View Mobile Site
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

Racism needs to be untaught in America

Posted: May 11, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: May 11, 2014 2:00 a.m.
 

Regarding the May 5 column “The Sterling Dilemma” by Steve Lunetta, racism and bigotry in this country have been prevalent since the America’s inception.

Discrimination is a way of life in America to some
Americans. All the conversations and debates are not going to change that narrow-minded thinking.

This racism and bigotry are embedded in the lives of these racists from the minute they are born, taught at home and handed down from one generation to another.

I’ve heard this hatefulness and narrow-minded way of thinking all of my life, and it seems to be getting worse since President Obama was elected president of the United States.

Obama being a black man and becoming the president has galled borderline racist and bigots.

These people don’t even know why they are racist and bigots. They were told and taught this hatefulness all their lives.

If you have every heard from someone, “don’t get me wrong; some of my best friend are Jewish or black,” is a facade to cover up their racism and ignorance.

Talk about and debate racism and bigotry is all well and good, but this sensitive matter has to be untaught and flushed out at the core,

As the The Anti Defamation League puts it, stop the defamation of people and help to secure justice and fair treatment to all.

 

Comments

BrianBaker: Posted: May 11, 2014 7:00 a.m.

Some of what Eisenberg states in this LTE is true, quite the departure from her usual diatribes.

Human nature being what it is, there certainly are at least some people who are bigots, and always will be.

But here's where her own blind spot evidences itself. She writes: "Obama being a black man and becoming the president has galled borderline racist and bigots."

Maybe so, but what about the Black racists and bigots who hate everything White, or who vote for Obama and other politicians only because they're Black?

Racism and bigotry isn't limited to White people.
.
.
. --edited.


therightstuff: Posted: May 11, 2014 9:52 a.m.

"""This racism and bigotry are embedded in the lives of these racists from the minute they are born, taught at home and handed down from one generation to another."""

This helps explain why over 90% of blacks vote for the Democratic Party. They are taught at home and handed down from one generation to another that you cannot trust white people. Democrats exploit this mistrust and fuel this racism against the Republican Party hence a 90% turnout. Just as Democrats fought against freeing the slaves in the 1860s and fought against civil rights in the 1960s, today they still want to keep blacks on Uncle Sam's plantation for political power. Reason #933 why I would never be a Democrat.






therightstuff: Posted: May 11, 2014 9:55 a.m.

"""These people don’t even know why they are racist and bigots. They were told and taught this hatefulness all their lives."""

This would also be true of many blacks. Why do so many blacks associate white people with the evil slave owners but not with the hundreds of thousands of white people who died to help set them free?


therightstuff: Posted: May 11, 2014 10:00 a.m.

"""it seems to be getting worse since President Obama was elected president of the United States."""

Yes, it is truly a shame the way Barack Obama and his followers often exploit the race issue to dismiss criticism or advance their ideology. I agree with the writer, electing a black man as president - twice - should have made things better for racism but this is what happens when a leader puts partisan politics ahead of what would be best for the nation as a whole.


itzreality: Posted: May 11, 2014 10:55 a.m.

It is really said that racism exists in this country. If you have ever traveled or lived in the deep south, Alabama, Georgia (out of Metro Atlanta) northern Florida, Mississippi it is sad to say the Jim Crow is alive and well.
Having lived in most of these areas it is sad to see how Blacks and Jews are hated and have stigmas. It is sad that these folks have it embedded in their upbring and behavior. Most of these people are open about it and proud that they are bigoted.


tech: Posted: May 11, 2014 12:17 p.m.

"I’ve heard this hatefulness and narrow-minded way of thinking all of my life, and it seems to be getting worse since President Obama was elected president of the United States."

Key word: "seems". Equating opposition to policies with racism is used as a political deflection by those unable to defend polices on their merits.


BrianBaker: Posted: May 11, 2014 2:19 p.m.

Exactly, tech. We all hated the exact same policies and ideology when they came from the lips of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, but it's only "racist" when it applies to the ObaMessiah, seemingly.

And it's ALSO funny how Clarence Thomas and Larry Elder and Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell and Colonel Allen West and a whole host of others can be absolutely trashed by the Dem/socialists, and somehow or another THAT'S not "racist".

I guess it's not "racist" if the "person of color" has wandered off the leftist plantation. Then it's okay to send out Snidely Whiplash and the other overseers to hunt them down and lash them.




chefgirl358: Posted: May 11, 2014 8:11 p.m.

Yep, all of you guys make excellent points I agree with on this topic.


17trillion: Posted: May 12, 2014 7:53 a.m.

I don't like Obama because he's black. I like Ben Carson because he's black. I'm so confused. Can someone like Lois help me understand how the two statements could be possible true or perhaps is there a more subtle answer?


philellis: Posted: May 12, 2014 8:27 a.m.

@17 - if you want sublety, don't be looking towards Lois.


Lotus8: Posted: May 12, 2014 11:14 a.m.

Lois, this opinion piece is just terribly shallow. Can you presently point to any country or place in the world, now or in the history of human civilization, where discrimination based upon tribe, race, religion or some other measure is/was absent? Has there ever been a time or place where "justice and fair treatment to all" was a reality? There are many who have immigrated to the US who would like to take your hand and show you a place where infinitely more intense hatred, racism and tribal warfare forced them to flee for safety and a better life in the US. No person, country or church is perfect, but the US is a great example of a nation that makes a very good attempt to level the playing field. You can't make the players equal, but if the playing field approaches level, at least each player has some kind of shot.

