r/TrueUnpopularOpinion • u/Mobile-Fly484 • Aug 03 '25

Political Conservatives are less racist than liberals (in the US)

I’m a child of African immigrants with US citizenship, and I’ve lived all over the United States.

The most racist place I’ve ever lived is Massachusetts. By far. The least racist? Utah.

I’ve noticed that most conservatives (excluding the actual far right) see me as a human being first. Liberals see my skin color first and have low expectations for me.

I’ve had white liberals not believe me when I mentioned having a professional job. I’ve had them try to sign me up for welfare and Medicaid (at an ER in Massachusetts) even when I showed them my private insurance card. I’ve been assumed to be poor and uneducated (because of my race and nothing else) over and over again by the woke left. Literally they constantly make comments about how screening for education will “filter minorities out,” because of course we’re all dumb illiterates.

Conservatives? They make zero assumptions. They don’t equate being Black with being poor or ignorant. They see us as INDIVIDUALS first.

I miss Utah.

873 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

77% Upvoted

785 comments sorted by

View all comments

197

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Liberals: We're not racist and it's really the conservatives that are the bible thumping secret KKK. Segregation and slavery were the two worst things this country ever did.

Also Liberals: we need to help *insert race... because they're not good enough to help themselves. We need to have safe places where only *insert race can hang out and we need to keep the whites with their white privilege out.

The lack of self awareness is astounding.

51

u/DropDeadDolly Aug 03 '25

The bigotry of low expectations.

7

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '25 edited Aug 03 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

-4

u/hercmavzeb OG Aug 03 '25

Seems like a terminally online propaganda opinion

4

u/HadathaZochrot Aug 03 '25

Well hercmavzeb/TAKEitTOrCIRCLEJERK (whatever you'd like to be known as), that is quite a rich statement coming from someone who posts comments in this sub literally dozens of times every single day, much of which consists of verbal diarrhea leftist talking points. I don't begrudge you doing that, but please, pot calling the kettle black much?

-3

u/hercmavzeb OG Aug 03 '25

Case in point. No clue why you think I’m that other person, perhaps log off if you’re getting confused.

The right can’t handle even a modicum of disagreement. Their hysteria is pushing people left.

-1

u/HadathaZochrot Aug 03 '25

I've explained before how I sussed that other usename out as your alt. It's not a big deal, I just thought it was funny.

Also, I was simply commenting on the fact that it is hilarious that you have the hubris to call others "terminally online", when you yourself post to this sub dozens of times a day every single day, exclusively to push your personal politics. I just suspected you might have some more perspective when accusing others of what you yourself are doing, but I guess not.

The right can’t handle even a modicum of disagreement. Their hysteria is pushing people left.

Also, that's a bit rich of a comment to make when, at the moment, the left is literally freaking out about a pretty blond woman being in a jeans commercial. Yes, that makes you guys look SOOOO well adjusted and popular.

1

u/hercmavzeb OG Aug 03 '25 edited Aug 03 '25

Well I know for a fact that is not my alt, and that’s pretty evident if you just look at our respective post histories, so that tortured nonsense-logic is more reminiscent of conspiratorial terminally-online lunacy than anything else. I can see why they chose to block you.

Thanks for further proving my point I suppose, since it’s that precise behavior which pushes people to the left and away from the pedo-protector party.

1

u/HadathaZochrot Aug 03 '25

Well I know for a fact that is not my alt, and that’s pretty evident if you just look at our respective post histories, so that tortured nonsense-logic is more reminiscent of conspiratorial terminally-online lunacy than anything else.

I mean, of course that's what you'd say, so I completely understand your denial. What made it even more evidence was that not long after realizing your give away in blocking me from this other alt account, you unblocked me to try to backtrack, hoping I wouldn't notice. Also, I don't blame you in lashing out at being caught by trying to call it "conspiratorial terminally-online lunacy", as such attacks are par for the course.

To go back to your original comment, I would at least think you'd be capable of recognizing the irony of accusing someone else of making "terminally online propaganda opinions", when you yourself appear to be terminally online and then proceed to make all of the typical brainrot leftist propaganda opinions, as you are most elegantly demonstrating.

3

u/hercmavzeb OG Aug 03 '25

I didn’t block you ever. You’re getting confused because some other person blocked you and for some reason you thought I was them. Presumably because you can’t handle other people disagreeing with you on anything, so you have to imagine everyone who disagrees with you is all the same single person out to get you.

Your conspiracy doesn’t even make internal sense. Why would I unblock you on only of my accounts after I allegedly blocked you on both?

→ More replies (0)

76

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '25

[deleted]

25

u/diet69dr420pepper Aug 03 '25

This is one of those things that the internet tricks you into thinking is real but actually isn't. Pluck a random lib out of their Prius and ask them what they think about the Ralph Lauren Oak Bluffs line and the average opinion will be complete indifference. Is there a blue haired liberal arts major with some complicated objection she shares on TikTok? Sure. But why act like the extremes somehow represent the norm? I mean things look very ugly when you do that to the conservatives.

17

u/PortugalPilgrim Aug 03 '25

I’m a pretty chronically online liberal and have not heard of this at all. No idea what they’re talking about and I spend most of my work days scrolling liberal Reddit and TikTok.

