AmaccurzerO

"And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission." V.

Joe Biden doesn't speak for the black community so I'm unsure why you bring that up likes it's relevant here. And to answer your question, she'd still be black. Yes. She'd be denigrated and insulted for not agreeing that Black Lives Matter in America's judicial system, especially since she's a black woman. I'm not going to assume who you two are or how you act outside the computer screen. But I will tell your situation looks like for black people and why they get so angry and upset seeing people of their own ethnicity not support the movement. Basically the main reason people who are black who marry a white person tend to get denigrated, is because they forget their roots. It's like the moment they marry into a white family, they forget about the fact that they came from black roots and then worst tend to step on other black people (metaphorically of course) because they think they are better than that now. As an analogy: Imagine you go to school with the same group of friends, and one of them is your best friend. You've been going to school together for 10 years, you live in the same neighborhood, you like the same things, and you are comfortable in each other's company. Now imagine you've had bullies as well who've been bullying you and your friends over that same 10 years, they call you names, they beat you up whenever they get the chance, school teachers ignore their bullying, and they live in the rich side of town. Now one year your best friend falls for one of the bullies and they develop a relationship together, already you feel betrayed by your friend. How could they fall for someone who's been bullying them all these years? However, you stay friends, but over time they start growing more distant, spending more time with that bully than you and your friends. However, the tipping point comes when the bullies still bully you at school, but your friend instead of stopping them or trying to at least talk with them, they laugh at you to. How would you feel? Because that's how black people feel when we see other black people who marry into white families, and then pretend like all the issues plaguing black people don't exist. Is that fair for you? No, of course not. But they are allowed to express their displeasure for that because of their 1st amendment rights. And at this point, with all the technology, data, and information at our fingertips, if you truly believe that BLM isn't worth supporting, then yeah. Black people are gonna throw a lot of crap your way. What? We are only intolerant of racial bias in the criminal justice system, and police in-accountability. What are you trying to say here? What intolerance? Or are you trying to imply that because BLM supporters don't agree with racist and bigoted view points that they are suddenly intolerant? I see this argument all the time. Yes, there is a hell of a lot of racism and discrimination in media and video games. It's just really hard to see that discrimination and racism when you aren't the target of it. You know like how the hero is almost always white, darker skinned people are bad, minorities rarely have a leading role, and when they do it's met with "Oh, they're just pandering now...". Because apparently white people are so insecure about minorities having the leading role, that when they do, the only reason for that must be due to pandering to some sort of SJW agenda. So yeah. Of course we see blatant and subtle racism in media. As for people being afraid. That is blown so out of proportion it's not funny. People aren't skimming the internet waiting for someone to mess up so they can jump on and ruin that person's career. Most of the time, if you actually look into it. It's something that happened over a period of time. It's rarely a one and done thing. A lot of those people get fired because you know, it's part of your job application to not say or do intolerant things online, it risks your job. And if you have to stop and wonder if your joke is racist or not, here's a hint: It probably is, and you shouldn't be saying it in public. When minorities are the butt of your joke, stop and think for a moment about why you are saying said joke and in what company you are in. Among friends an likeminded people sure, say all the racist jokes you want. But when you are online. Be smart, not everyone is going to find racial humor funny. Yes actually, it's called being a minority in America. Why do you think BLM is out protesting? It sucks you grew up in one of those places, but guess what here's some good news, you should be well aware that BLM isn't Marxist then. BLM is filled with people from all political spectrums because it's a fluid movement. It's a-political, because it's focusing on human rights and social issues. The only people going out of their way to make it political are Republicans and other Right-wing groups with a vetted interest in keeping the movement down. When neo-nazis, white supremacists, and other racist groups are agreeing with or parrot your points you need to take a step back and figure out what side you are on. You keep bringing up this idea of intolerance but what is it? What is BLM actually intolerant of. Everyone keeps saying it, but nobody can give an actual example. Same with the Marxist argument. A few co-leaders of the movement said they are Marxist, but the movement itself hasn't done anything Marxist at all. In fact scholars and people who either are or study Marxism say the movement does many things that not label it Marxist. Such as showing support for women's and individual rights. You know, something that is one of the core foundations of Marxism. The removal of individual rights. So until someone can give an example of BLM being Marxist or having intolerance outside of not tolerating racists and racist systems then stop citing them as such. If the organization is Marxist. Show Proof! If they are intolerant of valid ideas: Show Proof! The only thing in your list that you are allowed the right of is not being attacked or killed. That's assault. However, you are perfectly within your rights to be denigrated because of an opinion. People speak the 1st amendment like they know what it is, but keep leaving out the part where it's explicitly geared towards the government, not the citizens. If you don't want to support a movement whose goal is to see racial bias end in the justice system, bringing about better changes for everyone, but are totally willing to support a president who is practicing Facism. Then don't worry the government won't arrest you, but other people have every right to call you out or insult you for it. That is freedom of speech. It's not one way, it's both ways. And it still isn't even universally applicable (go ahead and yell fire in a crowded room and watch your butt get arrested). The reason I asked for closing the thread is because the two other people who are on this thread arguing in favor of the topic, don't want to debate. HeyYou expressly said he doesn't want to, and doesn't want to do any more research into it. He has his opinion, brought about by easily debunked sources, and doesn't want to research any further. JJb54 just keeps repeating the same debunked argument over and over again, and already insinuated from the post he doesn't want to debate because if you don't agree with him you're a liar. This thread is just going to become an endless circular argument, with people who don't want to research more into things because they don't want their opinions challenged. That's the polar opposite of a debate. Now onto your only point that actually talked about the topic at hand. Why do people conflate what the Media does with BLM. We don't control the media, like even you said, we don't have the power. So which is it? Do we have this unfettered control of how narratives are spread or don't we? Pick one. Again. I ask you to show where BLM doesn't care about black lives. Where? The guy you linked to, wasn't killed because he was black (at least until further information is provided, they haven't found the killer). The point of BLM is to support black lives killed, for being black. Not for being black and democrat, or being black and republican. For being black. And even so, BLM supporters still made a vigil for the man and called him an elder in the community. That's a higher honor. And completely goes against what you were trying to imply. Only conservatives and known liars like Lauram Ingramm, are going out of their way to make this man's death political without even getting all the information. And still, BLM supports him. But not every death is going to be covered equally, because there are so many of them, and not all of them are racially carried out by Law Enforcement or racists. The whole point of BLM's founding. Which is something that is always conveniently ignored. So, if she as a black woman does not support BLM, she has the right to be denigrated and stand all the kind of garbage that BLM followers want to throw at her. Wow! The only thing that proves your words is that only BLM only cares about the black people who support them. So, the rest can be denigrated? And this way they want unify black people? Wow! You wont change no one's mind with insults and denigration. But if you think so, go on. You will only collect what you sow. Along History, insults has not proven anything but the lack of arguments and reasons. But you just call it freedom of expression. Insulting is not freedom of expression and will only add bad reputation to any social movement you support. One of the man who I most admire and who fought, not only for black people rights, but for many other minorities rights, was Martin Luther King. And I really doubt that he insulted anyone or promoted such behavior. Start by educating the masses of intolerants BLM followers to prove the other half why you are better. That's the right way.

