User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Social Justice

  1. #1
    Points: 665,260, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433311
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,549
    Points
    665,260
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,983
    Thanked 80,900x in 54,717 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Social Justice

    In another thread was dropped a link to THE QUICK START GUIDE TO QUINN IN THE MORNING.

    There I find probably the best short description of Social Justice:

    SOCIAL JUSTICE

    Social justice is an invention of the Left to permit them to abandon equal justice under the law in order to benefit one group and punish another based on whatever social or economic wound is claimed by each group. Basically it’s racism, sexism, and classism that liberals are ok with. Justice needs no modifier. If it has one, it isn’t justice.

    The problem with the Civil Rights Movement is that it wasn’t black American’s civil rights that were being violated. It was their constitutional rights that were being violated. By introducing the concept of civil rights, the door was opened to rights (and punishments) granted and meted out by men. This facilitated the fracturing of our public life into group identity politics. Each group issues a series of demands, and labels them “civil rights”. If you take issue with their demands, you are against their “civil rights” and therefore a bigot which renders your opinion invalid.
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    Captdon (09-01-2018),Peter1469 (09-01-2018)

  3. #2
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,011, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 92.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496558
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,683
    Points
    859,011
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,214
    Thanked 147,568x in 94,410 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That is an interesting point.

    it wasn’t black American’s civil rights that were being violated. It was their constitutional rights that were being violated.
    Had we looked at it this way in real time, we would have much better race relations today.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Peter1469 For This Useful Post:

    Chris (09-01-2018)

  5. #3
    Points: 34,652, Level: 45
    Level completed: 47%, Points required for next Level: 798
    Overall activity: 2.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialTagger First ClassVeteran50000 Experience Points
    midcan5's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    71955
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    5,953
    Points
    34,652
    Level
    45
    Thanks Given
    1,333
    Thanked 2,497x in 1,841 Posts
    Mentioned
    301 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I guess when they lynched all those blacks who may have looked at a white woman or blacks who wanted to vote it was just those little bitty constitutional rights that were stepped on. Someone find me in that constitution thing where it says anything about looking at women and hanging. This is another dumb apologetic for nonsense that sounds like it says something and really says nothing. For anyone online here who wants to truly understand these issues see book quoted below. The constitution means nothing if the civil rights of people can be steeped on by states and other government powers. Wake up people and smell reality.

    "At least in the South, however, white supremacists did not need to control the Supreme Court in order to control their state's policies-or the votes that their senators and representatives would cast in Congress. Democracy, it turns out, does not mean much at all if many of the voters cannot vote.

    For eighty-two long years, from 1875 until 1957, Congress did not pass a single civil rights bill. Indeed, this was true even when such legislation enjoyed majority support. Five civil rights bills passed the House between the end of World War II and 1957, but none of them survived contact with the Senate."

    The reason for this inability to legislate was the filibuster, which allowed Southern white supremacists to block any bill they chose, so long as they could convince just a handful of conservatives outside the South to join their obstruction of the legislative process." Moreover, because Southern voting officials ensured that few black voters would actually get to cast meaningful ballots, white supremacist lawmakers faced no consequences for their opposition to civil rights.

    The Jim Crow South was largely a collection of one-party states between 1916 and 1944, for example, the Republican presidential candidate won more than 5 percent of the vote in South Carolina just one time." Thus, the winner of a Democratic primary in the South was virtually guaranteed election, and general elections were largely formalities. For this reason, segregationists could exclude African Americans from the franchise entirely by preventing them from voting in Democratic Party primaries.

    In 1923, one state tried to do just that by enacting a law providing that "in no event shall a $#@! be eligible to participate in a Democratic party primary election held in the State of Texas"though this first attempt to suppress the black vote did not end well for Texas."

    page 185 'Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted' Ian Millhiser

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22715946-injustices
    Wanna make America great, buy American owned, made in the USA, we do. AF Veteran, INFJ-A, I am not PC.

