2016 U.S. Presidential Elections: The Circus Is In Full Swing

[Mad Vader]

But what if you are really stubborn? Maybe it's not genocide then.
I get Brutus for trying to show those lefty young 'uns not to flaunt words like genocide too easily, but sometimes they may have a point. I am bothered too when purist liberals revise history by sticking their labels and cheapening the meaning of words (and inevitably pushing neutrals to the right by this type of excessive behavior).

 

[Pixel]

Eh iunno fam. Something can simultaneously be grave and severe while also ubiquitous. I would say genocide is one of those things: there have been dozens even in the 75 years or so since the word genocide was coined and defined. Weird timing, that, wonder what happened. Naturally it's revisionism to call almost anything prior to that a genocide, but certainly the Holocaust was by no means the first, notably preceded by the Armenian and Herero genocides, though I know many on this forum have a long-standing habit of denying the first one. "Luckily," (just like the Armenians') the genocide of indigenous peoples leaves no room for doubt.

If exterminating groups of people by various means becomes less of a bad thing because it's happened like non-stop in succession for the past like 500 years, it's not that the label is cheapened, it's that you're morally bankrupt. So it's fitting then that you end up on the right

 

[Nega-Brutus]

Just be nicer. Brutus probably just takes offense at the notion that the US is evil. Bear in mind that he has dedicated some of his life to progressive causes in the US and has a vested interest or even hope in making it a better place and believing that it is a good place with good people. Characterizing the country which has shaped him and which has formed his ideals in some sort of absolute manner as imperial, genocidal, etc. is actual autism.

You don't have to compromise your beliefs that the US has a darker history, you just have to be charitable where you can, and be more prospective. Approaching the conversation in a less accusatory manner would've made him much more agreeable, and would've gotten many more concessions from him. Stop being cringe puritans, people like Brutus are allies that are easily swayed, and you're turning them away so you can virtue signal.

 

[Pixel]

Hello Rams. There is a long history with Brutus, meaning I am not inclined to be so charitable. Thank you for the lecture where you virtue signal at me, but calling an empire an empire is not autism.

 

[Nega-Brutus]

Explicitly invoking loaded language with regard to some vague concept of a country, and implying lack of moral character is the epitome of online autism.

Fair enough, I don't know what the history is, just that you're autistic.

 

[Pixel]

What is vague about "state and federal governments"? I'm sure Brutus isn't a big fan of genocide, massacres, and things of the like. All I said is that something he wrote would be construed as genocide denial and explained why. The US can be evil and Americans mostly good people, both can be true, it is not people like me or Brutus that have benefitted from the atrocious things done but a select few at the top. This is so obvious it does not have to be said, Brutus is in fact smart enough to figure out that that's what I'm getting at, it's actually partly the basis of his argument.

 

[Nega-Brutus]

Spoiler: I'm 90% sure you'll miss the point, but maybe it's useful to someone:

The way I read it is that Brutus went defensive mode as soon as he thought the US as a whole was characterized as bad (and it was). He goes as far as deflecting to that Germany is worse. Like, unless I have a really bad read here, it's so blatantly clear that this was something he was just uncomfortable with, and something that could've been easily avoided if he was given a softer, more nuanced point. But to be fair, he doesn't make it easy because of the generational gap, I think.

It's not advised to use overly loaded language with regard to things people have a sentimental relationship with such as their home, a sense of patriotism, etc. if you're trying to convince them of something. You're talking to people, not other historians.

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

i explicitly referred to specifically "presidents" and not "the usa" for that precise reason, so no, actually.

 

[Nega-Brutus]

Yeah I drafted a paragraph to address that specific point before it could be brought up but decided against it because I thought I'd respect your intelligence. Sad to be let down. Bye

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

can it. what you said does not address what happened.