You preemptively bang on folks who claim to have friends of different ethnic or religious backgrounds, but if you truly did have such friends and those friends were lifelong friends of yours (like mine are), they will tell you that sometimes their own family and friends in their communities put white America to shame with how racist they are behind closed doors/in safe company.

My belief is that the only way to increase understanding is for folks to get out and travel, see the world, make new friends, embrace change and the fact that the place you grew up in is but one grain of sand on the beach. Because many people never end up gaining perspective, human society will never move past fear of the unknown and misunderstood. I used to think the internet would help in this area, and maybe it has to some extent.

You talk about "these people" as if somehow you are so different from them. We are all one, interdependent on each other. The same mechanism that creates fear and prejudice in them exists in you. We have been going down this road of shaming folks when these thoughts spill over into the public domain. This is probably what should happen to reinforce that we don't accept these types of comments, but often the next step of understanding that takes more effort remains the step not taken because we don't want to see that a man like Donald Sterling really isn't all that different from the rest of us at his core. He is a product of our society, a society that we all have a daily hand in shaping.

As Leo Tolstoy mentioned, "Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." Rather than crusading through the newspaper here Lois, what meaningful efforts to promote understanding could you be making that would make a real difference? Buddha, Gandhi and Jesus were such powerful examples because they decided to personally live the message, to give up the normal trappings of life and be the light for others to follow. They didn't prattle on in the paper with tired old prose. They became living examples of the change they were seeking.


ricketzz: Posted: May 13, 2014 7:22 a.m.

This stuff will go away as the old people shuffle off. There is a new species of human with a ubiquitous nervous system; they are a thousand times smarter than we.


17trillion: Posted: May 13, 2014 8:33 a.m.

"they are a thousand times smarter than we."

At least in your case that's true.


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 12:48 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: """This racism and bigotry are embedded in the lives of these racists from the minute they are born, taught at home and handed down from one generation to another."""

This helps explain why over 90% of blacks vote for the Democratic Party. They are taught at home and handed down from one generation to another that you cannot trust white people. Democrats exploit this mistrust and fuel this racism against the Republican Party hence a 90% turnout. Just as Democrats fought against freeing the slaves in the 1860s and fought against civil rights in the 1960s, today they still want to keep blacks on Uncle Sam's plantation for political power. Reason #933 why I would never be a Democrat.

Indy: The writer like to make his assertion about partisan politics but ignores the statement that indeed racism is ‘taught’ by parents.

I myself found this with my Mother who wasn’t an overt racist but just ‘assumed’ that ‘blacks’ were best ‘used’ in janitorial services and little else . . . but she asserted she wasn’t racist.

This comes to focus with the recent disclosures of Clive Bundy, the old white rancher that is free loading on government land, who noted his beliefs about the ‘Negro’.

Since this clown is an economic illiterate, he ‘assumes’ that blacks would be better off ‘picking cotton’ and having a ‘family life’ on the plantation under the direction of the ‘white’ owner versus having to survive on welfare type programs. Notice the poster here share’s Bundy’s beliefs in this area . . . citing ‘Uncle Sam's plantation’ which is a totally ignorant economic observation but one that still persists with religious conservatives that cite biblical scripture in the House regarding the 'virtues' of work while ignoring the economic reality of many minority Americans.

And Bundy as well as this poster believes that they aren’t racist . . .

In any event, Americans will generally vote for those leaders that address their concerns.

We see today with the republican party positions that many minorities are being shortchanged by same as evidence by:

- Cutting food stamps for the poor
- Refusing to keep the minimum wage indexed to inflation
- Voter suppression . . . making ‘vote fraud’ an issue when it doesn’t exist
- Gerrymandering – making districts ‘white’ to discount minority voters

In any event, it’s great to go back in ‘time’ and realize that the democrats were just as guilty of racism as many republicans are today. But we live in the ‘here and now’. We can’t vote for republicans that existed in 1860s since their party today, as evidenced by their positions, has ‘flipped’ . . . while it is the democrats of today that support racial equality.


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 12:53 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: """it seems to be getting worse since President Obama was elected president of the United States."""

Yes, it is truly a shame the way Barack Obama and his followers often exploit the race issue to dismiss criticism or advance their ideology. I agree with the writer, electing a black man as president - twice - should have made things better for racism but this is what happens when a leader puts partisan politics ahead of what would be best for the nation as a whole.

Indy: Indeed, the majority of Americans voted for Obama ‘twice’ . . . but that doesn’t keep a group of minority republicans, the ‘birthers’ from challenging the President’s right to be President.

And interestingly, this type of racism goes to some of the financial elites in America like Donald Trump . . .

So making the assumption that racism isn’t an issue for many minority republicans simply defies common sense.

And again, republicans using tactics like gerrymandering to allow minority whites to vote in republicans or voter suppression to reduce the ‘black vote’ has ‘nothing’ to do with racism . . . as this poster would like you to believe . . .


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 1:00 p.m.

Lotus8 wrote: My belief is that the only way to increase understanding is for folks to get out and travel, see the world, make new friends, embrace change and the fact that the place you grew up in is but one grain of sand on the beach. Because many people never end up gaining perspective, human society will never move past fear of the unknown and misunderstood. I used to think the internet would help in this area, and maybe it has to some extent.

