🏀 KuBuckets Archive

(... Being Inclusive of White People, And Handling Race The Right Way)

The Democrats are expected to be in the driver's seat for the midterm elections. The President continues to whip up his base while moderates grow colder to him. I am expecting the Democrats to take the House. I expect impeachment proceedings thereafter and I expect the Republicans, seeing Trump as a polítical liability at that point, to acquiesce. The alternative being a lame duck Trump continuing to cause drama. This is all predicated on the Democrats taking the House. I think it will happen, but I'll believe it when I see it.

Anyway, my point in this thread is that the Democrats needs to be inclusive of white people in their vernacular. It's time to stop using terms like "white privilege" and to acknowledge early and often that NOBODY will be discriminated against based upon the color of their skin, and that economic policies attempting to aid those in lower economic standing will be made based upon economic status and not upon race. And protection of the middle class will likewise be done with all Americans in mind.

It's time to acknowledge that poverty should be addressed for everyone starting with a very strong public education system. We need an education rennaisance in this country. Kids should be inspired to achieve their potential. We aren't even close to being there.

We need to stop being white, black, Latino, Asian or prefer not to answer. This can be done NOT by immediately doing away with affirmative action but by improving our public education for everyone. Pay teachers better. Get rid of No Child Left Behind. Develop learning plans that make sense for each child. Find out what academically interests them and let them pursue it. A thirst for knowledge is the flame that every child has. Do Not Snuff It Out! Build around it!

I want to acknowledge those that think I'm a "leftist". There are many things the Democrats have screwed up. Ultimately we need to get past the two party system where one party represents looking out for yourself and the other, looking out for others. This yin yang should not be the two parties seeking to eradicate each other. It is a duopoly that must live in balance.

But as it stands now, the Democrats are still the party of looking out for others. And as such, it should be explicitly said that that includes white people too, with aggressive goals to get past race and focus solely on equality of economic opportunity and building a better tomorrow for ourselves and for others.

I think your dualistic assumption gets it exactly wrong, based on a false narrative. Republicans have never been about doing well for just themselves. And when you look at the policy results, shorn of the rhetoric, it proves it.

Case in point, the Democratic rhetoric of Trump's deregulation and tax cut policies say that it is for the rich and the corporations. The RESULTS though show the truth of the Republican pov - unemployment is at record lows, and perhaps even more critical is to emphasize that Black unemployment is at historic lows...if only to give lie to the "we care, and Republicans hate minorities" rhetoric.

And finally, you're spitting in the fan if you think you're going to be successful talking Democrats out of their identity politics philosophical culdesac. That's a circular shooting gallery that has a ways to play out yet.

@Bwag I appreciate your point about the "party of me" vs "the party of we" being a false narrative but take what I said as both an acknowledgement of narrative and of the policies. You cannot deny that Republicans are about tax breaks, protection of individual wealth, protection of gun rights, and the Evangelical position on abortion and drugs which are a a little different how they fit** but can be seen as a me position because they presume that they know better what people's personal choices should be and that they don't want to be responsible for the consequences of those people's poor choices.

This is all indisputable.

And as I said I think there has to be a balance between me and we. I agree that peoples personal wealth has to be protected WITHIN REASON. Capital gains taxes can't get out of control. At the same time there needs to be a balance where the middle class isn't crushed and the lower class is given a path to prosperity. There is a place for both ideals. But as I said it's a problem that these two ideals are attributed to the two parties. What I'm getting at is that a multiparty system would help us get away from this white and black attribution and allow better for compromise and less polarism in truth and in perception.

** - rephrased for clarity

Here's a Bloomberg article about China's goals. Note that the article also cites Trump's trade war as having an impact in slowing China.

What Does a Chinese Superpower Look Like? Nothing Like the U.S. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-08-27/what-does-a-chinese-superpower-look-like-nothing-like-the-u- ↗

But slowing down China with a trade war is not enough. Xi Xinping want to replace the US as global leaders in technology. Our two advantages here are the tech lead we have and the strength of our middle class. We NEED to improve our public education to win this battle and protect our middle class. 4 times as many people will win otherwise.

@approxinfinity love the point your trying to make. Not many people realize that a newly elected president often loses in the midterms of our two party system. Yet you posted something in the tune of religious nuts. (abortion)

If you don't mind I would like to guide you to a recent abortion poll of all Americans.
Americans speak out about abortions ↗

My friend it's not a Christian thing. Its a common sense thing.