 

[Pixel]

>"90% sure you won't get it"
>"wanted to respect your intelligence"
thonk

In that case I am more charitable to Brutus than you have been, since your view of him amounts to being a snowflake offended that someone did the equivalent of bringing up court papers documenting that his grandpa was a murderer. Accepting that your parents or your home or other things like that are flawed and often abusive systems is part of life, part of growing up.

 

[Nega-Brutus]

can it. what you said does not address what happened.

Yeah calling someone racist and alluding to that their leadership is reducible to imperialists and genocidal maniacs is definitely good rhetorics. I don't think you were malicious and I empathise to some degree so just take the advice and try better next time.

 

[Antoine de Saint-Exupéry]

there's a difference between "reducible to imperialists and genociders" and "imperialists and genociders, amongst other things".

(nice editorialising on the "maniacs" there, what was that about good rhetorics?)

 

[Curiocaueri]

Bear in mind that I have dedicated some of my life to progressive causes in Germany and have a vested interest or even hope in making it a better place and believing that it is a good place with good people. Characterizing the country which has shaped me and which has formed my ideals in some sort of absolute manner as imperial, genocidal, etc. is actual autism
You don't have to compromise your beliefs that Germany has a darker history, you just have to be charitable where you can, and be more prospective.

 

[Nega-Brutus]

there's a difference between "reducible to imperialists and genociders" and "imperialists and genociders, amongst other things".

(nice editorialising on the "maniacs" there, what was that about good rhetorics?)

****, you got me. I'm taking the L here, dude.

 

[Lord Brutus]

What is vague about "state and federal governments"? I'm sure Brutus isn't a big fan of genocide, massacres, and things of the like. All I said is that something he wrote would be construed as genocide denial and explained why. The US can be evil and Americans mostly good people, both can be true, it is not people like me or Brutus that have benefitted from the atrocious things done but a select few at the top. This is so obvious it does not have to be said, Brutus is in fact smart enough to figure out that that's what I'm getting at, it's actually partly the basis of his argument.

Amen to that. I reject the idea that the prime motive of every immigrant after 1500 was the total destruction of the native people. When unscrupulous people or the army got involved with native Americans the probability of genocide increased.
I'm not even sure I would apply the term genocide to the horrors visited upon the Navajo over a period of decades. The people seeking fortunes in coal, oil and uranium from Navajo land viewed the native people as nothing more than rocks to be moved out of the way or trees to be cut down to allow free passage.

 

[Curiocaueri]

Amen to that. I reject the idea that the prime motive of every German after 1933 was the total destruction of the Jewish people. When unscrupulous people or the SS got involved with Jews the probability of genocide increased.
I'm not even sure I would apply the term genocide to the horrors visited upon the Slavs and others over a period of only a few years. The Nazis seeking Lebensraum im Osten viewed the native people as nothing more than rocks to be moved out of the way or trees to be cut down to allow free colonization.

 

[Mad Vader]

I doubt the Americans had developed an ideology of getting rid of the Navajo in a systematic way just because they were Navajo, their ideology was pragmatic greed (as is today, ha!). So, I wouldn't say Herr Brutus is literally Hitler.

Edit:
Here's some great on-topic Trump drama from Axios' Jonathan Swan (the Trump interview meme guy with incredulous face).

Off the Rails: Inside the disintegration of Trump’s relationship with Bill Barr

How Trump torched what was arguably the most consequential relationship in his Cabinet.

www.axios.com

 

[Lord Brutus]

I've seen claims that tens of thousands of native Americans were forced into slavery in South Carolina alone. In 1700 the native American population of South Carolina was about 5,000 total and rose very slowly, mostly because of their way of life. Also, I disavow any responsibility for what the Spanish did in Florida, Texas, Mexico or California.

 

[Adorno]

Where do you read these things?
And this:

... Wounded Knee may be one instance of genocide but instances like that are very rare.

(One instance never/rarely makes a genocide. It's the many instances. And there are many.
It seems the relationship between the natives and settlers was very violent for centuries
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Massacres_of_Native_Americans )