Indy: Great point about ‘mingling’ with those that are ‘different’ from you . . . and that appears to be the case in the ‘blue states’ most of which are on the ‘coast’ . . . but when you get into the ‘heartland’ red states, you get the ‘Clive Bundy’s’ supported by ‘white elites’ that form ‘militias’ that are there to protect the ‘white race’, white supremacy if you will.

Lotus8 wrote: You talk about "these people" as if somehow you are so different from them. We are all one, interdependent on each other.

Indy: You need to comment on the resident libertarian market fundamentalist that promotes the US government isn’t really part of ‘we the people’ and only ‘individuals’ should be trusted with our future . . .

Lotus8 wrote: As Leo Tolstoy mentioned, "Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself." Rather than crusading through the newspaper here Lois, what meaningful efforts to promote understanding could you be making that would make a real difference? Buddha, Gandhi and Jesus were such powerful examples because they decided to personally live the message, to give up the normal trappings of life and be the light for others to follow. They didn't prattle on in the paper with tired old prose. They became living examples of the change they were seeking.

Indy: I’m not sure then why you’re ‘wasting your time’ at this forum by criticizing another writer who sees public forums as a means to discuss topical issues . . . as you’re doing.

Public opinion is formed in many areas including ‘public forums’.

But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt since indeed you are promoting greater interaction but not every person will rise to the level of a Gandhi . . .


17trillion: Posted: May 13, 2014 1:06 p.m.

Wow, who would have thought gerrymandering was a Republican idea? Clearly Indy is so divorced from reality that he fails to see the same thing happening in CA and IL among other blue states when used for Democrat advantages. But no, he frets and whines and moans like a little child when what was used for his purposes gets used against his purposes. Perhaps he wasn't paying attention that day all those long years ago when he was obtaining his prestigious MBA from Cal State Northridge when they taught reality.

I don't care if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, or the moon. If you think I hate the guy because he's black, then you're the racist. I hate him because he's incompetent and fully unprepared for the job. He's done actually nothing in his life other than depend on the generosity of the voters to advance his so-called career. This is a guy that voted "present" over a hundred times as a legislator. That says everything about the lack of conviction that he has. I despite him! He is a destroyer and has shown to have zero skills as a politician.


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 1:06 p.m.

Tech wrote: "I’ve heard this hatefulness and narrow-minded way of thinking all of my life, and it seems to be getting worse since President Obama was elected president of the United States."

Key word: "seems". Equating opposition to policies with racism is used as a political deflection by those unable to defend polices on their merits.

Indy: Here again, the poster fails to see the republican actions in congress as a form of racism that effects mostly minorities . . . from voter suppression to gerrymandering . . . all geared to get ‘white’ republcians into public office with a minority of votes.

That’s was the recent outcome of the last presidential election where democrats got more than a million more popular votes in the House but don’t control it . . .

And why do the Clive Bundys and Donald Sterlings keep popping up . . . very wealthy ‘white men’ that have such narrow views on blacks as being fit for 'picking cotton' or just considered ‘property’ respectfully?

The poster asks us to ‘ignore’ all of this . . .


17trillion: Posted: May 13, 2014 1:09 p.m.

"But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt since indeed you are promoting greater interaction but not every person will rise to the level of a Gandhi . . ."

Not even people who claim to know everything via their alleged business experience and their alleged MBA from the prestigious Cal State Northridge?


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 1:15 p.m.

17trillion wrote: Wow, who would have thought gerrymandering was a Republican idea?

Indy: Just watching republicans practice this is enough for me . . .

17trillion wrote: Clearly Indy is so divorced from reality that he fails to see the same thing happening in CA and IL among other blue states when used for Democrat advantages.

Indy: Here in CA we’ve passed laws to redistrict voting precincts apart from politics . . .

17trillion wrote: But no, he frets and whines and moans like a little child when what was used for his purposes gets used against his purposes. Perhaps he wasn't paying attention that day all those long years ago when he was obtaining his prestigious MBA from Cal State Northridge when they taught reality.

Indy: Then the poster ‘strays’ from the actions of ‘today’s republicans’ and starts whining about anyone that dares to bring that malfeasance to light ‘today’!

Any party that seeks minority representation by gerrymandering is wrong . . . simply saving the ‘other party’ is doing it . . . doesn’t address the consequences.

17trillion wrote: I don't care if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kenya, or the moon. If you think I hate the guy because he's black, then you're the racist. I hate him because he's incompetent and fully unprepared for the job. He's done actually nothing in his life other than depend on the generosity of the voters to advance his so-called career. This is a guy that voted "present" over a hundred times as a legislator. That says everything about the lack of conviction that he has. I despite him! He is a destroyer and has shown to have zero skills as a politician.

Indy: I don’t have any problem with any voter making any judgment on any politician of any party. But apparently the ‘public’ has decided a bit differently on Obama than this conservative poster . . .

Anyway, wee’ve had Buck McKeon for some 20+ years that through his voting record, has not done anything substantial to help our long term future and is still arguing to waste even more ‘Hundreds of billions of dollars’ on ‘defense’ spending that doesn’t address any of the socio-economic issues creating global unrest.

Or the lackluster republicans we get saddled with each election in the state legislature that do little more than recite known RNC talking points that don’t work.


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 1:21 p.m.

