesterday? Minus the caste system and study part?

The caste system (if that’s what you want to call it) beg as n to break down before the civil war because it was outdated. Some people just can’t let go.

How did the racial caste system begin to break down before the Civil War? And, even if it did, it persisted well into the 20th century. Some people can't let go of what?

Are those real questions? Do you not know what led to the civil war? The confederacy couldn’t let go of slavery. And some people still can’t let go of the confederacy. It’s only been 170 or so years. One might argue there are still a caste systems in place, only now it’s got as much to do with money as race.

The God given right to vote eventuallly wasn't restricted to monied male landowners of Protestant Teutonic extraction before then. God had a chance of heart and also allowed Catholics then later His very own Chosen people that He created to have it too,,,

What did they used to call it? An ethnocentric plutocracy?

The illustrious Founding Fathers were going to be our new aristocracy, crown Washington king. But the notion that should the fellas who just cut the British Monorachy off from the Colonies might turn the guns on these fine gents minus 5000 miles of an ocean moat to protect their necks proved a tad unsettling. So first it was rich male Brit/Germanic landowners who would get to vote then it was all of them regardless of wealth and class.

The Electoral Congress was because our new lords believed these folks were too stupid to vote wisely on their own for president, who at first they used to appoint.

Democracy? Republic? pfffft, racist classism courtesy of guys in wigs hiding the lice crawling their heads.

Your understanding of history is a bit myopic. Throughout most of history, kings and landowners ruled. Religious wars were common. Genocide was common. Western Christian values changed all that with the emphasis on God-given individual rights. The fact that you are complaining about it proves it. Otherwise, the rule of the strong would be the norm and there would be no argument. Socialism is a step backward to the bad old days when the political elite ruled and the individual was not important.

"CraigThompson

Your understanding of history is a bit myopic. Throughout most of history, kings and landowners ruled. Religious wars were common. Genocide was common. Western Christian values changed all that with the emphasis on God-given individual rights. The fact that you are complaining about it proves it. Otherwise, the rule of the strong would be the norm and there would be no argument. Socialism is a step backward to the bad old days when the political elite ruled and the individual was not important."

"Your understanding of history is a bit myopic."

Wait, are you saying history did NOT begin in late 18th Century America?

"Throughout most of history, kings and landowners ruled. Religious wars were common. Genocide was common."

You're kidding, right?

"Western Christian values changed all that with the emphasis on God-given individual rights."

That is false to the point of verging on sarcasm.
Western Christian values claimed God-given supremacist rights which lead to millenia of wars between their countries, then onto colonialism branching outwards, even world-engulfing wars and unltimately the recreation of the world in the likeness of the Gods called Americans.

"God-given individual rights."

There's no such thing.

"The fact that you are complaining about it proves it."

Complaints are irrelevant. History doesn't get remolded to suit your feelings.

"Otherwise, the rule of the strong would be the norm and there would be no argument."

On what physical plane it isn't?

''Socialism is a step backward to the bad old days when the political elite ruled and the individual was not important."

Socialism is a step forward into a badly conceived futuristic utopian fantasy where the political elite is extinguished and individuals are what is important, directly owning and controlling the economy and goverment as a community.

You really need to look things up, including the basic terms us Americans here use to describe our history. That ight help alleviate any confusion of what was being discussed. Or perhaps just stick to reiterating what I said the day before to someone else.

False.
They were all racists since before they landed on our shores - their shores even (the word "Welsh" comes from the Old English "Welisc," or "Wælisc," from a Germanic word that means "foreigner." That's what the invading Anglo, Saxons, etc from Germany called the Celtic Britons, the indigenous people of much of Britain, foreigners in their own land 2000 years ago).

Look up the Lily-White Movement Republicans in the South, starting in Texas in 1880, it was a segregationist Whites-only faction of the party.

There was never a switch, just once party started to shift away from it while the other sought to conserve the racist aspects of their society.

