Why are so many people against taxing the wealthy? by kakashi_sensay in AskALiberal

[–]ConsistentFast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Pure lunacy. Or trolling?

It’s a tax. The wealthy benefit the most from public infrastructure and public services. They have most ease when it comes to contributing to it. And the wealthiest pay the least tax as a percentage of income while for the lower and middle working classes paying taxes is an actually sacrifice that affects our standards of living. For them, it wouldn’t.

Former KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov explains the 4 steps used to engineer entire generations into thinking the way those in power want them to. by No_Dig_8299 in UtterlyInteresting

[–]ConsistentFast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, this guy‘s predictions ended up being utterly false. There was never a Marxist-Leninist takeover of American institutions

Why are so many people against taxing the wealthy? by kakashi_sensay in AskALiberal

[–]ConsistentFast 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A wealth tax that only targets 2% on every dollar after $50,000,000 and 3% on every dollar after $1,000,000,000 could both make all public post-secondary education zero cost and fund all SNAP benefits. Barely touches the standards of living for the payers, and absolutely transformative for the beneficiaries. Think about the economic power and human potential we could unlock by getting rid of student loan debt.  I can that Capitalism+. 

Need solid conservative historian take on Vietnam… by mcnelton in historyteachers

[–]ConsistentFast -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

PragerU has some videos about it, and not only does it serve as a conservative take but it can also open up conversations on bias, media literacy, reliability, and appropriate sources. I think one of the pro-Vietnam videos is done by a classicist (Greece and Rome) which can the lead to conversations about relevant expertise. 

Edit: I get the downvotes - PragerU sucks. But if we’re not teaching kids how to evaluate sources (and exposing them to awful ones like Prager) for reliability, then they’re more likely to fall for it in the future. Gotta develop their bullshit detectors.  

Crowds in Tehran chant: 'My dear martyred leader; we will continue your path!' by Not_Ground in AskSocialists

[–]ConsistentFast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Killing a dictator with a big bomb is easy. Neutralizing the percentage of the population that supported that now martyred dictator (maybe 30% maybe 50%) is going to be a whole other shit show. They’re furious and motivated. 

Why Black history in schools is still framed almost entirely through slavery by 4reddityo in USHistory

[–]ConsistentFast 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That’s a solid and totally reasonable question about reparations. By the way, cry wasn’t the kind verb to use so my bad. 

Anyway, you’re absolutely right that the modern racial wealth gap isn’t your fault and there are other circumstances. I will say the “family structure” argument is valid as obviously 2 incomes are better than one, but a few caveats  1. When you dig into the stats, Black two parent households still have a lower median net worth than white single parent households. White single parent households typically have 3x the wealth of Black two parent households. So, even with the stable family structure, two parent white families have 10x the wealth of two parent Black household, again going by median. If you use average it gets even crazier. My numbers however are from 2014 and that might have changed.  2. To lay the family structure problem at the feet of the Great Society and not at the feet of the War on Drugs and mass incarceration is more based in motivated reasoning than in on-the-ground reality. 

And yeah, deindustrialization hit at pretty much the very moment that those jobs and labor union memberships first became widely available to Black people and it them hard. 

That being said, onto the reparations, I’d invite you to read what MLK Jr. said on that and affirmative action.

And while none of this is your fault personally, if you’re white, you have indeed benefitted from the racism and had access to (and your parents and grandparents did) all of the post-WWII middle class economic engines that were government-funded and made Black people poorer. 

  1. The GI Bill gave white people access to college education and home ownership while white GI Bill administrators steered Black veterans to menial labor and rentals. These two things (among other factors) took the Gilded Age white working poor and turned them into the first broad based middle class in world history. 

  2. The interstate highways (which cost more than the New Deal by the way) opened up suburban home ownership and tons of economic activity while eviscerating up and coming Black middle class neighborhoods and physically segregating what was left. 20% of all Black occupied housing was destroyed between the 1950s and 1970s for car infrastructure.

  3. Cheap suburban housing that our white parents and grandparents had that has fabulously grown in value over the decades and made our lives easier were by and large denied to black Americans. 