17trillion wrote: "But I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt since indeed you are promoting greater interaction but not every person will rise to the level of a Gandhi . . ."

Not even people who claim to know everything via their alleged business experience and their alleged MBA from the prestigious Cal State Northridge?

Indy: I understand the jealousy of this former businessman poster since one of my partners was of this kind of thinking . . . jealous of anyone that has ‘formal business training’ and didn’t make important decisions by the ‘seat of his pants’.

Fortunately, for my partner, his economic fortunes changed dramatically and stopped the history of constantly going ‘broke’.

Interestingly, I heard the same ‘mocking’ type comments until the reality of being successful using very basic business strategies taught to any MBA graduate proved the folly of the mockery.

In any event, showing the ability to address many of our economic, business, and management problems isn’t being washed away by some comment about ‘know everything’ since I heard that same nonsense back in junior high school (that’s what they called them in the 60s . . . ) from kids that didn’t know any better . . .


Lotus8: Posted: May 13, 2014 2:20 p.m.

Indy - Voting for the blue party does not give anyone an "I can't possibly be a racist or bad dude" halo. There are crooks, child abusers, racists, and all other manner of scumbags voting for both parties.

You may continue to believe that my main form of trying to change the world is through posting on this little rag's website if that makes you feel like you got a zinger in on me. I only started posting on here a while back because I thought I had a point of view that might add something once in a while. I have no visions of grandeur vis-a-vis posting here. If you need a "credibility check", I will offer up that I help low income high school students with college essays every year at a high school in downtown LA, have volunteered with and supported a facility for abused and neglected children for going on three decades (organizing birthday parties for the kids, sending some of them to summer camp, organizing holiday parties, just playing basketball with them, raising money for them, and on and on), I teach some community classes for free through the parks and rec department and I also support the special needs community in our valley. My parents are both still involved in helping abused children in the community which they have been doing for now going on more than forty years. Seeing kids I help get their first job, helping them get furniture for their first apartment, seeing some of them get into college...helping these kids who got a raw deal through no fault of their own, whose parents can't even show up to be a part of their life due to sheer selfishness, substance abuse, or their own mental illness issues...these are just some of the ways that I experience joy and meaning in my life.

So please, tell me again how I am hypocritical for calling on folks shaking their fist for action through a shallow newspaper column to actually go out and do something meaningful. I'm certainly no Gandhi either, but it never hurts to have role models. Love without action is meaningless, right?


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 2:37 p.m.

Lotus8 wrote: Indy - Voting for the blue party does not give anyone an "I can't possibly be a racist or bad dude" halo. There are crooks, child abusers, racists, and all other manner of scumbags voting for both parties.

Indy: Agree completely . . . but the overall percentages of racist policies are occurring in ‘red’ states and understandably so knowing the overall demographics being played to by republicans.

I mean look at what Sean Hannity did with the Bundy bozo . . . putting him on the air, promising to ‘defend him’, promoting ‘harm’ to federal agents that were sent them to ‘enforce the law’ . . . and look at the militia folks that showed up . . .

Do you see those folks denouncing Bundy for his ‘Negro’ comments?

Lotus8 wrote: You may continue to believe that my main form of trying to change the world is through posting on this little rag's website if that makes you feel like you got a zinger in on me.

Indy: No I don’t see you in this light . . . but I thought it a bit puzzling to see you taking another poster to task for discussing issues at a ‘public forum’.

But I find the tag of ‘little rag's website’ to be a bit puzzling as well . . . since today, our ‘major’ political parties all get their political organizations started at the ‘community’ level then work the folks up with the ‘party machine’ to where today, most politicians are ‘clones’ if you will just reciting party slogans with little or no independent thought.

But what types of ‘websites’ should we be participating?


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 2:48 p.m.

Lotus8 wrote: I only started posting on here a while back because I thought I had a point of view that might add something once in a while. I have no visions of grandeur vis-a-vis posting here. If you need a "credibility check", I will offer up that I help low income high school students with college essays every year at a high school in downtown LA, have volunteered with and supported a facility for abused and neglected children for going on three decades (organizing birthday parties for the kids, sending some of them to summer camp, organizing holiday parties, just playing basketball with them, raising money for them, and on and on), I teach some community classes for free through the parks and rec department and I also support the special needs community in our valley.

Indy: Those are all laudable activities . . . and I appreciate your efforts. But many of the major economic issues facing us are above the individual activities of any of us . . . thus participation in this forum is what you make of it.

Some here like the political banter and find the posts ‘entertaining’ as if that’s the role of our politics.

Lotus8 wrote: My parents are both still involved in helping abused children in the community which they have been doing for now going on more than forty years. Seeing kids I help get their first job, helping them get furniture for their first apartment, seeing some of them get into college...helping these kids who got a raw deal through no fault of their own, whose parents can't even show up to be a part of their life due to sheer selfishness, substance abuse, or their own mental illness issues...these are just some of the ways that I experience joy and meaning in my life.

Indy: And I wonder why conservatives in general feel that using such ‘public’ things as ‘education’ can’t be used for exactly the same purpose . . .

Many Americans today work several jobs and others world long hours. I don’t expect them to be first in line for volunteering when it should be ‘allowed’ that those same folks have the family life everyone talks about.

This is why government of ‘we the people’ was created . . . to help ‘we the people’ . . . not just those that can ‘buy’ influence and distort our economic reality.