I listened Joe biden say: I you dont vote for me, you aint black. I am white and my wife is black. We both are very conservatives. If we would live in USA and we would not vote Biden, which would be her racial status according to Biden's words? Which would be her race? Another question: What if we, she as a black woman and me as a white man, do not support BLM? We actually do not support BLM. So, would she be exposed to the denigration with which BLM and their followers treat those black people that does not support them calling them Uncle Tom, con and other denigrating names I will not mention here and I will be called a racist no matter if we both are civilized and we respect everyone? One of the many things that defines Marxism is the intolerance. There is no need to dig deeper. If these people (I am referring BLM, their followers and also the SJW) breathe intolerance now they do not own the institutions, I cannot imagine what they would be capable of do when they got the power. They see racism and discrimination in every opinion, movie, TV serie or videogame. People is affraid to make polemic comments and express their opinions to not being branded as racist or something worse and lose their jobs after being crucified in the social networks. This somehow mines the freedom of expression and is as dangerous as this new movement called "the culture of cancellation". And we can go further. I've seen the marxists take the power. They forced during my school days to learn marxism-leninism and if I would have protested or would have have a different opinion about it me and my family would have gone to jail. Why would you think these marxist would be different? Do you know what is to go to jail only for giving a different opinion? Only for giving a different opinion, whithout violence, with civism. That ideology of the intolerance is gaining terrain in USA. If this ideology hasnt achieve nothing positive wherever it has been applied... why do you think ti will achieve positive things in USA? Going back to the originial post, I wanted to point at something. Bernell Tremmell, a black pro-Trump activist and street prophet was killed a few days ago in front of his store. I havent seen nothing in the medias about him. I havent seen BLM protesting about his life. Why? Maybe the answer is in the original post ,maybe because the medias and BLM dont care about black lives or maybe because the medias and BLM dont care about any live and they only care about their Marxist agenda and black lives are only useful if they feed their purposes. Maybe you are only meat for the medias and BLM or useful fools in their Marxist agenda. Maybe... You are free to believe and think what you want without being denigrated, attacked or killed. So, repect the freedom of expression, the integrity and the lives of people who don not support BLM and choose to support Trump. And if you think that your ideas are better, there is no need to impose them by violence and intolerance. That is democracy. If you continue mentioning the site owner to close this thread as he closed another thread, you are only achieving to close spaces to people express, even for you to express when the rest of people do not like your ideas. That is freedom of expression. I repeat: there are problems and racist people in the USA? Yes there are. But the solutions wont com from intolerant people with a deep social resentment.

