To all the "Good Liberals": A Rant for our Times.

[Loren Pechtel]

Social equality only comes as a result of economic equality.

As long as there are masters and servants in the workplace there will be no social equality.

Your eternal preaching contributes nothing of value.

 

[LordKiran]

I didn't say it would. In fact that assertion doesn't really relate to my post at all.

The goal isn't legally enforced equality so much as it is the removal of and safeguarding against laws that enforce inequality or that legally stratify society.

Whose goal? Not mine. I'd rather have actual equality, than a government which pretends to be neutral but in the end does nothing to prevent abuse and oppression.

Nothing at all? I'd rethink that given the historic precedence for our nation to grow steadily more egalitarian with the passage of time. In either case I believe we've largely run the gambit on legislative solutions to prejudice in the daily functions of our society. There's not too much more I think we can do in that regard beside safeguard many of the protections already created (And arguably even removing a few!)

What the poor (Blacks or otherwise) need is rescue from the perpetual poverty and dysfunction that we allow them to languish in and then enable them to achieve personal financial success and and a good education so that they might find their own voices as functional and productive individuals. Enable them to empower themselves.

 

[LordKiran]

I didn't say it would. In fact that assertion doesn't really relate to my post at all.

The goal isn't legally enforced equality so much as it is the removal of and safeguarding against laws that enforce inequality or that legally stratify society.

What laws exist now that enforce inequality?

Are you asking if I know off-handedly or if I can find any?

 

[repoman]

Social equality only comes as a result of economic equality.

As long as there are masters and servants in the workplace there will be no social equality.

Your eternal preaching contributes nothing of value.

I disagree, it is a similar point to this old South Park episode, but in a sideways method.

Bad flag


Good flag



Now companies are putting some non straight white males in positions of power, but they still may add to inequality on the whole. They are "diversity washing" (similar to greenwashing) their otherwise exploitative businesses.

 

[Vork]

A liberal is somebody who wants to increase democracy.

To increase democracy means to level the playing field to the greatest extent possible. That is one aspect of trying to increase democracy.

A liberal is not some kid screaming on a campus.

That is just a kid trying to find their way.

Those obsessed with the behavior of children have ulterior motives.

In my experience, liberals often don't like the idea of regular people deciding things by vote, because they may vote the wrong way, and not do what the "enlightened" liberals think should be done.

The whole idea that democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner also comes up. Of course that's a true risk of democracy, but then there are risks coming from rule by political elites that don't want to listen to the people, or rule by judicial elites "discovering" constitutional rights that never actually existed.

Although it sounds like you maybe have a different definition of democracy than actually letting the people decide things.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I didn't say it would. In fact that assertion doesn't really relate to my post at all.

The goal isn't legally enforced equality so much as it is the removal of and safeguarding against laws that enforce inequality or that legally stratify society.

What laws exist now that enforce inequality?

Cocaine v Crack Cocaine

Pro-discrimination laws

Bonding agencies

 

[Politesse]

I didn't say it would. In fact that assertion doesn't really relate to my post at all.

The goal isn't legally enforced equality so much as it is the removal of and safeguarding against laws that enforce inequality or that legally stratify society.

Whose goal? Not mine. I'd rather have actual equality, than a government which pretends to be neutral but in the end does nothing to prevent abuse and oppression.

Nothing at all? I'd rethink that given the historic precedence for our nation to grow steadily more egalitarian with the passage of time. In either case I believe we've largely run the gambit on legislative solutions to prejudice in the daily functions of our society. There's not too much more I think we can do in that regard beside safeguard many of the protections already created (And arguably even removing a few!)

What the poor (Blacks or otherwise) need is rescue from the perpetual poverty and dysfunction that we allow them to languish in and then enable them to achieve personal financial success and and a good education so that they might find their own voices as functional and productive individuals. Enable them to empower themselves.

I agree, legislation is useless. That's why meaningful social critique is necessary, and blathering on about equal laws is pointless.

I don't know who you think "we" are, but I find your attitude toward blacks patronizing and offensive. "They" are not sitting around waiting for "you" to come rescue them from poverty and dysfunction. Who appointed "you" the leader here?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Nothing at all? I'd rethink that given the historic precedence for our nation to grow steadily more egalitarian with the passage of time. In either case I believe we've largely run the gambit on legislative solutions to prejudice in the daily functions of our society. There's not too much more I think we can do in that regard beside safeguard many of the protections already created (And arguably even removing a few!)

What the poor (Blacks or otherwise) need is rescue from the perpetual poverty and dysfunction that we allow them to languish in and then enable them to achieve personal financial success and and a good education so that they might find their own voices as functional and productive individuals. Enable them to empower themselves.