For me personally, most politicians I see are just folklore recitalist that haven’t a proverbial clue as to what’s going on . . . but feel that pep speeches about patriotism, religion, ideology or again, folklore, is a proxy for real leadership.


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 2:55 p.m.

Lotus8 wrote So please, tell me again how I am hypocritical for calling on folks shaking their fist for action through a shallow newspaper column to actually go out and do something meaningful. I'm certainly no Gandhi either, but it never hurts to have role models. Love without action is meaningless, right?

Indy: First of all, when you criticize another poster for ‘making a comment’, how does that promote meaningful dialogue?

And indeed ‘racism’ is taught . . . but you make a good point that when people get to know each other, racism goes away . . . why not just ‘add’ to the LTE writers comments versus the comment ‘terribly shallow’.

I’ve lived as long as the LTE writer, lived through two race riots here in Los Angeles, worked with ‘racist’ people in business that opened our discussions with ‘racist jokes’ . . . heard racist classmates of mine growing up in the 60s based on what appeared to me that the ‘black’ person was lazy based on racist stereotypes given to them by their parents.

And as we see with Bundy and Sterling, they don’t see themselves as racist . . . why do you suppose that is?

In any event, public discourse is important.

I would challenge our elected leaders to participate in forums like this . . . including the Op-ed writers yet I believe the Signal discourages that. Why?

A quick answer is the ‘level’ of discourse in that the more outspoken posters here drive off the moderates with the ‘chippy rhetoric’ . . . I guess feeling that ‘shutting down debate’ is important to maintain their political position?

Gandhi noted ‘be the change you wish to see in the world’ . . . well, many people do different things . . . some do charity work . . . others like me invest their time in the world of economics and feel it important to explain where folklore is no longer working in the modern world . . . and that setting government policies that follow belief and ideology systems that don’t work need to be exposed if for nothing else that to stop wasting precious tax dollars.

Again, this forum is what you make of it.

It appears from your recent posts that you can add value to it . . . so let us continue.


therightstuff: Posted: May 13, 2014 3:29 p.m.

Nice Indy, even throwing your mother under the bus? Your 'mother issues' explains a lot but I think you need more help than what we can provide by cleaning up the mess you leave from your posts.


tech: Posted: May 13, 2014 3:57 p.m.

"Indy: You need to comment on the resident libertarian market fundamentalist that promotes the US government isn’t really part of ‘we the people’ and only ‘individuals’ should be trusted with our future . . . " - Indy

I doubt Lotus8 shares your conflation of government and people, Indy. It's defined by the Constitution, remember?

By the way, your mendaciously erecting a straw man, i.e. suggesting that I say individual citizens are precluded from voluntarily associating to achieve shared objectives didn't pass unnoticed. I've stated no such thing.

Here (again) is how the Constitution delineates government and "the people":

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - Tenth Amendment

United States = Federal Government
States = states
The people = citizens

I suggest you copy it into your Word document repository.


AlwaysRight: Posted: May 13, 2014 4:40 p.m.

17t- I wouldn't say that Obama has zero skills as a politician. He wound up President. LOL


tech: Posted: May 13, 2014 4:52 p.m.

I concur, AR. Supported by a TelePrompTer and Air Force One, Obama is a skilled campaigner and fundraiser. Unfortunately, he doesn't display similar skills in governing, economics, foreign policy, negotiation, etc. required for his actual job.

No doubt that was 17t's point.


stevehw: Posted: May 13, 2014 4:55 p.m.

"Here (again) is how the Constitution delineates government and "the people":

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - Tenth Amendment

United States = Federal Government
States = states
The people = citizens"

I'm not getting your point here. Are you saying that "the Government" is some external agency, some body that is outside of society? Isn't "the Government" composed of members of the group "the people", i.e., "citizens"? Aren't the elected members of Congress, the President, the members of the Judiciary "people" and "citizens"?

You seem to want to make the big, bad federal government to be something like an outside actor, a body beyond the boundaries of the rest of American society, acting on it from without. Isn't it a structure *within* that society, composed of members *of* that society, and acting *internally* to it?

I don't see the arbitrary distinction you're drawing here.


stevehw: Posted: May 13, 2014 4:59 p.m.

Let's just look at some other parts of the Constitution...

"The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States...

No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen."

So the House (a key part of "the federal government", no?) is composed of members chosen by (wait for it) "the people", who have to themselves be citizens (again, members of "the people"), and live in the state which they represent.

How does this square with your "the government is not the people" stance?


tech: Posted: May 13, 2014 5:12 p.m.

Yes, government ≠ society, Steve.

While individuals elected to office and individuals employed by various agencies are part of government when acting in their official duties, they don't constitute the entirety of the population or society, do they?

Exercise: Has our government ever acted against the interests of citizens? Considering Public Choice Theory, do members of government ever act in their own interest, apart from that of the citizens they're elected/appointed/hired to serve?

The distinction isn't arbitrary, it's Constitutional. The Bill of Rights limits the power of government over citizens. They would be nonsensical if there was no delineation.

To clarify, I'm not asserting that those elected/appointed/hired to serve in government cease being citizens or part of our larger society.

Make sense?


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 6:04 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Nice Indy, even throwing your mother under the bus? Your 'mother issues' explains a lot but I think you need more help than what we can provide by cleaning up the mess you leave from your posts.