BLM has stated: "IF YOU DO NOT GIVE US OUR DEMANDS ... WE WILL BURN EVERYTHING DOWN." Sorry, dude, but that is a very clear sample of terrorist menace. I cant support that and no authority should yield to such demands. Is common sense. Civism over all. That's the way to achieve positive things. And the best example is Martin Luther King. There are many problems of all kinds in USA? That's right. But Marxism is not the solution because Marxism has not ever been the solution in any country. But that is something that the only way to learn it is the hard way. You can ask the citizens of the ex-soviets republics. We can go further, but I dont have to eat an egg completly to know it is rotten and BLM is not making the right approach about this matter.

Insulting me only proves your lack of arguments. I already defended my point and kept the shape, so I'm satisfied. If you think that is the right attitude, go on. I don't think you'll ever get something positive that way, but that's your problem.

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not. The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy. These are things you don't seem to understand. Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it. To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework. But these are things you dont seem to understand. Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a coup d'état by nationalizing a company? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a purge by creating a welfare-state? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif All the things the dictators need to make a coup d'état or a purge are the police, the army, the control of the justice and of the medias. I repeat the same rethorical because I know it highlights some truths the right-wing fascist propagandists like you prefer to keep hidden. So according to you it is impoossible to have on one hand free medias, an independent justice, an equal financing for all the parties, a maximum financial transparency ; to make it an important separation of the powers and on the other an economy only made of public companies? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif I'm impatient to see your demonstration. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif Do you want a name of a dictator who made a coup d'etat by nationalizing a company?: Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro not only nationalized all companies, it also expropiated all national companies: small, medium and big companies. He forbid private property and free press. And that's is one of the ways you install a dictaroship. Check your eye in the mirror. :dance: And your rethorical is non-sense. Fascism is so linked to the right as is it to the left-wing. Do you even know that nazi meant national-socialist? NATIONAL_SOCIALIST. Can you read it well now? Do you need bigger characters? Do you need a longer list? I am not here for that. Do your homework, dude. And dont believe all what your left-wing profersors want to put in your mind. Free your mind. I vote for freedom of market and freedom of speech. I am agaisnt monopolios as well as against dictarotships. We have more points in common than those you want to see. But communism ideology is so fascist as the right-wing fascist you always mention. Fidel Castro was already dictator when he nationalized all the companies. You're either a very lame manipulator, or retarded. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif How do you define when a party is socialist? By relying on its name since the dictators are known to lie as they breath? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gifOr by comparing the characteristics of socialism with the policy applied by said regime?Socialism is a system where the state interveins as a counter power to protect the workers, consumers and people in general from the countless slaver and public poisoner bosses (the social boss with the highest rate of psychopaths by the way) to redistribute the wealth and ensure the workers who create the wealth and the members of the lowest social classes don't live in destitution. Hitler forbid the syndicates, increased the working times, decreased the salaries and used the wealths to finance its imperialist policy and replace the exploited workers with war-prisoners/slaves it lented to private companies. And you dare presenting the nazis as socialists? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif You vote for the freedom of speech and that's why you never denunced the company bosses who control the medias since the freedom of the press is a fundament of democracy. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif Lame manipulator and retarded? Your lack of arguments and knowledge of History make you recurre to insults? Wow! I am not daring presenting the nazis as socialists. It is fact and it is implicit in the name and in its policies. For the record, Fidel Castro forbid the syndicates, decreased the salaries and used wealth to finance its socialist agenda across Latin America, created the UMAP ( which means forced labor camps for political dissidents) and monopilized all the industries and medias. Any resemblance with the nazis (national-socialist party) is a coincidence? Actually, not. If you dont understand it, well, there is not much to do. There is freedom of press when there are public and private medias (small, medium and big medias). When only goverment controls press, there is not freedom of press. Isnt clear? You repeat again and again the word "psychopaths" when referring to some groups, but in the late posts, you have started to behave like one. Stop behaving like one to keep this debate friendly and to find common points.