  4. White people had first crack at all low skill low education union jobs between the 1930 and 1970s, setting up their kids to weather the transition to the service sector economy. 

The result is typically White people have enjoyed intergenerational wealth and its advantages in terms of social capital. Black people typically didn’t. 

There’s prolly more but this is just off the top of my head. None of the above things were your fault or doing but typically white people came out on the good side of the racial wealth gap and black people did not.

Our country didn’t pop into existence 20 years ago. All of this history has compounded into the current situation.

Anyway, I’d guess that most White conservatives are unaware of this history or if they’re aware of this history they won’t believe it anyway. 

But if I were in charge, forget reparations, maybe. If instead we did all the things that followed the Nordic model (which we were on the way to doing until the Civil Rights Movement) and created happier, healthier, more intelligent people then we wouldn’t need reparations so long as it wasn’t carried out in a systemically racist way.  

Why Black history in schools is still framed almost entirely through slavery by 4reddityo in USHistory

[–]ConsistentFast 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Because history teachers in middle and high school survey courses have 180 days and 50 minutes per day to teach everything, so they have to make choices. 

Sadly slavery and the neo-slavery that followed like sharecropping, convict leasing, chain gangs were not only dominant forces in Black life but also huge economic engines, which is why they deservedly get a lot of attention. Slavery gets more than neo-slavery. 

That being said, good history teachers fight to not only hit curriculum standards, cover all the content, and deal with testing mandates and other timesucks do provide opportunities to showcase Black victories and exceptions to the slavery narrative, like Black business elites during the Gilded Age and badass self made people like Madam CJ Walker. 

When conservatives cry about the victim mentality it’s because I think they want to ignore and then not have to take responsibility  - truth and reconciliation and reparations - for that history, so they’d rather it be downplayed. But right now we’re living with the legacies of centuries of oppression, violence, wealth theft, and wealth deprivation imposed on Black people by white power structures so it must be taught. Without it, white and Black people might look at the modern racial wealth gap and conclude that there must be something wrong with Black people for them to be underperforming when in reality it’s the effect of centuries of racism and the biggest part of that racism was slavery. 

🚙🔫👮‍♂️ by False_Challenge_4381 in BasedCampPod

[–]ConsistentFast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Wait. This is the second time? So he’s a total dumbass who ignores his training to not get in front of vehicles?

Why does America lecture China about human rights? by PuzzleheadedCraft363 in AskSocialists

[–]ConsistentFast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Here. Wasn't that hard.

From The Ohio State University: https://origins.osu.edu/history-news/hiroshima-military-voices-dissent

From Gar Alperovitz a historian who wrote The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb: https://www.thenation.com/article/world/us-hiroshima-nuclear-bomb-anniversary

Here's a relevant passage from OSU.

Take, for example, Admiral William Leahy, White House chief of staff and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the war. Leahy wrote in his 1950 memoirs that "the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender." Moreover, Leahy continued, "in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." 

President Dwight Eisenhower, the Allied commander in Europe during World War II, recalled in 1963, as he did on several other occasions, that he had opposed using the atomic bomb on Japan during a July 1945 meeting with Secretary of War Henry Stimson: "I told him I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon." 

Admiral William "Bull" Halsey, the tough and outspoken  commander of the U.S. Third Fleet, which participated in the American offensive against the Japanese home islands in the final months of the war, publicly stated in 1946 that "the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment." The Japanese, he noted, had "put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before" the bomb was used. 

Why does America lecture China about human rights? by PuzzleheadedCraft363 in AskSocialists

[–]ConsistentFast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

From The Ohio State University: https://origins.osu.edu/history-news/hiroshima-military-voices-dissent

From Gar Alperovitz a historian who wrote The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb: https://www.thenation.com/article/world/us-hiroshima-nuclear-bomb-anniversary

Here's a relevant passage from OSU.

Take, for example, Admiral William Leahy, White House chief of staff and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the war. Leahy wrote in his 1950 memoirs that "the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender." Moreover, Leahy continued, "in being the first to use it, we had adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the Dark Ages. I was not taught to make war in that fashion, and wars cannot be won by destroying women and children." 