Indy: Your statement echoes the beliefs of Bundy and Sterling that can’t ‘see’ where their racism was created . . . but you’ll have to do better to defend your own connection to the people that are defending Bundy and Sterling who still, even though their ‘words’ say otherwise, ‘believe’ they are not racist.

This is the real tragedy of ideology believers that can’t see reality . . . as you demonstrate here.


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 6:10 p.m.

Tech wrote: "Indy: You need to comment on the resident libertarian market fundamentalist that promotes the US government isn’t really part of ‘we the people’ and only ‘individuals’ should be trusted with our future . . . " - Indy

I doubt Lotus8 shares your conflation of government and people, Indy. It's defined by the Constitution, remember?

Indy: Yet, that old Constitution that starts out:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence,[note 1] promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

I greatly appreciate the opportunity to contrast the ‘actual’ words of the Founding Fathers versus your libertarian ideology beliefs . . .

Tech wrote: By the way, your mendaciously erecting a straw man, i.e. suggesting that I say individual citizens are precluded from voluntarily associating to achieve shared objectives didn't pass unnoticed. I've stated no such thing.

Indy: When all else fails and you can’t debate the topic, were back to your backstop, the ‘straw man’! But here, play the word game anyway you like . . . I’ll address the inaccuracies as you present them.

Tech wrote: Here (again) is how the Constitution delineates government and "the people":

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - Tenth Amendment

Indy: You state and recite this Amendent as if it exist ‘apart’ from the totality of the Constitution and Bill of Rights . . . but at least you get points for consistency in your belief of libertarianism that rejects the ‘we the people’ in favor of ‘me, myself and I’.

Tech wrote: United States = Federal Government
States = states
The people = citizens

I suggest you copy it into your Word document repository.

Indy: I’m sure others here beside be marvel at your ‘equations’!


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 6:13 p.m.

Stevehw,

Thanks for trying to help Tech get a grip on the organization and ‘original’ intent of the Founding Fathers . . . but he’s got a huge libertarian ideology mountain to climb before realizing same . .


Indy: Posted: May 13, 2014 6:20 p.m.

Tech wrote: Yes, government ≠ society, Steve.

Indy: Written by a true believer libertarian market fundamentalist!

Tech wrote: While individuals elected to office and individuals employed by various agencies are part of government when acting in their official duties, they don't constitute the entirety of the population or society, do they?

Indy: Interestingly, they do . . . that’s why citizen representatives are sent to our government institution to ‘represent’ the people . . . think ‘House of Representatives’.

Tech wrote: Exercise: Has our government ever acted against the interests of citizens? Considering Public Choice Theory, do members of government ever act in their own interest, apart from that of the citizens they're elected/appointed/hired to serve?

Indy: Yes, this is problem where many ‘individual’ citizens ‘sell out’ the interest of ‘we the people’ and instead start working for ‘we the money’.

This is made worse when we appoint ideology based judges to sit on the SCOTUS that haven’t a proverbial clue how to ‘run things’.

Tech wrote: The distinction isn't arbitrary, it's Constitutional. The Bill of Rights limits the power of government over citizens. They would be nonsensical if there was no delineation.

Indy: The Bill of Rights simply declares that the government of ‘we the people’ not tread on the people . . . quite understandable as many of the Founding Fathers were escaping religious tyranny from nations in Europe that practiced and used government to enforce their religious beliefs.

This is why Madison and Jefferson included the ‘separation of church and state’ in the Bill of Rights . . .

Tech wrote: To clarify, I'm not asserting that those elected/appointed/hired to serve in government cease being citizens or part of our larger society. Make sense?

Indy: A non sequitur . . . in fact, it doesn’t address the point under discussion here . . .


therightstuff: Posted: May 13, 2014 7:58 p.m.

Indy, what purpose was served in trashing your mother on this thread? She's not here to defend herself against your accusations. All we have is your word and we know what that's worth. Did describing your mom as a racist make you feel more like a man?

You are one messed up dude.


stevehw: Posted: May 14, 2014 9:26 p.m.

"While individuals elected to office and individuals employed by various agencies are part of government when acting in their official duties, they don't constitute the entirety of the population or society, do they?"

No, they *represent* the entirety of the population...because we have a *representative* democracy. The fact that, say, laws are passed by representatives simply makes it one step removed from direct passage by the citizenry...it doesn't make it *separate*.

You view "the government" as something *outside* of society...most of us view it as a *part* of society (formed by it, representing it, and ultimately, controlled by it). I suppose thinking of it as an external agent allows you to blame "the government" rather than our society for whatever is done that you don't like...


tech: Posted: May 14, 2014 12:32 a.m.

Semantics, Steve.

Government is composed of individuals as a subset of society. It isn't the whole of society, as you confirmed.

Constitutionally (legally), the entities I listed are separate by function rather than the conflation Indy (and Obama) assert. Individuals can act independent of government.

The Founders were wisely concerned about government overreach and designed limits. I consider myself in good company. --edited.


ricketzz: Posted: May 14, 2014 7:19 a.m.

So much for "Proud to be an American".

Government should be just big enough to protect me from predatory capitalism, and not one manilla folder bigger.


Indy: Posted: May 14, 2014 7:12 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy, what purpose was served in trashing your mother on this thread? She's not here to defend herself against your accusations. All we have is your word and we know what that's worth. Did describing your mom as a racist make you feel more like a man? You are one messed up dude.

Indy: Hey, there’s a new concept you need to check out: ‘thinking’.