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not. The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy. These are things you don't seem to understand. Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it. To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework. But these are things you dont seem to understand. Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a coup d'état by nationalizing a company? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif Can you give me the name of one single dictator who made a purge by creating a welfare-state? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif All the things the dictators need to make a coup d'état or a purge are the police, the army, the control of the justice and of the medias. I repeat the same rethorical because I know it highlights some truths the right-wing fascist propagandists like you prefer to keep hidden. So according to you it is impoossible to have on one hand free medias, an independent justice, an equal financing for all the parties, a maximum financial transparency ; to make it an important separation of the powers and on the other an economy only made of public companies? http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/12.gif I'm impatient to see your demonstration. http://image.jeuxvideo.com/smileys_img/39.gif Do you want a name of a dictator who made a coup d'etat by nationalizing a company?: Fidel Castro. Fidel Castro not only nationalized all companies, it also expropiated all national companies: small, medium and big companies. He forbid private property and free press. And that's is one of the ways you install a dictaroship. Check your eye in the mirror. :dance: And your rethorical is non-sense. Fascism is so linked to the right as is it to the left-wing. Do you even know that nazi meant national-socialist? NATIONAL_SOCIALIST. Can you read it well now? Do you need bigger characters? Do you need a longer list? I am not here for that. Do your homework, dude. And dont believe all what your left-wing profersors want to put in your mind. Free your mind. I vote for freedom of market and freedom of speech. I am agaisnt monopolios as well as against dictarotships. We have more points in common than those you want to see. But communism ideology is so fascist as the right-wing fascist you always mention.

Communism is compatible with the sepration of powers, marxism-leninism like the right-wing/fascist culture are not. The separation of powers is the fundament of democracy. These are things you don't seem to understand. Communism is not compatible with separation of powers. Not in practice. Never. History proves it. To continue repeating the same rethorical a thousand times does not make your statements true. Not today. Today we can research. Today, if someone attempts to deceive you with such statement is because you do not make your homework. But these are things you dont seem to understand.

If you want to protest, is your right, but be peaceful and civilized. There is not justification for burning, stealing, looting private and public property or attacking innocent and killing innocent people. Violent rioters are criminals and that is not my opinion, that is the reality.

Our freedom of speech is because the state do not control all the medias. If all medias were controlled by the state there will be not freedom of speech. That is what happens in totalitarian dictatorships. On the other hand, state do not creates or generates wealth. As larger the state is, larger will be the public spending. As larger the public spending, larger will be the taxes you will have to pay. So, the math is simple. There are two kind of persons: the one who wants a life-time work in public service and the one who wants to be self-sufficient and start his own business. In countries were the second prevails, the quality of life and human development is better. Where do you think the money to pay "free" public services you enjoy today in your country comes from? Do you think that is there were a larger state and more public workers than private business the things would be better? I repeat, the math is simple. There are people who just simple dont want to effort and are happy with a life-time simple job and the help of the state. Those people do not push the country forward, the entrepreneurs and business men do. Although, you're right that there are unscrupulous companies. But is in these cases where the state have to make prevail the rights and duties of both: the boss and the employee. The state must be like a referee, not Santa Clauss. So it's not a problem if the slaver and public-poisoner company bosses can control the medias? Even if democracy notably relies on the freedom of the press? So according you all the bosses act to improve our quality of life? Like the petroleum lobby that murders thousands of people every year? Like the agro-food lobby that also murders thousands of innocents every year using pesticides and carcinogenic additives? The list is very long and I didn't even mention all those bosses who prefer collecting the sport cars they will never drive instead of paying taxes as any citizen to build hospitals or schools. So according to you the problem is the intervention of the state in the economy? It doesn't have any relationship with the system that gives the companies' leaders a structurally advantageous strength relationship towards the consumers because of a unique party or rigged elections based on clientelism when all the parties don't have the same financing? It doesn't come either from the fact those who lead the companies can also vote the laws when democracy relies on the separation of powers? Didnt you read when I wrote: Although, you're right that there are unscrupulous companies. ? Your hatred against the word "private property" blinds you? Are all the owners of small, mediums or even so big companies are "murderers" for you? Yes, there are unescrupulous "bosses" and companies (should I write it in caps?). But not all that wants to be self-suficient and to have his own company is destinated to become a "big bad boss". In democracy there are many medias: some controlled by state, some by your "big bad bosses" and some independient medias. Do you wish that state controls all the medias? And what if the state is corrupt and controls all the medias? And what is the problem with the people who collect cars? They pay enourmous taxes for their houses, cars and other posesions. Who manage those taxes? I can answer that: THE STATE. So, if there are no hospitals, schools and so on, is because the politicians and publics servers, whom should destinate al those taxes to the public spending, steal the money of the taxes. So yes, I agree you that there are corrupt companies as there are corrupt politicians on both sides. But envying anyone who is successful and pointing it out as "the big bad boss" are the symptoms of social resentment.