Also with the China dominance. What would you do? I mean it's easy to play arm chair quarterback, but what would you do? Lets not forget China was a democracy at one time. Yet under Jimmy Carter a liberal he did nothing and watched them fall into Communism.

You play the Dem horn. Yet is it not true that most of the problems facing our nation today have not been created by the DNC. You said that The DNC is the party that really cares, Yet you also alluded to the DNC creating groups because of skin color?

I'm really confused here?

What gives?

@DoubleDD my point about abortion and drugs were that they are a "me" position by my criteria. Your trying to convince me that it's the right thing proves exactly what I said. The fact is, that the Republican party adopted the Evangelical position on abortion under Reagan. Remember that Reagan as a governor was very lenient on abortion in California, before the Republican position became " pro-life" around Roe v Wade . This is fact man. I dont want to get into it beyond calling it a me position by my criteria. I'm going to change the way I phrased it in the first post because what I meant was that these things were a little different as to how they fit when I said "weird"

Regarding competing with China, I would spend a lot of effort and money on education in this country, beefing up staffing, pay, individual education plans, possibly go year round, and gut garbage curriculum that is boring rote busy work. Kids should love school and come out the other end worldbeaters. I would also spend a lot of money on retraining programs for adults and assistance with transition across careers. Also, I believe in programs like Americorps (I'm an alum) and Peace Corps as I think it it critical for people to see other cultures and do community service in order to have perspective.

If our workforce is the best workforce on the planet then there will always be work for us. When the robots replace the blue collar jobs, as I believe you referred to in another thread, our work force will be resillient.

@DoubleDD Carter was in his early 20's when China went Commie. WW2 created the conditions that made it possible. From Wikipedia:

In 1945, China emerged from the war nominally a great military power but economically weak and on the verge of all-out civil war. The economy was sapped by the military demands of a long costly war and internal strife, by spiraling inflation, and by corruption in the Nationalist government that included profiteering, speculation and hoarding.

Furthermore, as part of the Yalta Conference, which allowed a Soviet sphere of influence in Manchuria, the Soviets dismantled and removed more than half of the industrial equipment left there by the Japanese before handing over Manchuria to China. Large swathes of the prime farming areas had been ravaged by the fighting and there was starvation in the wake of the war. Many towns and cities were destroyed, and millions were rendered homeless by floods.

The problems of rehabilitation and reconstruction after the ravages of a protracted war were staggering, and the war left the Nationalists severely weakened, and their policies left them unpopular. Meanwhile, the war strengthened the Communists both in popularity and as a viable fighting force. At Yan'an and elsewhere in the communist controlled areas, Mao Zedong was able to adapt Marxism–Leninism to Chinese conditions. He taught party cadres to lead the masses by living and working with them, eating their food, and thinking their thoughts.

The Chinese Red Army fostered an image of conducting guerrilla warfare in defense of the people. Communist troops adapted to changing wartime conditions and became a seasoned fighting force. With skillful organization and propaganda, the Communists increased party membership from 100,000 in 1937 to 1.2 million by 1945.

Mao also began to execute his plan to establish a new China by rapidly moving his forces from Yan'an and elsewhere to Manchuria. This opportunity was available to the Communists because although Nationalist representatives were not invited to Yalta, they had been consulted and had agreed to the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in the belief that the Soviet Union would cooperate only with the Nationalist government after the war.

However, the Soviet occupation of Manchuria was long enough to allow the Communist forces to move in en masse and arm themselves with the military hardware surrendered by the Imperial Japanese Army, quickly establish control in the countryside and move into position to encircle the Nationalist government army in major cities of northeast China. Following that, the Chinese Civil War broke out between the Nationalists and Communists, which concluded with the Communist victory in mainland China and the retreat of the Nationalists to Taiwan in 1949.

@approxinfinity I believe the same thing. If we boosted up our schools, race or poverty wouldn't matter as much. You would slowly start to see a shift if all people were given an equal opportunity from the beginning.

I am actually rooting against impeachment proceedings (right now, at least). Any attempt to impeach the president would be seen as a purely political act at this point. Impeachment should not be pursued unless it is blatantly clear to the vast majority of the country (not just Democrats, but a majority of independents and at least a solid plurality of Republicans) that the president has engaged in illegal activity (not counting perjury).