We’ve been discussing how ‘racism’ is learned . . . at childhood in much the same manner that your parents indoctrinated you into your religious beliefs.

And what I found later was her mother was even more racist . . .

But thankfully, they did keep it to themselves . . . so I didn’t get ‘contaminated’ with such racism.

In any event, your remarks are consistent with a ‘true believer’, one that simply can’t see reality and just ‘ignore’ what you don’t like . . .

That again is why you should ‘think before you type’.

Just trying to help you out here . . .


Indy: Posted: May 14, 2014 7:16 p.m.

Tech wrote: Semantics, Steve.

Indy: LOL

Tech wrote: Government is composed of individuals as a subset of society. It isn't the whole of society, as you confirmed.

Indy: Yes, but it represents the ‘whole society’, the ‘we the people’ part of the Constitution in that government is ‘we the people’.

Tech wrote: Constitutionally (legally), the entities I listed are separate by function rather than the conflation Indy (and Obama) assert. Individuals can act independent of government.

Indy: Wow . . . what an absolute ‘revelation’: Individuals can act independent of government.

Who would have ever thought that was possible! Not!

Tech wrote: The Founders were wisely concerned about government overreach and designed limits. I consider myself in good company. --edited.

Indy: Yes, the government did plan on addressing citizens ‘liberty’ in the Bill of Rights.

But likewise, the government of ‘we the people’ was there to ‘promote the general welfare’ of the populous not just ‘you’ or other individuals that like to believe they are ‘apart’ from the ‘we the people’ government.


therightstuff: Posted: May 14, 2014 7:31 p.m.

Indy: """But thankfully, they did keep it to themselves . . . so I didn’t get ‘contaminated’ with such racism."""

If your mother kept her racism to herself, then how do you know she was a racist? Any other mother issues you want to share? I'm here to help.


tech: Posted: May 15, 2014 9:38 p.m.

Indy: Indy: Wow . . . what an absolute ‘revelation’: Individuals can act independent of government.

Indy: ‘you’ or other individuals that like to believe they are ‘apart’ from the ‘we the people’ government.

Two opposite opinions in a single post. Which Indy wins?

Indy: Yes, the government did plan on addressing citizens ‘liberty’ in the Bill of Rights.

Liberty meaning free from tyrannical government. The Bill of Rights protects "the people" and limits "government".


Indy: Posted: May 15, 2014 12:53 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """But thankfully, they did keep it to themselves . . . so I didn’t get ‘contaminated’ with such racism."""

If your mother kept her racism to herself, then how do you know she was a racist? Any other mother issues you want to share? I'm here to help.

Indy: I’m really not sure why she and her mother kept this under their belts so to speak but I did see the type of candidates they supported and listened to their infrequent remarks about ‘blacks’.

It might also have been that my Father wasn’t racist . . . and people like to ‘hide’ things that others may find objectionable even in a martial relationship.

So while you try to ignore and even mock the ‘parental indoctrination’ that influences racism and indeed your religious beliefs, it doesn’t dismiss the consequences.

And indeed many religious conservative fight hard if a personal belief of theirs doesn’t ‘fit’ the ‘laws’ of the US . . . as we’re seeing in the Hobby Lobby court case where the ‘owners’ want the ‘employees’ to follow their own ‘private and personal’ religious beliefs regarding contraception that they themselves aren’t ‘forced’ to use.

But I find it this discussion great to help you understand the consequences of your beliefs . . .


Indy: Posted: May 15, 2014 1:01 p.m.

Tech wrote: Indy: Indy: Wow . . . what an absolute ‘revelation’: Individuals can act independent of government.

Indy: ‘you’ or other individuals that like to believe they are ‘apart’ from the ‘we the people’ government.

Two opposite opinions in a single post. Which Indy wins?

Indy: Yes, we may have a awakening moment here for this libertarian regarding the internal contradictions of that ideology . . . there may still be hope for this poster . . .

Tech wrote: Indy: Yes, the government did plan on addressing citizens ‘liberty’ in the Bill of Rights.

Liberty meaning free from tyrannical government. The Bill of Rights protects "the people" and limits "government".

Indy: Libertarians struggle with the constitutional concept put forth in the preamble of the Constitution that notes the ‘promote the general welfare’ of the citizens.

And indeed the Founding Fathers, many of which came to the US to escape the religious persecution by their own native government, did address that in the Bill of Rights by ‘separating church and state’.

But this doesn’t dismiss the overall intent to use a ‘government’ of ‘we the people’ to chart our nation’s future.

Libertarians it appears like to believe that the efforts by the Founding Fathers to create ‘government’ can only be looked at in the most sinister manner . . . but indeed it does show the original feelings that the Founding Fathers had in ‘limiting’ what a government could do against its citizens but that is balanced by the reality that the citizens elect ‘representatives’ to do the ‘people’s work’.

In any event, note the theme of libertarians that like to see our government as ‘tyrannical’ even if the Founding Fathers recognized what could happen to a government and addressed same in the Bill of Rights.

Asking individuals to moderate certain actions for the common good has to me always been a trait of Americanism. Only libertarians like this poster like to see the government as an ‘enemy’ even if it is made up of ‘us’.


ricketzz: Posted: May 16, 2014 7:00 a.m.