    "I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: 'O Lord make my enemies ridiculous.' And God granted it." Voltaire

  6. #4
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,011, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 92.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496558
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,683
    Points
    859,011
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,214
    Thanked 147,568x in 94,410 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    I guess when they lynched all those blacks who may have looked at a white woman or blacks who wanted to vote it was just those little bitty constitutional rights that were stepped on. Someone find me in that constitution thing where it says anything about looking at women and hanging. This is another dumb apologetic for nonsense that sounds like it says something and really says nothing. For anyone online here who wants to truly understand these issues see book quoted below. The constitution means nothing if the civil rights of people can be steeped on by states and other government powers. Wake up people and smell reality.

    "At least in the South, however, white supremacists did not need to control the Supreme Court in order to control their state's policies-or the votes that their senators and representatives would cast in Congress. Democracy, it turns out, does not mean much at all if many of the voters cannot vote.

    For eighty-two long years, from 1875 until 1957, Congress did not pass a single civil rights bill. Indeed, this was true even when such legislation enjoyed majority support. Five civil rights bills passed the House between the end of World War II and 1957, but none of them survived contact with the Senate."

    The reason for this inability to legislate was the filibuster, which allowed Southern white supremacists to block any bill they chose, so long as they could convince just a handful of conservatives outside the South to join their obstruction of the legislative process." Moreover, because Southern voting officials ensured that few black voters would actually get to cast meaningful ballots, white supremacist lawmakers faced no consequences for their opposition to civil rights.

    The Jim Crow South was largely a collection of one-party states between 1916 and 1944, for example, the Republican presidential candidate won more than 5 percent of the vote in South Carolina just one time." Thus, the winner of a Democratic primary in the South was virtually guaranteed election, and general elections were largely formalities. For this reason, segregationists could exclude African Americans from the franchise entirely by preventing them from voting in Democratic Party primaries.

    In 1923, one state tried to do just that by enacting a law providing that "in no event shall a $#@! be eligible to participate in a Democratic party primary election held in the State of Texas"though this first attempt to suppress the black vote did not end well for Texas."

    page 185 'Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted' Ian Millhiser

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22715946-injustices
    Your one good post in your career (earlier today) here has been overshadowed by this bit of typing vomit. With the sort of things you post, I don't understand how you function in the United States. You belong somewhere else.
    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  7. #5
    Points: 665,260, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    433311
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    197,549
    Points
    665,260
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    31,983
    Thanked 80,900x in 54,717 Posts
    Mentioned
    2011 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    I guess when they lynched...

    The topic is the difference between "equal justice under the law" vs "rights (and punishments) granted and meted out by men."

    Do liberals have a topic blocker in their collective brains?
    Tradition is not the worship of ashes, but the preservation of fire. ― Gustav Mahler

  8. #6
    Points: 17,291, Level: 31
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 159
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    VeteranTagger Second Class10000 Experience Points
    Sergeant Gleed's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    2046
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Right Now? The Planet Gand
    Posts
    4,872
    Points
    17,291
    Level
    31
    Thanks Given
    492
    Thanked 2,038x in 1,586 Posts
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    I guess when they lynched all those blacks who may have looked at a white woman or blacks who wanted to vote it was just those little bitty constitutional rights that were stepped on.
    You mean when THE DEMOCRATS lynched those blacks.

    You mean it was THE DEMOCRATS who created the Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow, segregated government, Affirmative Action, welfare, inner city ghettos, and failed public schools.

    Someone find me in that constitution thing where it says anything about looking at women and hanging. This is another dumb apologetic for nonsense that sounds like it says something and really says nothing. For anyone online here who wants to truly understand these issues see book quoted below. The constitution means nothing if the civil rights of people can be steeped on by states and other government powers. Wake up people and smell reality.
    The issues are EASY to understand.

    The DEMOCRATS are the Party of Racism and the Party of Slavery. Always have been, still are. This has NEVER changed.

    Who screams "racism" when a cop justifiably shoots a mountainous black thug who had already beaten him, had already grabbed for his gun, had already robbed a store, and refused the lawful order to stand down and stop approaching?

    The Rodents who find it politically useful to get their ignorant masses out marching in the streets shouting STUPID slogans and causing violence.

    Look up the Sturmabtielung, Horst Wessel and how political manipulators use the stupidity of morons that want free $#@! to establish tyranny and put slave collars on those same morons.


    The rest of us, the NORMALS, we know who the enemy of freedom is.