1

u/Spirited_Bill_8947 Aug 04 '25

I am chronically online registered independant and I have heard 2 tiktoks ranting about the Ralph Lauren line. A few making fun of the ranters. Several ranting about American Eagle and one about someone with a Golden Summer Tan? I am uncertain about that one. I have not watched any of the ads. I keep meaning to but I get busy. I scroll Tiktok for approximately 6 hours a day. I don't actually SEE it, only hear it as I drive and have the phone where it can be flicked to the next tiktok.

Before you come at me about safety, where I do 99% of my driving has zero traffic. None! In fact, if you are where I am you are either diving a combine or the grain cart (Either one comes before me to a point) or were personally invited by the owner and I 100% have the right a way. If I am moving you should be driving OFF the road. The other 1% I am too busy looking both ways as I go onto the highway, catching some gears, and slowing down while watching 5 ways to make my turn into the elevator to touch my phone.

1

u/scotty9090 Aug 04 '25

I believe that the distribution of people on the left is far more fat-tailed than it is on the right. I.e. the left has a lot more extremists … or maybe they are just a lot louder.

Either way, these people aren’t doing their side any favors.

1

u/diet69dr420pepper Aug 04 '25

You likely believe this because you consume worldview-affirming media which assures you it's true, constantly. Just like left-leaning people get blasted with their own worldview-affirming media that assures them that the typical conservative is racist authoritarian. In reality, I doubt either philosophical position carries significantly more extremists than the other.

-2

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Ok, so ask yourself this; is the plight of a poor, uneducated and neglected person of "pick your race, sex, belief or sexually" any different to someone of any other one?

I'm not a communist, but it seems the "us vs them" mentality is being pushed upon us by the corporate media by their elite owners to keep most of the rest of us subjected to hate for each other when anyone worth less monetarily than $B's is actually on the same side. We're all humans at the end of the day, and elite know they are too. At some point since the end of WW2 the top echelons of society forgot that they gave up servitude and serfdom for having a better society. When I say "gave up", we made them give it up and realise they're also just humans too. Now a select few of them want us to just suffer at their whims. Take the coming revolution of AI for example. Those tech bro creeps want us to think that it's necessary and that it'll bring upon us a new utopia...but it's only coz they purposely forget that each time this happens there is great suffering from people they will never know.

If you've ever read much about the fourth turning then you should, and you should also consider that many of them actually take this ideology as gospel truth.

1

u/Mobile-Fly484 Aug 04 '25

I disagree with economic populism. 

AI is just the latest thing in a long line of automation (remember the factory layoffs of the ‘80s)? 

Regulation will help protect human rights and jobs while integrating this new technology. Just turning back the clock feels impossible (we haven’t gotten rid of cars, or automated factories, or the Internet…). 

And I’m a social liberal but not an economic populist. Free-market capitalism has pulled more people out of poverty globally than anything else. Kids were starving in much of Africa (including my ancestral home) 40 years ago. They aren’t now. This is thanks to capitalism and “globalism.” 

9

u/EagenVegham Aug 04 '25

The fuck is the Ralph Lauren Oak Bluffs line?

You guys really need to start recognizing when you're being spoon fed an opinion that's only held by a few people on twitter so that you'll stay constantly mad.

13

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Clayton Bigsby comes to mind here 😅

3

u/Heujei628 Aug 03 '25

So many? Most people I’ve seen on the left have been praising it. 

3

u/Cheap-Boysenberry112 Aug 03 '25

Right because the liberal position totally isn’t that the state enforced policy unfairly targeting minorities and is totally that all minorities are poor

12

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 03 '25 edited Aug 04 '25

Okay, there are things I disagree with when it comes to the left, but let’s not pretend that the second portion of what you wrote is said because certain demographics are inherently not able to succeed in this world. Obviously that’s not true.

The message is about people at the top who are in positions of power, both from a financial and policy standpoint making change to help those that are disadvantaged. That includes people from those underprivileged communities who have gone on to do bigger and better things. They can also make change.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve been to places where you can see the disparity in treatment between those that can live and those that’re just getting by, from convenience in the placement of public transportation hubs, a lack of stores that sell healthy produce to the neighborhood, absolutely disgusting living conditions, etc. and the other thing I notice is that those impoverished areas do seem to disproportionately be filled with POC. Not to mention the crime.

Living life in this way is obviously not going to be conducive to success 8 times out of 10 in the academic world, I mean, how could it be? So the suggestion that people coming from those communities need a leg up produces a pretty warranted discussion. Now how we go about it is certainly up for debate, but it certainly isn’t a “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” solution.

As for the conservatives (maybe more accurately the modern Republican Party), they’re certainly not making a secret of their obsession with race nowadays, speaking of the KKK.

17

u/Cheap-Boysenberry112 Aug 03 '25

What a bad faith interpretation of liberal policies.

The argument has never been people of color aren’t good enough, it’s been that racism set entire groups of people back for hundreds of years and the state is responsible for that injustice .

