US 2020 election

[flatandy]

The 1619 project really has you triggered, doesn't it?

Are you saying that there wasn't slavery all over the founding of this country.

[jimboky]

in 1619 there was no USA, there was however slavery in England, as well as English colonies, It was the idea of freedom the USA founded that spread through Europe, Slavery was a hold-over from the days of English rule, it took the US less then 100years to shuck it, much shorter then any other country, the USA has had a Black president, tell me who was the last British PM? or European?

[Repat Van]

Sept 24, 2020 3:25:26 GMT jimboky said:

in 1619 there was no USA, there was however slavery in England, as well as English colonies, It was the idea of freedom the USA founded that spread through Europe, Slavery was a hold-over from the days of English rule, it took the US less then 100years to shuck it, much shorter then any other country, the USA has had a Black president, tell me who was the last British PM? or European?

Yeah naw. You cannot really blame slavery on a hold over from British rule as you still had it after Britain had abolished it in most of its colonies.

And to add to that the 100 plus years of Jim Crow that followed was unique to the USA (and South Africa) at least in the developed world.

[flatandy]

The US right are so utterly triggered by the desire to teach actual history, where people learn what actually happened. They have melt-downs when Washington and Jefferson’s slave-ownership is mentioned, or when Andrew Jackson’s genocide against Native Americans comes up. They want a fascist re-writing of history that excludes any suggestion that the US might be flawed, might have had flaws, that the founding fathers were actual humans and not deities, and that the constitution was just written by normal - luckily generally fairly smart - people rather than handed down in tablet form to James Madison on top of a mountain.

[flatandy]

The project author says nothing of the kind, of course.

It's ironic that the author of one of the pieces Rick links to says "We would no longer be a nation built to protect the inalienable rights of all, as the Declaration states"... given that when the Declaration stated it those inalienable rights didn't apply to women or black people. So, whatever the Declaration "stated", the originalist intention wasn't to give those rights to anyone other than landed, wealthy, white men.

[jimboky]

where in the Declaration does it state that these rights don't apply to women or blacks?

[flatandy]

Well, the rights didn't apply to women or blacks when any of the people writing the constitution were President. Not Washington, or Adams, or Jefferson, or Madison, or Monroe...

[jimboky]

but in all these the Declaration was used as the basis that they should be granted, that happened in 1776, not 1619 when the Brits run the thing

[flatandy]

It clearly wasn't the original intention, or the people who wrote it would have implemented it.

Instead they carried on the policies of slavery and oppression.

It's important that the kids learn this actual history rather than the weird whitewashed version.

[Marshall]

Sept 24, 2020 3:25:26 GMT jimboky said:

in 1619 there was no USA, there was however slavery in England, as well as English colonies, It was the idea of freedom the USA founded that spread through Europe, Slavery was a hold-over from the days of English rule, it took the US less then 100years to shuck it, much shorter then any other country, the USA has had a Black president, tell me who was the last British PM? or European?

That's twisting things. "Much shorter" means little when we were one of the last to do so and only then it took a Civil War to force the South to "shuck it".

About the Declaration though - although it did not outlaw slavery, it did pointedly say "all men are created equal". If they tried to outlaw it then there would have been no independence as we would not have unified. But the language was there most likely to imply that in time it should be outlawed.

[voice]

Though you have to remember the pervading thought at the time was that only white men were actually considered worthy, blacks and the aboriginal population weren't considered equal in any way, many didn't even consider them fully human, an attitude that has persisted to this day for some.

[flatandy]

How about this for some get-out-the-vote stuff?

[Marshall]

That's one way to get some skin in the game.

[Marshall]

Sept 24, 2020 19:32:33 GMT voice said:

Though you have to remember the pervading thought at the time was that only white men were actually considered worthy, blacks and the aboringonal population were considered equal in any way, many didn't even consider them fully human, an attitude that has persisted to this day for some.

Blacks were considered 3/5ths at the time in the US.
And leading up to the Civil War, the South enjoyed the balance of power in Congress because they could count that 60% of the black population as their constituents (giving them more representation), while using that gain in political power to perpetuate slavery. That's pretty messed up.

[voice]

that is pretty fcuked up for sure.

[voice]

Well looks like Trump had his ass handed to him in the debate, if you can call it that, by Biden. Though its not so much that Biden aced it, its that Trump was so terrible.

First polls showing 60% say Biden won, only 28% thought Trump won, so not even all the cult is with him on this

[mids]

I hear Trump won that one.

[mids]

Well, almost.

"A CBS and YouGov poll has found that voters believe Joe Biden was tonight's winner.

Forty-eight per cent of likely voters who watched the debate believe Mr Biden won, while 41 per cent said President Trump was victorious."

[Repat Van]

That debate....

I feel like the rest of the developed world was watching thinking “wtf?”

[perrykneeham]

Not just that debate, and not just the developed World.

America at the moment seems to represent everything it's not supposed to stand for. It is a cesspit.