Our freedom of speech is because the state do not control all the medias. If all medias were controlled by the state there will be not freedom of speech. That is what happens in totalitarian dictatorships. On the other hand, state do not creates or generates wealth. As larger the state is, larger will be the public spending. As larger the public spending, larger will be the taxes you will have to pay. So, the math is simple. There are two kind of persons: the one who wants a life-time work in public service and the one who wants to be self-sufficient and start his own business. In countries were the second prevails, the quality of life and human development is better. Where do you think the money to pay "free" public services you enjoy today in your country comes from? Do you think that is there were a larger state and more public workers than private business the things would be better? I repeat, the math is simple. There are people who just simple dont want to effort and are happy with a life-time simple job and the help of the state. Those people do not push the country forward, the entrepreneurs and business men do. Although, you're right that there are unscrupulous companies. But is in these cases where the state have to make prevail the rights and duties of both: the boss and the employee. The state must be like a referee, not Santa Clauss.

Nobody here is defending the corruption of the politicians. What's is defended here is the freedom of market and speech. Do not confuse terms. Goverments are not to control the economy, they are to defend people rights. And that are to different matters. Statistically, when goverment controls the economy is turns into a disaster. Yes, modern slavery exists thanks to corrupt politicians. But not all business men, small and medium companies are exploiters.

I would like all the parties to have same financing so the elections aren't rigged any longer. I would like to prevent the psychopaths notably from gaining a political power or leading a company. I would like the laws to force the company bosses to respect the workers' rights wherever they go to decrease the unemployment and the immigration. I would like to prevent anyone from simultaneously owning a company and a media to preserve the freedom of the medias which is a fundament of democracy. I would like the potential dictators and their strategic crime partners (including the company bosses who finance the electoral campaigns and give their "advisors" policians commission/bribes) to be systematically executed when they are found guilty of a crime so none can free them when the popular pressure falls and so know they have everything to lose trampling people's rights. Do you know any company which will help me reach these goals? I well want to believe the right-wing culture is a lesser devil compared to marxism-leninism but if it's right it comes from a lesser concentration of powers not from capitalism. Some countries have a much more sane political system, take a look at the scandinavian countries. I've never said that in the USA there is not corruption. Is there were no corruption, it would be perfect, but no system is. But, if others, even inmigrants, have raised their own business in USA... why dont you can? In spite of everything, there are opportunities. You don want to be exploited, start your own business. No one will keep you from do it. Actually, there is no law to keep you from do it. Many of the big companies started in a garage. I think there is no need to name them. What my people wants is the opportunity that you already have: the opportunity of the freedom of entrepreneurship. The nefast part of the communism is not that it does not solve you your problems, the real sad part is that he does not allow you to solve your problems either. If you try to create your own business, you go to jail. Simply as that. Everybody have to be equal: equaly poor and everybody has to work for te state, like it or not. But that is something that you will never understand. We are here today, chatting, tahnks to an entrepreneur named Robin Scott, whom probably started this site with computer. Yes, I know he is from UK, but there are a lot of people running these kind of site everywhere. The only thing they need is the freedom to start their companies and the will to do it. That is what I want for my country. we will take care of corrupt politician later.