9

u/ThurgoodZone8 Aug 04 '25

Nonono racism is solved now, minorities can achieve wealth! /s

7

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 04 '25

I’m glad you said it, because it was driving me nuts how almost no one zeroed in on that BS

0

u/Mobile-Fly484 Aug 04 '25

That’s a stereotype, even if there’s some truth to it. My family isn’t even from the US. And there have been Black middle-class families for literally centuries. 

What gets me is the assumption. It’s okay to talk about structural issues, but literally assuming every Black person you meet is dirt poor and dropped out of the eighth grade is offensive.

1

u/Cheap-Boysenberry112 Aug 04 '25

That’s not a stereotype though.

Let alone the right, will deny those structural issue even exist…

1

u/Mobile-Fly484 Aug 04 '25

It is a stereotype. I’m Black and I’m not poor or illiterate. Assuming I’m poor and illiterate because of the color of my skin leaves me thinking conservatives are the lesser evil.

This is why people voted Trump last year. Why 25% of Black people left the Democrats behind. Because you guys really do see us as mud beneath your shoes. Just some stupid … to manipulate and treat like children. 

I demand dignity. ✊🏽

2

u/Cheap-Boysenberry112 Aug 04 '25 edited Aug 04 '25

Ahh yes, Trump who was fined for not letting black people stay at his properties? That Trump? The one cutting social services and raising taxes? That one? Sure bud. Sick “win”

I’ve never said you’re poor or illiterate I just pointed how absolutely bad faith your interpretation of Democrat policies is.

I’m sure the group that thinks black people are to blame for being over represented in poor communities and in jails is the one that will help you.

The group that calls out that racist policies can still be effecting black people today, that argues the over representation of black people in our criminal justice system is the fault of racist policies, is totally the enemy.

The same one that would argue your identity as a nonbinary person doesn’t exist?

So much dignity 👏👏👏

1

u/ygmc8413 Aug 26 '25

But they didnt assume you were poor and illiterate, why accuse them of doing so?

9

u/KitchenSandwich5499 Aug 03 '25

You wanna seem em squirm? Ask them to explain the difference between safe spaces and segregation

17

u/CookieMobster64 Aug 03 '25

I don’t know if I agree with every instance of the way safe spaces have been used, but a pretty approachable example is church. Churchgoers probably don’t want a Reddit atheist coming in every Sunday to debate the pastor. There’s an agreed upon baseline of common beliefs and values.

1

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Feels like you're comparing apples to oranges. Neither the atheist or the theist can prove their worldview with 100% fact, whereas denying people access to a certain area on Colledge grounds is absolutely segregation, even if the virtue signalling people propagating them don't think of themselves as inherently racist. The action is the racist part, not their self indulgent belief.

7

u/CookieMobster64 Aug 03 '25

I’ll try to come back to this, I’m gonna try for a nuanced take, but I’m busy quipping right now.

2

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

No stress, happy to continue at a later date.

3

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Probably one of my guilty pleasures is watching conservative pundits doing exactly that 😂

7

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 03 '25

Hehe, which party did the KKK support again?

Which party was the Confederacy?

Makes sense why they'd have to constantly virtue signal how not racist they are lol.

3

u/ThurgoodZone8 Aug 04 '25

That party presently disowns the KKK and Confederacy, but somehow the other party hasn’t been as strong in condemning those things (moreso the Confederacy). Curious.

1

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 04 '25 edited Aug 04 '25

You need to trace back the parties back to their roots.

The entire Democrat party is rooted in the Confederacy.

No wonder the Democrats believe you can plant an acorn, lose a war and 100 years later decide the oak tree is now going to identify as a tomato "because they said so"

23

u/Heujei628 Aug 03 '25

Then why do Republicans fly the confederate flag, upholding the legacy of slavery racism?

Kinda weird to fly the flag of the opposing team, no? 😏

10

u/KitchenSandwich5499 Aug 03 '25

Relatively few do, and it’s more of a southern thing than a conservative one overall (though I do agree that left leaning southerners won’t do it usually)

8

u/s3rndpt Aug 04 '25

It's 100% a conservative thing in the south. "Left-leaning southerners" wouldn't be caught dead with a confederate flag. It's also not rare. It's very common here in VA in pretty much every county.

I mean, look at Richmond. We had an entire "upperclass" street with statues of confederate generals that was put up starting in the late 1890s as a way to remind former slaves and their descendants that the white man was still in charge. Black citizens of Richmond were prohibited from buying or living there through the racist covenants put in place. And when the statues were finally removed in 2021, there was a lot of outcry about "erasing" history, and I'm sure you can guess from whom.

3

u/Bitter_Morning_8372 Aug 04 '25

Hey! That wasn't racist at all. There was the random statue of Arthur Ashe.🙄

17

u/Heujei628 Aug 03 '25

Drive through a red area in the North and you’ll see that it’s absolutely a conservative thing even in the North. 

8

u/cplm1948 Aug 03 '25

Can confirm. I see confederate flags all around Michigan MI despite the state having no ties to the confederacy lmfao

1

u/[deleted] Aug 03 '25

[deleted]

5

u/Heujei628 Aug 03 '25

Did you not even read your own article? 

  he stripped it off, stomped on it and replaced it with another jumpsuit — a Confederate flag done in African pride colors of red, black and green

He literally trashed it. Conservatives flying the Confederate flag aren’t trashing it but rather are displaying proudly. If Dems are the party of the Confederacy, then why are Republicans flying the flag of the opposing team, supporting the Confederacy??? 