I would support continuing the investigations because the threat of interference is a very real one, and tracking down those involved, whether it leads to the president or not, is of utmost importance to the nation. This is where I struggle with the Republican position that if the investigation does not lead to Trump, it should be shut down. The investigation has shown some level of interference. Whether that leads to Trump or not, that is a huge deal that should allow the investigation to continue to its complete conclusion.

justanotherfan said:

I am actually rooting against impeachment proceedings (right now, at least). Any attempt to impeach the president would be seen as a purely political act at this point. Impeachment should not be pursued unless it is blatantly clear to the vast majority of the country (not just Democrats, but a majority of independents and at least a solid plurality of Republicans) that the president has engaged in illegal activity (not counting perjury).

I would support continuing the investigations because the threat of interference is a very real one, and tracking down those involved, whether it leads to the president or not, is of utmost importance to the nation. This is where I struggle with the Republican position that if the investigation does not lead to Trump, it should be shut down. The investigation has shown some level of interference. Whether that leads to Trump or not, that is a huge deal that should allow the investigation to continue to its complete conclusion.

The impeachment stuff is definitely a ploy. It's another distraction so no one pays attention to how terrible the government really is on both sides. It wouldn't mean anything anyway, the next 10+ people in line for POTUS are awful.

Speaking of awful politicians it would be nice to see Claire McCaskill lose, what a corrupt turd. Though there is no way to remove all the corrupt politicians ie most of them.

The best part about the impeachment talk is that Trump appears to be too dumb to realize that it's all a smoke show.

Which brings me to my next point. How many people here know there is a war in Yemen right now? There really is! Look it up. America is even helping out. It gets so very little national news coverage.

Oh and BTW, the Democrats taking the house would be a GOOD thing. We have historical data that backs that up. 1935-1997 basically.

Also, does anyone know what is going on with the damn tariff laws? Good companies have had to declare bankruptcy because of them. We need to see who is profiting from them to find out who was pulling Trump's puppet strings.

Edit

As far as the first post from @approxinfinity I would agree education is in dire need of an overall. We also need drastic minimum wage hikes across the board.

@BShark the cost of living is just plain too high, I think about how my My grandfather was able to raise 7 kids while my grandmother never worked, live in a good neighborhood and retire @ 59 years old, all without a college degree. Just about every family I know both parents work and they barely get bye, like my family. We are most definitely on a budget and have very little extra money and with what we are able to put away likely won’t be enough with the increase and inflation by the time we retire do us a heck of a lot of good. I’m worried that if minimum wage is increased the job market will suffer. We all hear about how bad kids are these and I’m not saying I disagree but who actually raises their kids? Mine are in daycare all day and see me 3 hours at the most everyday. They are too young to be in sports but if they do activities that time will decrease. So in reality is the cost of living an issue with kids as well? I think so. The problem isn’t necessarily capitalism I thinks monopolization and corporatism personally.

@kjayhawks Human greed is the real problem with ANY system imo. That's how you end up with McCaskill's husband getting 131 million from the government and how you end up with situations like the Stony Brook apartments in Florida which just happens to be a publicized location of something that is happening around the country. Basically the "companies" that manage HUD properties take the millions and keep it for themselves instead of putting any of the money into maintaining the property. Classic exploitation of the poor. I could go on literally all night citing examples.

I would agree that the cost of living is too high. And you live in Kansas right? So it could be a LOT worse. You practically can't even make it in larger cities with an even higher cost of living w/ a lower level income/job.

@BShark Yep, almost smack dab in the center of our state lol. Ya the cities are crazy, my wife loves HGTV (ik big shocker there lol) we was watch houses hunters a few weeks back and a couple that met and graduated from KU a few years back were looking for an apartment in Chicago, the cheapest decent one was $400,000. She was a work from home soon to be mother in marketing and he was a CPA. I had no idea how in heck they could begin to afford such a place.

@kjayhawks I will say this generation is turning into a bad bad bad savings generation. We are terrible at budgeting. And the numbers support that, unfortunately.

@mayjay

China goes Communist ↗

@approxinfinity

In the animal Kingdom. It is not uncommon for animals to kill their offspring that are inferior. A natural selection if you will. The Strong must survive.