I don't know who you think "we" are, but I find your attitude toward blacks patronizing and offensive. "They" are not sitting around waiting for "you" to come rescue them from poverty and dysfunction. Who appointed "you" the leader here?

"We" did. "We" hold them every 24 months.

 

[Underseer]

I have friends on the left who understand privilege. I have friends on the right who don't, but they do understand good manners.

And then there are the "good liberals." Saints preserve us!

People who mean well, but will attack ungrateful marginalized people in a heartbeat. People who will march with you in the big rally in the Capitol, but will not hear your truth unless you preface every single sentence with "but not all ______ people" (fill in the blank with whatever privileged group applies) People who will fight the fight until they feel a slight then watch out.

Incidents of hatred are on the rise and frankly, I don't have time to constantly make "good liberals" feel warm and safe and praised for their goodness. We're in a fight for our lives and if the only thing you have to worry about is a bruised ego, count yourself blessed and keep it moving.

I'm halfie, so goodness knows there were times in my life when I would have been the one you got frustrated with.

But to be honest, once the rhetoric of Trump's campaign got truly insane, I started blocking people left and right on my Facebook page because my tolerance for racism has lowered by a considerable amount. There was a time when I would stay and argue with each one, but lately I've even been blocking relatives. And yes, there were a few liberals included.

 

[Underseer]

Social equality only comes as a result of economic equality.

As long as there are masters and servants in the workplace there will be no social equality.

Your eternal preaching contributes nothing of value.

I disagree, it is a similar point to this old South Park episode, but in a sideways method.

Bad flag
View attachment 14801

Good flag
View attachment 14802


Now companies are putting some non straight white males in positions of power, but they still may add to inequality on the whole. They are "diversity washing" (similar to greenwashing) their otherwise exploitative businesses.

Hey, look at that, Loren! Our resident Nazi dislikes the concept of social justice as much as you do!

What a funny coincidence. I wonder why that is.

 

[LordKiran]

Nothing at all? I'd rethink that given the historic precedence for our nation to grow steadily more egalitarian with the passage of time. In either case I believe we've largely run the gambit on legislative solutions to prejudice in the daily functions of our society. There's not too much more I think we can do in that regard beside safeguard many of the protections already created (And arguably even removing a few!)

What the poor (Blacks or otherwise) need is rescue from the perpetual poverty and dysfunction that we allow them to languish in and then enable them to achieve personal financial success and and a good education so that they might find their own voices as functional and productive individuals. Enable them to empower themselves.

I agree, legislation is useless. That's why meaningful social critique is necessary, and blathering on about equal laws is pointless.

I don't know who you think "we" are, but I find your attitude toward blacks patronizing and offensive. "They" are not sitting around waiting for "you" to come rescue them from poverty and dysfunction. Who appointed "you" the leader here?

You know I specifically did my best to make it clear that I am not speaking of black people but that I am speaking of everyone disaffected by the current economic climate. A lot of those people happen to be black but that's circumstantial. At any rate, I can't rescue them. They have to rescue themselves and in doing so will find their own power. Thus government economic policy should be devoted towards investing more of our resources into the poor if only because there's lots of untapped potential wasting away at the bottom rung of society (And hey even a few broken people who don't work right and need help), but also because its not a good state of affairs to have a pervasive population of poor people. That's not something that can last and it actively brews anti-capitalist sentiments. And why not? If a system fails you then of course you'll say "fuck that system."


The we is obvious. Its the people I share my nation with. I don't know why you're choosing to take this attitude with me. Am I rude for giving my analysis?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

According to the research I have read the key to a happy and peaceful society isn't overall wealth, but relative wealth within the society. Big gaps between rich and poor is what creates resentment and crime. When everybody is poor or everybody is rich, you don't see as many problems.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I didn't say it would. In fact that assertion doesn't really relate to my post at all.

The goal isn't legally enforced equality so much as it is the removal of and safeguarding against laws that enforce inequality or that legally stratify society.

What laws exist now that enforce inequality?

Cocaine v Crack Cocaine

This wasn't about being tough on blacks. It was about the fact that crack addicts do a lot more harm than cocaine addicts.

Pro-discrimination laws

That's not a law.

Bonding agencies

I presume you mean bail bondsmen. It's not about inequality, but it is a poorly designed system.

 

[untermensche]

Social equality only comes as a result of economic equality.

As long as there are masters and servants in the workplace there will be no social equality.

Your eternal preaching contributes nothing of value.

Your mistaking simple truisms for preaching shows a disturbed mind.