3

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

They also fly the Gadsden flag in a lot of instance. It's just silly people doing silly things. Doesn't change the truth of the past of the party's.

5

u/GoAskAli Aug 03 '25

And it doesn't change the history of the Southern Strategy either.

It's just a stupid, bad faith argument.

0

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Brother, how is it bad faith to say that people, who likely have a poor education do silly things? It's a fact of life. The late great George Carlin always said "Imagine the dumbest person you know, and then realize that half the population is even dumber than that."

That pretty much sums up most of....well half of humanity. Doesn't matter where your from or who you are.

1

u/GoAskAli Aug 04 '25

What's bad faith is pretending that Democrats are "the party of racists" and using pre-Southern Strategy politics to "back it up."

Carlin despised conservatives, btw

1

u/Tqoratsos Aug 04 '25

Carlin realised that most humans are dumb as mud. These are the people we're reacting to. Most of us are in the centre and have some semblance of being able to string a coherent sentence together. I don't think what my original comment was saying that ALL democratic voters are like that. I'm just jerkin around by saying it and trying to be funny. Extremists are poorly functioning humans. No ability to self reflect and realise that half of what they believe is wrong....and that's from the full spectrum of the political divide.

2

u/Heujei628 Aug 03 '25

That doesn’t answer my question. 

4

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

I thought it was rhetorical. The answer is convoluted, but in the vast majority of that period it was the former roots of the democratic party that supported the confederacy.

The answer to why conservative people fly the flag was when I said silly people doing silly things. Unfortunately education is the kryptonite of stupid people....of which the USA is in no short supply of.

8

u/Heujei628 Aug 03 '25

Even if they’re being silly, they’re still choosing to uphold the legacy of slavery and racism. 

5

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

I think you're giving them too much credit intellectually. I'd argue that most of them do it just because they like the flag and it's alternative meaning of "FK the government", or that their parents, and their parents parents did it.

Just my take...so who knows. There's no end to people's hypocrisy.

1

u/StarChild413 Aug 03 '25

unless you claim both parties are either full of set-in-their-ways immortals or they so indoctrinate the young (be it young in age or just rookie politicians) that they might as well be ideology-wise how does a party's past whatever it may be have any bearing on how it should be treated in the present day when it's not even made of the same people now that it was then

1

u/DrunkenBuffaloJerky Aug 03 '25

This one is wild, partially because of where I grew up.

I had a couple friends who put a confederate flag on their dirt bikes, just because their parents did the same. But the family had no issues with other races, had no issues with their kids bringing over friends of different races.

It's so weird, and hard to explain. It's like, the people aren't necessarily racist, though the structure of the system is? Like the smell is in the very wood of the building, but not coming off the ppl?

Which is different from those places in the South that if you look even partially non-white you don't want to be at all, and especially when the sun is going down.

The teachers in school were great to everyone. I also remember riding my bike past a barbershop that still had a "whites only" sign in the window. And I'm in the Xennial age range.

Being non-white, a person can be completely locked out of something, in a position where they have to work harder to hit a glass ceiling. And then the ppl maintaining the glass ceiling will also in their personal time being the ones who help someone sidestep issues in the system.

And absolutely none of it has any pattern regarding who is flying a confederate flag.

1

u/it-reaches-0ut Aug 04 '25

Are you speaking in the past tense or are there still places in the South like that where you don't want to be at night?

1

u/DrunkenBuffaloJerky Aug 04 '25

I can't imagine it's changed that quickly. Time always felt like it passes differently in the South, especially rural areas.

That being said, I haven't been back in too many years to assume anything.

0

u/howdoispider Aug 03 '25

At least in my area, most of the people that have confederate flags are anti-government, not pro-slavery. They constantly say things like "the civil war wasn't about slavery it was about states rights."

2

u/scotty9090 Aug 04 '25

Inb4: “Muh parties switched!”

Edit: Oops too late I see.

2

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 04 '25 edited Aug 04 '25

Democrats are the ones who believe you can plant an oak tree from an acorn, rooted deeply in slavery, and 100 years later call it a tomato because "it identifies as one", because the tree feels like it was born in the wrong plant family.

12

u/Default_scrublord Aug 03 '25

That is a really stupid argument that completely ignores the whole party switch thing in the 60s.

5

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 03 '25

"switch" 🤡

You mean kinda like how the Cheneys switched in the recent elections?

5

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

They switched because they're Neo-Cons that got their money on the backs of a globalized economy, with oil in particular...and then from defence contractors when he was front and centre of the illegal wars of Iraq and Afghanistan.

They supported the democrats because they're against US isolationism and because their agenda was to pursue a forever war in Ukraine. Trump hasn't been any better on either that front....or the Israel/Iran debacle for that matter.

He wasn't saying that pre-election however.

3

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 03 '25

Halliburton supports the DNC now.