Yet we humans will kill our offspring before they are even born, or giving a chance to live. Somehow we feel superior to the beasts will call animals?

You once posted a topic on being labeled into certain groups. Yet you Practice what you don't preach. Abortion is a very explosive topic indeed. However it is not just a Christian thought, or religious one. Sure these groups fight for the rights of the unborn, but it is hardly just their issue.

Common sense and just human nature would say that as humans we must protect our unborn and just born, or we will cease to exist. Or worse yet we will become the very animals we say we are superior too.

China caused it's own problems ↗

@DoubleDD Let's see how your logic must go. So if we hadn't recognized the government in mainland China in 1979, it would not be Communist? Taiwan would rule all those people but for Carter? Remember, the process of opening up relations started under the crook who made his career by Commie baiting in the 1940's, Tricky Dick Nixon--gasp, a Republican! Recognizing China was merely accepting the inevitable, and attempting to cash in on a potential billion person market. The country was going to be Communist regardless of our diplomatic relationship. Redefine responsibility if you wish, but it don't make it so.

@DoubleDD The Republican think tanks decided they were going to court the Evangelicals and went all in on Pro-Life. This is ancillary to my point there, which was that the Republican position is the "me" position. Sure, some people such as yourself may be Pro-Life and not religious. I labeled it the Evangelical position because that is why it is the Republican position.

@mayjay

I only gave that link as I felt it's more suited to what you would read and respect.

I have so many more, but I wouldn't want to bore you with independent and conservative think tanks. As we both know you would dismiss them without giving them much thought.

Sadly a condition of the human mind and spirit is to fill it with what we already believe.

@DoubleDD You didn't respond to what I wrote. The history is there. Do you think China would not be Communist if Carter had not made that diplomacy decision?

@mayjay

You're asking a question I can't answer. Is not life a journey filled with different paths to take? To take one path or the other doesn't guarantee a desired result.

I do know that under Jimmy Carters leadership. Russia was able to commit mass genocide and that China became Communist.

@DoubleDD You didn't even read your own article, did you? Just thought the link told the story? I give up.

@mayjay

Actually I did. Twice in fact.

@DoubleDD Well, then saying China became Communist under Carter must have been written by someone else who didn't read it because it clearly states China was Communist-controlled by 1949. Of course, by your theory the USSR wasn't commie until 1933 (recognized by FDR), and Cuba avoided the Communist label until Obama established formal relations. Forget those inconvenient 1918-33, 1949-79, and 1959-2015 years.

If you were not so freaking stubborn, you could say that you meant Carter cut ties with Taiwan, or talk about when China's seat at the UN and the Security Council went to the Red Chinese. Those are different events from China becoming Communist, which appears to be a "fact" known only to you. Indeed, I literally cannot find one source besides your assertion to support your claim.

@mayjay

Your wrong

millions die but liberals say not gencide ↗

You can call it whatever you want mayjay but millions died under the Jimmy administration. Explain that?

@DoubleDD hey can you qualify your links with a couple sentences as to what logical thought process you are using to derive your conclusion from the source? I'm not sure what I'm supposed to look at here. I need rails!

@DoubleDD Very nice article, and well researched. Yes, millions died under Stalin. I was taught about this by every history teacher I ever had in both high school and college.

And with this submission, you obviously have won the argument: Stalin, who died in 1953, killed millions of Soviets, and therefore China became Communist during Carter's presidency 25 years later.

I live in utter humbled defeat.

Obama's speech today was a pretty good one. I enjoyed hearing a rational, intelligent president talk in a civil manner.

Full speech here:

Note: Do not let the "CNN" label fool you. This is the speech, the whole speech, and nothing but the speech.

Things are heating up for the midterms with Obama's return to the campaign trail.

No comment

@approxinfinity nice to have a no breaking news day president!

Lmao

@approxinfinity

You do know that Obama has a terrible record when stomping for other Dems/libs.

Oh never mind keep drinking the kool-aide.

@approxinfinity

Ill give you the fact that President Obama is a great orator. Maybe the best since Kennedy. Reagan was good but he was a witty speaker. Kind of down to earth. Yet if you have a opinion, then so do I.

opinion piece ↗

Also lets be honest? Giving a good speech is one thing, but actually doing what is right is a whole different thing.

link text ↗