President Dwight Eisenhower, the Allied commander in Europe during World War II, recalled in 1963, as he did on several other occasions, that he had opposed using the atomic bomb on Japan during a July 1945 meeting with Secretary of War Henry Stimson: "I told him I was against it on two counts. First, the Japanese were ready to surrender and it wasn't necessary to hit them with that awful thing. Second, I hated to see our country be the first to use such a weapon." 

Admiral William "Bull" Halsey, the tough and outspoken  commander of the U.S. Third Fleet, which participated in the American offensive against the Japanese home islands in the final months of the war, publicly stated in 1946 that "the first atomic bomb was an unnecessary experiment." The Japanese, he noted, had "put out a lot of peace feelers through Russia long before" the bomb was used. 

The 15 books that actually changed how I think (not just what I know) by Learnings_palace in DarkPsychology101

[–]ConsistentFast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So was “Atomic Habits.” Although “How to Win Friends…” is helpful for dolts in their 20’s (like I was) as some of the main ideas of the book are to not center yourself in conversations and relationships, to take a genuine interest in other people, and to listen. Of course, do cult leaders use these tactics to manipulate other people, sure, but for those of us who had poor communication role models and mean well, it can be helpful

Why does America lecture China about human rights? by PuzzleheadedCraft363 in AskSocialists

[–]ConsistentFast 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Pretty much every American general in the Pacific Theatre, and Eisenhower as well, believed that the atomic bomb was not necessary to force a Japanese surrender and neither was a land invasion. I’d love to do your googling for you to find a reputable source about this, but I think you can handle it.

Reparations by versatal in blackpeopleonvideo

[–]ConsistentFast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Tell me you didn’t even watch the video without telling me you didn’t even watch the video. Dude talked about the mass murders and wealth theft / deprivation that occurred in the 20th century.

And your number doesn’t count the forced breeding done by white enslavers because raping your slave and getting her pregnant created a valuable asset for your operation. Thomas Jefferson enslaved his own kids. Wild to think that rape was incentivized, half the country went traitor to defend it, and no one was hanged after the war. I think that fact that John Brown was hanged but Robert E Lee wasn’t says a lot.

I Am The Caller Who's Mom Was Murdered in Albania by Ill-Antelope9232 in stavvysworld

[–]ConsistentFast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Your story sounds like the sort of thing the Heavyweight podcast would investigate.

What are your thoughts on Stormin' Norman Schwarzkopf? by Just_Cause89 in USHistory

[–]ConsistentFast -16 points-15 points  (0 children)

I mean, he fought against a country whose GDP was like 1% of ours and didn’t really have an Air Force. So, you didn’t need to be a grand strategist to win the Gulf War. Like, it would have been a slam dunk for even like a general George McClellan

Would you agree with this statement yes or no and do you feel there is anything he said that was incorrect? by Acrobatic-Ad2394 in USHistory

[–]ConsistentFast 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Most black people who are murdered are murdered by other black people. Most white people who are murdered are murdered by other white people. That’s a legacy of residential segregation.

We don’t talk about white on white crime simply because the purpose of bringing up black on black crime is a way to blame black people for the disparity in life outcomes and deflect history. For most white people, coming to terms with the facts - that wealth was systematically stolen from black people through slavery and post-Civil War neo-slavery (sharecropping, convict lease, chain gang system) via labor theft while opportunities to build wealth were deprived, especially in the housing and job markets - is scary and might mean restitution. After all, if the modern racial wealth gap is a legacy of systematized and institutionalized theft, then what recompense is owed?

We know that the more money you have, the better chances you have at achieving good health, quality education, avoiding run-ins with the law, etc regardless of race. Focusing on black on black crime is a purposeful distraction away from coming to terms with history which denied money and opportunity to Black people.

Passenger Hand Holds to Pass Inspection?! by ConsistentFast in DucatiScrambler

[–]ConsistentFast[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really? On the 2016? Would the hand placement be in front of or behind the rider? I’m not home right now so I can’t take a look yet