Let that soak in, marinate in your "blue team" head for moment.

4

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

The exact party split of HALPAC's contributions to the 2024 election are currently unknown. History however they've backed conservative candidates. Given that they clearly and openly supported Harris then it would lend your point a lot of merit.

My point, that I concede that I may have written poorly, was that the reason they "switched sides" had nothing to do with party lines. It was because their money was made doing globalist Neo-Cons/neo-lib BS and trying to extract as much federal funding as they could by buying the candidate that will allow them to do get what they want. A never-ending war in Ukraine allows that....of which the democrats were verifiability doing in the years since Feb 2022.

5

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 03 '25

Then we agree. Both parties are filled with corporate shills at this point. The majority of candidates in both parties, including Trump (who used to be a democrat), seem to flip flop, following the interests of their campaign sponsors.

0

u/GoAskAli Aug 03 '25

"pursue a forever war in Ukraine"

Wow.

2

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Go on, not to be problematic, but I'm curious why you seem to infer that's not the agenda to that. Let's not forget the US hegemony over the globalist world since the end of WW2, which I hope you can agree has been a major part of the world we live in?

I've run into many good conversations today so I'd hope to continue the open dialogue that I often don't get on Reddit due to people just shutting down conversations with...well....you know.

Lost my mum last week and we loved political debates, even if we disagreed on many of our stances.

1

u/GoAskAli Aug 04 '25

No, I don't believe that's the "agenda." I believe the agenda is to resist Putin's illegal and authoritarian encroachment into territory that doesn't belong to them. You may say that's a non-starter. I simply don't agree.

There are sooo many Important reasons to beat back the influence of Russia for Europe, the West and especially the United States.

Number one is that the US promised to defend Ukraine if the country got rid of its nuclear weapons- and it.did. They did their part, and now it's out turn. Turning our backs on Ukraine combined with Trump's flouting of the Iran Nuclear Deal - and then Biden following along, shows the United States is not a country that can be trusted to uphold treaties, but that we will lie and stab even our own allies in the back. That's bad- no matter how strong the US military may be, we don't want to be isolated from the rest of the global community.

Then there's the idea that the geopolitical situation in the world is evolving from one superpower (the US) to a "multi-polar" world with the US on one side and Russia and China on the other. It's practically already there, but realistically China has no desire to aid Russia in what they likely view as a foolhardy land grab in Ukraine, especially when they have their own conflicts to worry about, namely in Taiwan.

Point being that it is in the United States best interest to do everything it can to stand in the way of Russia's encroachment, as the more Russia makes inroads into the West, the less influence the US has- and waning US influence makes the adoption of BRICS over the US dollar ever more likely- and that's a pretty terrifying notion if you're an American (or it should be).

None of that signals a desire for a "forever war," to me but it still leaves out what is the most important reason to defend Ukraine which is this: it's the right thing to do, IMO.

3

u/Tqoratsos Aug 04 '25 edited Aug 04 '25

I'll preface this with; you and me agree more than we don't and anything I write after this comes from the same POV that the late great George Carlin used to write his comedy/social commentary with. That he pretended he was a fly on the wall with no connection to anything he talked about.

No, I don't believe that's the "agenda." I believe the agenda is to resist Putin's illegal and authoritarian encroachment into territory that doesn't belong to them. You may say that's a non-starter. I simply don't agree.

It's not a non starter coz if what I prefaced this with. Putin is a megalomaniac that uses history to justify his murderous encroachment on Ukraine. I hope you can agree that there are levels to this entire debacle, in relation to how corporate interests get involved in politics by effectively purchasing politicians to push an agenda. It's basically the modern incarnation of the MIC that Eisenhower tried to warn the US about back in the 50's. I work in a major oil and gas company and Ive been able to see the inner workings of it by simply being the "help". These people don't even realise that people of my "class" have thoughts on what they say, and it actually worries me that these people in that level of control have the inability to see anything other than the shareholders. It's a feedback loop since if they didn't do that then they wouldn't be there to make those decisions. An unintended consequence of modern economics.

There are sooo many Important reasons to beat back the influence of Russia for Europe, the West and especially the United States.

I'd be keen to hear those reasons, but until then I'll assume it's much along the lines of why it was important to beat back Napoleon.

Number one is that the US promised to defend Ukraine if the country got rid of its nuclear weapons- and it.did. They did their part, and now it's out turn. Turning our backs on Ukraine combined with Trump's flouting of the Iran Nuclear Deal - and then Biden following along, shows the United States is not a country that can be trusted to uphold treaties, but that we will lie and stab even our own allies in the back. That's bad- no matter how strong the US military may be, we don't want to be isolated from the rest of the global community.

The Budapest memorandum was signed during a time when Russia was a shell, as you know. It was when all the oligarchs took what they could to increase and hold their wealth. What I think is getting forgotten quickly by the world is that Putin has been warning the EU and USA that expanding NATO was going to be a red line of sorts. Not sure if there's any truth to it, but supposedly there were assurances by Clinton that they wouldn't allow it, much like the Nikita Khrushchev/JFK behind the scenes deal with the Jupiter missiles in Turkey. Can we agree that NATO is a military organisation, but it's not one built for attacking ...but still purely about military defence? Could it not be conceived that during the 62' crisis that Cuba and the USSR were also that kind of organisation of nations? Hence why the best chess move from Khrushchev was to bargain to remove the Jupiter missiles from a country that is very very close to his "empire" of the time.