    It's the morons that voted for socialism in any of it's forms, all of them evil.
    Freedom Requires Obstinance.

    We the People DID NOT vote in a majority Rodent Congress, they stole it via election fraud.

  9. #7
    Original Ranter
    Points: 859,011, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 92.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialCreated Album picturesOverdrive50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Awards:
    Posting Award
    Peter1469's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    496558
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    NOVA
    Posts
    241,683
    Points
    859,011
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    153,214
    Thanked 147,568x in 94,410 Posts
    Mentioned
    2552 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergeant Gleed View Post
    You mean when THE DEMOCRATS lynched those blacks.

    You mean it was THE DEMOCRATS who created the Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow, segregated government, Affirmative Action, welfare, inner city ghettos, and failed public schools.



    The issues are EASY to understand.

    The DEMOCRATS are the Party of Racism and the Party of Slavery. Always have been, still are. This has NEVER changed.

    Who screams "racism" when a cop justifiably shoots a mountainous black thug who had already beaten him, had already grabbed for his gun, had already robbed a store, and refused the lawful order to stand down and stop approaching?

    The Rodents who find it politically useful to get their ignorant masses out marching in the streets shouting STUPID slogans and causing violence.

    Look up the Sturmabtielung, Horst Wessel and how political manipulators use the stupidity of morons that want free $#@! to establish tyranny and put slave collars on those same morons.


    The rest of us, the NORMALS, we know who the enemy of freedom is.

    It's the morons that voted for socialism in any of it's forms, all of them evil.
    It would be nice if someone took this message and cleaned it up so normal people would read it rather than discounting the message as from a kook.

    Is it possible that this Sergeant is a far-leftist who is posting as what the hard left thinks of the right? Rodents?

    Yes. Sergeant Gleed is a hard leftist out to discredit the right with his ridiculous posts.

    ΜOΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ


  10. #8
    Points: 4,367, Level: 15
    Level completed: 64%, Points required for next Level: 183
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    1000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Mr.Soxes's Avatar Post Review / PM Disabled
    Karma
    165
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    692
    Points
    4,367
    Level
    15
    Thanks Given
    405
    Thanked 155x in 118 Posts
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by midcan5 View Post
    I guess when they lynched all those blacks who may have looked at a white woman or blacks who wanted to vote it was just those little bitty constitutional rights that were stepped on. Someone find me in that constitution thing where it says anything about looking at women and hanging. This is another dumb apologetic for nonsense that sounds like it says something and really says nothing. For anyone online here who wants to truly understand these issues see book quoted below. The constitution means nothing if the civil rights of people can be steeped on by states and other government powers. Wake up people and smell reality.

    "At least in the South, however, white supremacists did not need to control the Supreme Court in order to control their state's policies-or the votes that their senators and representatives would cast in Congress. Democracy, it turns out, does not mean much at all if many of the voters cannot vote.

    For eighty-two long years, from 1875 until 1957, Congress did not pass a single civil rights bill. Indeed, this was true even when such legislation enjoyed majority support. Five civil rights bills passed the House between the end of World War II and 1957, but none of them survived contact with the Senate."

    The reason for this inability to legislate was the filibuster, which allowed Southern white supremacists to block any bill they chose, so long as they could convince just a handful of conservatives outside the South to join their obstruction of the legislative process." Moreover, because Southern voting officials ensured that few black voters would actually get to cast meaningful ballots, white supremacist lawmakers faced no consequences for their opposition to civil rights.

    The Jim Crow South was largely a collection of one-party states between 1916 and 1944, for example, the Republican presidential candidate won more than 5 percent of the vote in South Carolina just one time." Thus, the winner of a Democratic primary in the South was virtually guaranteed election, and general elections were largely formalities. For this reason, segregationists could exclude African Americans from the franchise entirely by preventing them from voting in Democratic Party primaries.

    In 1923, one state tried to do just that by enacting a law providing that "in no event shall a $#@! be eligible to participate in a Democratic party primary election held in the State of Texas"though this first attempt to suppress the black vote did not end well for Texas."

    page 185 'Injustices: The Supreme Court's History of Comforting the Comfortable and Afflicting the Afflicted' Ian Millhiser

    https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/22715946-injustices
    The KKK really sucked at genocide!

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts