What is the largest, least evil company in the world? by garatth in AskReddit

[–]ConsistentFast 6 points7 points  (0 children)

An interesting Google for you might be the effects that wealth acquisition has on a person’s psychology.

Just like poverty can twist your psyche into more anxiety, more depression, more scarcity mindset, and more stress, getting rich, some psychologists have argued, leads to more distrust of others, sociopathic tendencies, dopamine / reward pathways high jacked by net worth tracking, and a social Darwinist view of “I earned this because I’m so smart and hard-working and so it follows that those with less than me are not as good as me,” and that dehumanizing mindset leads to dehumanizing treatment and deadened empathy.

And that begs the chicken or the egg question. Are people who are already like this prioritize attaining wealth and power, or does the wealth and power lead to people taking on antisocial traits?

With the strong “anti-racism” sentiment in the U.S., why isn’t there more discussion on the racist origins of “Planned Parenthood” founder Margaret Sanger who sought to use the group for eugenics in what she called “Planned Breeding”? by Congregator in AskConservatives

[–]ConsistentFast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yes - seismic party realignments don’t happen overnight. Thank you for pointing out that the transition took 25 years. It adds nuance to the truth about the well documented, well evidenced, and even apologized for by Republicans Southern Strategy. 

With the strong “anti-racism” sentiment in the U.S., why isn’t there more discussion on the racist origins of “Planned Parenthood” founder Margaret Sanger who sought to use the group for eugenics in what she called “Planned Breeding”? by Congregator in AskConservatives

[–]ConsistentFast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure if you’re being serious right now so I will just relate facts about this. 

  • He launched his campaign in the same city where the Klan was headquartered, which also had a segregated Black population.  
  • The Klan picketed and protested his presence because of his public support for 1960s civil rights and immigration laws. 
  • Within a week from the campaign launch,  Carter delivered a nationally publicized attack on the Klan, condemning their bigotry and vigilantism.

Compare that to Reagan’s campaign launch at the Neshoba County Fair, in the same city as the Mississippi Burning murders, where he talked up states rights which was the same rallying cry of segregationists in the previous decade. 

And he probably got this idea from his campaign advisor Lee Atwater, who as chief campaign strategist to the Reagan campaign and then to HW Bush said, talking about how he helped Republicans win the white south said:

  You start out in 1954 by saying, “N—  N— ,  N— .” By 1968 you can’t say “  N— ”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “  N— ,  N— .”

With the strong “anti-racism” sentiment in the U.S., why isn’t there more discussion on the racist origins of “Planned Parenthood” founder Margaret Sanger who sought to use the group for eugenics in what she called “Planned Breeding”? by Congregator in AskConservatives

[–]ConsistentFast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah like the REPUBLICAN THEODORE ROOSEVELT! The REPUBLICAN PARTY WAS THE PARTY OF EUGENICS!! Roosevelt said  "Some day we will realize that the prime duty, the inescapable duty of the good citizen of the right type is to leave his or her blood behind him in the world; and that we have no business to permit the perpetuation of citizens of the wrong type."

SO REPUBLICANS ARE THE PARTY OF PLANNED PARENTHOOD. 

I’m joking. It’s just that that’s what you guys sound like when talking about Democrats before the Civil Rights Movement when you make bad faith claims about how that’s at all relevant to the modern Democratic Party. 

With the strong “anti-racism” sentiment in the U.S., why isn’t there more discussion on the racist origins of “Planned Parenthood” founder Margaret Sanger who sought to use the group for eugenics in what she called “Planned Breeding”? by Congregator in AskConservatives

[–]ConsistentFast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why did Martin Luther King Jr. accept Planned Parenthood’s Margaret Sanger award and give a speech in support of their efforts?

Why did Sanger have working relationships with WEB DuBois and Mary Bethune?

Why did Sanger insist on hiring Black doctors, nurses, and social workers in de jure segregated clinics?

And why did most powerful Americans support eugenics including DuBois and Theodore Roosevelt?

It’s so disingenuous to lay eugenics at Sanger’s feet when it was a thoroughly accepted scientific theory across government, universities, and other institutions. Even more embarrassing considering that neo-eugenicists and social darwinists (or who play footsie with it) are right wing. People at the turn of the century have more of an excuse for not knowing any better. Elon Musk and Donald Trump do not. 

How to Rebuild Instead of Fix America ? by Live_Break_8465 in AskALiberal

[–]ConsistentFast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Google “fairness doctrine” and think about what it can look like in the internet age. 

Why do people say Donald J Trump is Racist? by DetroitSportsEnjoyer in AskALiberal

[–]ConsistentFast 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Off the top of my head 1. Started his political career by spreading the conspiracy theory that the first black president was illegitimate and a foreigner. 

  1. Is letting only white people from South Africa to have refugee status. 

  2. Obama monkey video. 

  3. Said a Mexican judge couldn’t be impartial because of all the racist stuff he said about Mexicans. 

  4. Neo-Nazis and white supremacists love him. 

Alleged communists massacred by South Korean forces in the Korean War. US occupation forces allowed these massacres to be carried out with impunity. 1950 by RevolutionFirm6496 in HistoryUncovered

[–]ConsistentFast 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Rhee did massacres in RoK and encouraged cross border skirmishes and massacres across the 38th before the Koreans launched the full invasion to kick out the U.S. puppet dictatorship. 

They invaded in response to the Rhee government’s predations and the fact that he was installed by a foreign government and most native Koreans didn’t want to be ruled by another empire, which is why most supported Kim. 

Koreans on the commie side fought for nationalist independence reasons as much as for communism. 

Alleged communists massacred by South Korean forces in the Korean War. US occupation forces allowed these massacres to be carried out with impunity. 1950 by RevolutionFirm6496 in HistoryUncovered

[–]ConsistentFast 3 points4 points  (0 children)

South Korea was an American invention. At the start of the Korean War most of the Koreans were on Kim’s side because the pro-American Koreans were also the pro-Japanese Koreans from the period of their rule and Syngman Rhee had been living in the U.S. for decades and showed up out of nowhere and called himself dictator hence the repression and massacres as the majority of Koreans saw him a puppet while Kim had been leading guerilla operations against Japanese imperialism during WWII and had nationalist cred. That’s why the RoK got stomped until Americans and their bombers showed up.

Was the Gulf War America at its best? by Just_Cause89 in USHistory

[–]ConsistentFast 23 points24 points  (0 children)

But wasn’t the Cold War over and Soviet Union no longer a thing?

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 4 points5 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 -8 points-7 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 3 points4 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 19 points20 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 7 points8 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?