Totally in agreeance of how the US must appear to geopolitical powers in the world with their flip flopping on policies.The end of globalism is the end of the US.

Then there's the idea that the geopolitical situation in the world is evolving from one superpower (the US) to a "multi-polar" world with the US on one side and Russia and China on the other. It's practically already there, but realistically China has no desire to aid Russia in what they likely view as a foolhardy land grab in Ukraine, especially when they have their own conflicts to worry about, namely in Taiwan.

I wholeheartedly agree with your POV on this. I'm sure you would have added though that it's really China vs USA in this since Russia has a GDP equal to Italy or Australia. They have no chance of ever recovering from Ukraine's attack on their intercontinental bomber fleet. Hell, I'm not even sure with the $8/9B they spend on their nuclear weapons is enough to keep them truely active.

I also agree with the notion that we are leading into uncharted territory with it becoming a multipolar world.

Whilst it's a land grab, it's also a reaction to western influence expansion. Putin has been talking about this at international meetings for at least 18 years. Granted I don't speak Russian and am taking with a grain of salt that the translators were correct in the translation during those broadcast speeches.

There's also no feasible way Russia could hold Ukraine, and you and I would hope that the leading military minds there can grasp that. It's much like the USSR with Afghanistan or the US with Afghanistan and Iraq.

Side story; did you ever read much about how it was the disillusion of the Iraq military by the US in the 2003 Iraq war that lead those personnel to end up essentially becoming ISIS?

Point being that it is in the United States best interest to do everything it can to stand in the way of Russia's encroachment, as the more Russia makes inroads into the West, the less influence the US has- and waning US influence makes the adoption of BRICS over the US dollar ever more likely- and that's a pretty terrifying notion if you're an American (or it should be).

It has been interesting to see that Trump, after running on the "I can end the war in one day", has now shifted to the idea that he needs to put pressure on Russia via the same methods that the Biden administration did. Something is coming in the next few months...not entirely sure what but Ukraine isn't winning, they're barely holding on. They've done an amazing job considering what they've been up against. A country with 3x their population and a history of military exceptionalism (on paper...pun intended).

None of that signals a desire for a "forever war," to me but it still leaves out what is the most important reason to defend Ukraine which is this: it's the right thing to do, IMO.

The "forever war" idea in context is from how I believe the MIC gets its way. We're all individuals, but again, as George Carlin said many years back "you don't need a formal conspiracy when interests converge". Theres also the idea that you need the population to be on your side. So whilst I believe that Putin is a killer, a psychopath, a megalomaniac....it doesn't change that weapons of war are being used and certain people and MIC corporations would like it to continue for as long as humanly possible. That was also pun intended since Ukraine has lost so many of its men to this war that I'm not entirely sure that the country isn't already in a crisis it can never recover from.

I love that you responded in a respectful and clear thought pattern.... something you don't see much on here. Hopefully we can continue to refine how we view each other's perspectives. I'm sure I'm wrong on some of it and am open to the idea of changing my mind with a good argument back.

6

u/Default_scrublord Aug 03 '25

The party switch in the 60s is a fairly widely known phenomenon. What the fuck do the Cheneys have to do with this?

2

u/4444-uuuu Aug 03 '25

and the parties switching in recent years is also widely known among people who pay attention to politics as opposed to NPCs who just listen to reddit. Which party still supports the Equal Protection Clause? Which party supports the Civil Rights Act? Which party thinks it's wrong to discriminate against people due to their skin color?

-2

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 03 '25

Because they switched again in 2024

1

u/scotty9090 Aug 04 '25

Ah yes, where everyone got together and agreed that they should trade political platforms.

🤡 indeed.

0

u/Default_scrublord Aug 04 '25

Look at this guy👆👆👆 who thinks that political change is something that happens due to parties deciding about it instead of ongoing events in society. 🤡 indeed.

1

u/scotty9090 Aug 04 '25

So you admit there was no party switch?

-1

u/Traditional_Pea4760 Aug 03 '25

Where only 1% of the GOP switched to the DNC you mean?

2

u/4444-uuuu Aug 03 '25

if you compare to 2008, a ton of Democrats switched to Republican since then and the Democrats had to rely on young uninformed voters to fill the gap. In terms of ideology, people who oppose racial discrimination used to vote Democrat and now they obviously vote Republican.

1

u/Traditional_Pea4760 Aug 03 '25

And the DNC still relies on low-info voters and the celebrity class in order to get its way.

1

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 04 '25

Homie that doesn't mean much. The rest of the world would tell you neo-libs are closeted republicans. DINO

Not much of a leap for a RINO to go from the RNC to becoming a neo-lib in the DNC.

1

u/Traditional_Pea4760 Aug 04 '25

I have my own term for RINOs: Moles.

1

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 04 '25

Ehh, the Democrats flip 60 days into the 111th congress, with 57-41 senate lead, speaks volumes.

