Quote (bogie160 @ Jun 14 2020 06:14pm)
How did George W. Bush condone (explicitly or implicitly) violence and looting in black communities? Please reference specific examples.
Bold - You sound like a Monty Python skit. It's not a good look.
"Oh ha ha, I heard a joke that had that term once, so nothing can be serious if it has that term. lol, you're such a fool"
Did Bush make an attempt to remove the institutional laws that have affected the community to this day and resulted in the riots we are seeing now? No? Because they were present during his time... Was he aware of those issues? I guarantee he was. To not do anything when you have the power to act and are aware of the issue is to implicitly condone the status quo. And that status quo has been for the entire history of this country to disenfranchise minority groups by institutional violence and wealth extraction.
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jun 14 2020 06:14pm)
Yes, I'll admit that my wording was sloppy. But like you said, since the mid-2000s, Democrats/liberals have been the side of censorship and cancel culture while Republicans/conservatives have been more on the side of freedom of speech. That's roughly the timeframe during which I have been paying closer attention to American politics, so my impression might be biased here. The Bush-type, socially conservative Republicans of that time were trash, I dislike them even more passionately than today's liberals.
Your notion, however, was that Republicans are still the party of censorship and cancel culture today, and that's outright laughable.
They remain the party of censorship and cancel culture, they're just bad at it. You think given the opportunity they wouldn't ban gays from TV again? The fact that they aren't doing it as well as the other side doesn't mean they aren't still exactly that.
"The left" has been on the side of censorship and cancel culture in the way that societies should do those things. Using non-centralized efforts like social pressure and market pressure. Pressuring advertisers to remove content we don't like by voting with our dollars and the like. That is wholly different from using the government to enforce censorship, which has been the method of conservatives for the entire history of the country. Whereas the left will not pay somebody to speak on their campus, and threaten to not pay advertisers for supporting voices they don't like,. conservatives will lobby the FCC to ban interracial couples and gay couples on TV, or ban gay marriage in their states. It is absolutely not the same and not a censorship issue. Free speech does not mean you get to speak everywhere and to whatever audience, and the fact that free speech exists means your opponents get to use their free speech to oppose you. What I've seen is conservatives being whiny bitches about other people using their free speech to oppose shitty conservative ideas. You don't lose your right to free speech because somebody took away your platform.
This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 14 2020 06:06pm