A long time ago Everyone was racist all the time. but you are going way way back. I don’t see why people make these types of arguments.

Prettty much most were. the exceptions are rare.

Which one of those 2 is Fascism and which one is Tyranny? 🤔

Fascism and tyranny is coming from the Republican party. Donald Trump and his party members

THEY ended segregation?

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Yes, they did.

Also, why are you specifically responding to my comment? There are several comments on here that say the same thing, but you only replied to mine.

Yes, I did.

What's that supposed to mean? I did not ask a yes-or-no question.

Yes

E

When did segregation end? What law brought segregation to an end? Who introduced the bill that created a law to end segregation?

That didn't end segregation, but it did make a start into ending segregation. Look at what happened in 1964

https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/civil-rights-act

Congrats, you shown me a link to a document.

Now what exactly are you trying to prove?

That segregation actually ended in 1964. Try a little bit of reading

there is no one date that it ended. It was a process that took several decades.

It doesn't matter how it went, it matters how it ended because how it started it could have remained the same way forever.

That doesn't make sense in the context of what I just said. Again, that was- there was no one date segregation ended. It was a process that took decades.

Perhaps YOU should do a little reading before lecturing an American on their own history.

Even Bluessol admitted that segregation ended in 1964. I think you should read his comments...

imgflip.com/i/85leb9?nerp=1700897222#com28582686

And how, again, does another person's comment on this site affect me?

Bwahahaha, I guess it’s expected you don’t really get American history.

You might benefit from an outside perspective on American history. And current events.

I might if it didn’t come from a progressive socialist Aussie girl.

You would if you weren’t racist and sexist?

Note it says I might, in any case not from an America hating leftist from Australia or America screeching racist while supporting racially divisive policy or screeching sexist while supporting transgender men usurping femininity and pushing women aside.

I’m what? The only people who hate America are the ones who think that it’s only for them. And that’s a lot of screeching you are doing btw.

Well America like every other country is for its citizens, so if you aren’t one, it’s not for you.

You’re talking about paper-work.

It’s only paperwork if your a naturalized citizen and your birth certificate doesn’t say USA.

You don’t have to be born in America to be an American. It’s not like other places. You can become an American. Where are you from?

Look at the comment history for indication where someone is from.

Lol.

I can't post it, or it's another 48.

“You don’t have to be born in America to be an American. It’s not like other places. You can become an American. Where are you from?“

I like how you ignore what I said about naturalized citizens. The overwhelming desire to sell your narrative is plainly evident. Not surprising from an alt. Naturalized citizens are full citizens and those who become naturalized are usually great citizens because they chose to become one. The country is for its citizens just like every other on earth.

My narrative is that people should be good to each other no matter who they are or where they are from.

I’m not an alt. I only have 1 profile at a time.

Why would you think I'm female?

What does it matter? In your eyes it’s all samey same.

You do realise that I was born male and I identify myself as male.

No I didn’t realize that I didn’t assume nor care.

When did segregation end? What law brought segregation to an end? Who introduced the bill that created a law to end segregation?

Brown vs board of education Supreme Court decision outlawed segregation in public schools. The Civil Righrlts act of 1964 outlawed discrimination based on race, color, religion, or sex. In 1965 the voting rights act ensured the right to vote without coercion. The Civil Rights act was signed by Lyndon Johnson. The same president who used the N word liberally and said he’d have those N words voting democrat for the next 200 years.

Now who opposed the Civil Rights act. Here’s the answer:

“ Democrats split their vote 152 (61%) to 96 (39%) while Republicans split theirs 138 (80%) to 34 (20%). The no vote consisted of 74% Democrats. Clearly, the 1964 Civil Rights Act could not have been passed without the leadership of Republicans such as Everett Dirksen and the votes of Republicans.

I'm glad you acknowledge that the Democrats were in charge when the bill was released, but who sponsored the bill?

Kennedy first and it was defeated in the senate by filibuster. Later Johnson proposed it. Who filibustered it?