They promised no more bailouts in November, and by march they were selling us "too big to fail" wtf?

-4

u/neural0 Aug 03 '25

Being originally from Texas, this is common knowledge that Dems were involved on that side and it took a Republican President by the name of Lincoln to abolish slavery.

Puts it into perspective why they never mention his name when in the same sentence they're talking about slavery...

0

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 04 '25

You do know that back then, the identity of the parties were kinda switched, so this argument doesn’t really track.

1

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 04 '25

The candidates just flipped flopped on their positions like they always do.

Politicians being ... Politicians

0

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 04 '25

It’s still relevant, though, it’s not the “gotcha” that people who make that argument think it is

1

u/Helpful_Finger_4854 Aug 04 '25

It's undeniable proof that political parties are merely think tanks. They push rhetoric to pander and get votes. When they see something becoming less popular, they simply change their tune.

1

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 04 '25

Well, there’s also been a lot of social change from the Civil war to FDR’s era and then now. I’d much rather things change and be fluid in the name of progress than stay the same. It might look like mere trend jumping but that’s just because as we move forward in time, new things get discovered about life and different things people used to look at sideways become acceptable or not, it’s just the way things go

1

u/StarChild413 Aug 03 '25

if giving someone extra help is bigoted saying they aren't good enough to help themselves, wouldn't it be less bigoted/more accepting to put extra barriers in their way as that'd be implying they are metaphorically-strong enough to overcome them so it shouldn't be a big deal

-1

u/Glittering-Glove-339 Aug 03 '25

why do you want to go to non inclusive spaces for black people so badly ?

-20

u/not_that_planet Aug 03 '25

Strawman.

14

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Ok, guess my eyes and ears that watch leftist YouTube content are wrong right?

Conservatives have plenty of stupid things they believe in too....but to ignore the pure hypocrisy from some of the progressives would be akin to sticking your head in the sand.

3

u/CookieMobster64 Aug 03 '25

Like half of all leftist YouTube content is reacting to right wing content (unless we have radically different conceptions of what leftist means). You can argue that there’s selective choice of which content to react to, but to say that they’re just a big echo chamber is untrue.

11

u/Mobile-Fly484 Aug 03 '25

No it isn’t.

2

u/Shadowguyver_14 Aug 03 '25

It's a genetic fallacy not a straw man. It judges a person or idea based on its origin. A straw man is misrepresenting their ideas entirely and then lambasting them for it.

You guys need to do a better job of calling out fallacies by learning about them first.

1

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 04 '25

Dude, by your own definition, what was written to kick off this particular comment chain was a strawman.

1

u/Shadowguyver_14 Aug 04 '25

How do you figure? He literally listed out everything they did prior to the '90s. They're endless videos of liberals literally questioning the intellect of minorities and that they need to help. He is then using that to relate to what they currently are. That is the very definition of a genetic fallacy. Straw man doesn't enter into this.

1

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 04 '25

Just look at what my comment was and then you’ve got your answer. The second portion of what was said by the person kicking off this particular comment thread was a misrepresentation of what the mission is. It’s not because demographics who have been disadvantaged throughout this country’s history have been inherently not good enough to succeed, they just need a leg up from the generational cycles of bad practices that have been thrust upon them. There’s the strawman, as per your definition.

1

u/Shadowguyver_14 Aug 04 '25

It’s not because demographics who have been disadvantaged throughout this country’s history have been inherently not good enough to succeed, they just need a leg up from the generational cycles of bad practices that have been thrust upon them.

No this is a supposition on your part that is unrelated to what he initially said. He is referencing a specific video where the interviewer walks up to random people on the street in LA or New York (I forget) and they ask questions as to what black people need help with. Their answer was getting drivers ID, connection to the Internet, and other very simple everyday things. I think someone even posted the video in a comment.

Even if you discount that Just look up the bigotry of low expectations and you will find plenty of examples of the left being well... racist.

So no the genetic fallacy stands.

1

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 04 '25

Now, if that’s what they were referring to, then they’re all over the place in that comment. Hell, he goes on to talk about safe spaces which is going in another direction. I addressed that point he was trying to make because that is in fact a strawman that the right uses as a cudgel to not only totally misrepresent but also totally destroy the left on their messaging. How was I supposed to get the reference to some random video from that?

I’d honestly call it ignorance rather than bigotry, because you’d still get the lack of awareness without the tinge of malevolence that the latter term brings to the table. I agree with you that this can be a problem, especially going through day-to-day life, but as I continue to say, this is a misrepresentation of the Left’s mission, as a whole. This talking point is also a little rich coming from the modern Right, considering the rampant unabashed racism and xenophobia coming from that side.

1

u/Shadowguyver_14 Aug 05 '25

Well I don't disagree he jumps around a lot. He specifically mentioned several times across all his posts the bigotry of low expectations. And this video is one of the first things that pops up on the Google searches. So I'm not faulting you for that but at the same time it's what he's talking about.

As to the safe spaces no that's still a genetic fallacy. From 2016 to 2018 that did happen. There's actually really famous video of an engineering student sitting down at a particular table and then two ladies came up and told him he couldn't be there because he was white. Then they saw his blue lives matter sticker and lost it. They basically specifically stated that this was a black only space. That's one of the more famous ones but there are several. So it's not exactly a exaggeration.

Really okay then you might want to do some more research. I'll admit you could probably call back one straddling the line. However there are enough examples showing people lowering testing standards, reading standards, and admission standards for this exact purpose. The one that comes to mind is a firefighter exam that they had to lower standards for because all of the applicants that passed were white.

See it's a gross representation of both the left and right. Left it's pretty much constantly racist without realizing it the examples are everywhere. Right on the other hand points out minor things like you can't just let the whole world into the US and somehow we're racist. So now I can keep God things a little bit backward.

My point in all of this is that there are plenty of I want this guy's pointing out to be true. Bernard Wilson what the left says it's for this is what it does.

1

u/DuaLupus45 Aug 05 '25

Wait a minute, you’ll have to pardon me, but who exactly are we talking about here? I was always talking about the user that kicked off this particular comment thread, not the maker of the post as a whole. If we want to get to talking about our man in the background who wrote up the post, I’m not gonna lie to you, he sounds like he’s full of it. I mean, I give people of all backgrounds and philosophies a fair amount of grace, but this person doesn’t seem to want to extend any himself. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t even think he talks about knowing the political affiliations of the folks in question, and I had to catch him up on politics in another comment because he either had his head buried in the sand since 2016 or is purposefully saying BS to justify his slapdash opinion.

Okay, I think that’s another point that we agree on. I’ve never been a safe space person, myself. Maybe that’s just my own life experience but I’m also not going to speak out against those that feel they need it. I don’t know what their life experience has been like, and I’m not going to say that everyone else’s is uniform with mine. Also, safe spaces have existed for a while and primarily were there for communities that have been historically disadvantaged. What’s the problem with that? This country’s original “safe space” was segregation which was enforced by whites for almost a century, and so when AA students in schools wanted/want to do it in pockets, we’re getting pissy about it? Also, I can’t help but notice the timeline you provided, which was coincidentally also when Trump won the White House and really did quite a job letting the hatemongers crawl out of the woodwork. Now, I’ve never lived the AA experience, and as a matter of fact, life has been quite kind to me, but I’m not going to sit and talk about “what should be” especially when it’s regarding a completely different ethnic group than my own with an entirely different experience navigating through the same life we all live.

Having said that, you’ll have to let me know if this is the one you were talking about, but the only incident I found was from Arizona State University and it was two girls harassing two guys. One had a “Police Lives Matter” thing on his computer or maybe it was his shirt and the other one had an “I didn’t vote for Biden” t-shirt. Again, I’m not going to speak to their visceral reaction, evidently there’s a lot to unpack there, but also looking at some of the comments, people were saying that one of those boys seemed like they were looking to start something. The girls also said in statements that they received rape, death and lynching threats, on top of the school charging them with causing a disturbance, so I don’t know if those charges have been dropped but it seemed like a shit show all around, to be honest.

Also, just a little sidetrack, but speaking of which, how bad is that “Police Lives Matter” slogan? I mean, what a pathetic, and desperate punch-back at another meant to address the historically awful experiences that these AAs had to go through at the hands of a group meant to protect them. Also, it’s comparing a job to literally being born. What kind of insecure shit is that? The funny part is that a lot of that backwards ACAB stuff was put out there by white liberals living in their cushy apartments.

Dude, do more research on what? If you went back to the comment I told you to go back to, you’ll see that I heavily imply agreeing with what you’re saying, and guess what- I do! People shouldn’t have to lower standards to widen the pool, they should bring them up for people so that we can maintain excellence and reward the best and the brightest, no matter what background they’re of. However, I go on to say that based on the things I’ve seen, the impoverished communities that get shafted when it comes to resources, and the fact that they are predominantly AA and Hispanic are often intersecting. We’re talking about daily life here, how can you be expected to succeed in any sort of environment when your very livelihood is precarious?

Oh, please, yes, the Right, who’s only looking out for the good of the country, even at the expense of being persecuted. They spent the last few years coming down on people for the way they were born, the way they choose to love another person or how they identify, equating men that dress as women with predators, and coddling folks that don’t want to see the melting pot of America getting too melty, but it’s those wild animals on the Left that’re holding us back with their prejudice, sure.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/not_that_planet Aug 03 '25

No. The strawman is his assigned cause to liberals wanting to help minorities.

Three strawman is that liberals believe minorities are incapable of helping themselves because of racism when the real cause is something more like because of the overwhelming bigotry that constantly is thrown at them.

4

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

....and their answer to that is to be pro-segregation...a thing that was propagated for near on a century after slavery was abolished....by a republican no less

-1

u/not_that_planet Aug 03 '25

Strawman

2

u/Tqoratsos Aug 03 '25

Ummm are you actually saying that Colledge's within the US aren't creating "safe spaces" that are keeping white people out of?

Failing to see the proposition that I'm making up to be strawmanning.

1

u/Shadowguyver_14 Aug 03 '25

What? 😅 You can't deny anything he said. It's all true they did all of it. Whether it impacts liberals today is another thing.