I was raised by a racist bigot and still use racist language in my mind. When it's ingrained in your impressionable young brain there's no way to erase it. To pretend otherwise is to be a phony.


therightstuff: Posted: May 16, 2014 7:51 a.m.

Indy: """But I find it this discussion great to help you understand the consequences of your beliefs . . ."""

I don't know your mom so I haven't been contaminated by her racism as you so eloquently put it. By the way, for Mother's Day I sent my mom roses.


ricketzz: Posted: May 18, 2014 7:30 a.m.

My Dad raised me regarding such matters. We had to drive through the ghetto to get to the stock car races in Buffalo. Mom was a quiet Illinois Republican with way more class than Dad. She married down and drank herself to an early grave. I'll burn one for her.


Indy: Posted: May 18, 2014 7:31 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """But I find it this discussion great to help you understand the consequences of your beliefs . . ."""

I don't know your mom so I haven't been contaminated by her racism as you so eloquently put it. By the way, for Mother's Day I sent my mom roses.

Indy: I can only hope your ‘mother’ issues ended happily and I hope she didn’t beat you . . . but apparently she couldn’t help you see the religious beliefs you accepted that don’t work in the Modern world.

You simply can’t pray away the harm that your beliefs are causing for the poor with food stamps, the long term unemployed or the working poor that work for minimum wage.

I wish you would have sent a rational economic message to the people that are effected by many of your misguided religious beliefs based on biblical scripture that is no longer relevant.


tech: Posted: May 18, 2014 8:55 p.m.

"I wish you would have sent a rational economic message to the people that are effected by many of your misguided religious beliefs based on biblical scripture that is no longer relevant."

Why can't you release your collectivist ideology that's was proven a failure last century, Indy?


ricketzz: Posted: May 19, 2014 7:46 a.m.

Tech spews second hand gibberish. If he would actually read Adam Smith, Hayek, M. Friedman, etc., he'd see that classical conservatism accepts state charity as a necessary evil for the public good. Tech's views are that of extremist right libertarians, which serve only wealthy industrialists, trust fund babies and banksters. These policies are to maximize short term profits for the moneyed elite, while letting everything else wither and die. It is the most Unamerican philosophy there can be. We were founded to be above this kind of crap.


tech: Posted: May 19, 2014 7:59 p.m.

I have read them, ricketzz. They advocated free markets to serve the the interests of the citizens in nation states.

A social safety net for the truly needy doesn't equate to redistribution schemes by a corrupt political class, their cronies and a technocratic elite with a will to power. --edited.


ricketzz: Posted: May 20, 2014 7:59 a.m.

"Redistribution schemes" like high marginal tax rates and stiff import duties for imported luxury items protect Americans from the globalist elites. Fact: the same traits that make a successful business executive disqualify that person from being a suitable steward of the public good. Once upon a time an American business leaving to make more money somewhere else was unthinkable. Oh yeah, that was before Reagan and Thatcher and the Fascist takeover of the USA and the UK. 30 years later we get to live in the world they craved. Savor it.


tech: Posted: May 20, 2014 4:23 p.m.

“It is the highest impertinence and presumption, therefore, in kings and ministers, to pretend to watch over the economy of private people, and to restrain their expence, either by sumptuary laws, or by prohibiting the importation of foreign luxuries. They are themselves always, and without any exception, the greatest spendthrifts in the society. Let them look well after their own expence, and they may safely trust private people with theirs. If their own extravagance does not ruin the state, that of their subjects never will.” —Adam Smith


ricketzz: Posted: May 21, 2014 1:21 p.m.

Nobody's proposing to prevent extravagance, although it is gauche. The Peoples' representatives are neither kings nor ministers (in theory). If the people wish to minimize the damaging effects of outrageous behavior by trust fund babies (who aren't even the same species as the rest of us) it is their right to so organize around and enact such legislation. Judging by how the trust fund babies are pushing back, the populists must be on to something.

I agree there should be no psycho rich people telling other people what to do. See my comment above about how CEOs are prone to sociopathic behavior, and are rewarded for it in the perverted world of high finance. Power is a very dangerous thing. It should always be suspect.


tech: Posted: May 21, 2014 6:57 p.m.

You are proposing to tax and redistribute what you perceive as extravagance. For someone who professes a lack of interest in material goods, you're rather keen on expropriating the property of others.

Speaking of property, do you support the right to private property?


ricketzz: Posted: May 23, 2014 7:34 a.m.

Not dirt. No. Personal property yes. 99 year renewable leases like the USFS, yes.

Where did I say "redistribute"? I don't care what they do with the money, as long as crazed billionaires and family dynasties are prevented. They are a menace to society. Really though, I prefer to pay off the bonds first. Just like the law says. Then renegotiate what's left. Secure the blessings of Liberty, wubba, wubba, wubba.


tech: Posted: May 26, 2014 7:42 p.m.

You make my point, ricketzz

My posterity will benefit from my intellect and labor, as I have from my ancestors. Yours, if any, will do likewise or not based on the life choices you've made.


ricketzz: Posted: May 28, 2014 8:03 a.m.

"Life choices"? Is this new age claptrap or what? Are you saying you are smarter than an ag worker, or that you work harder? They are just as smart as you are and work a hundred times harder. Howzat working out for their posterity?

We're both going to the same place; one of us will go kicking and screaming.


tech: Posted: May 29, 2014 2:50 p.m.

I was unaware you were an ag worker. Or was that a straw man?

I referenced your choices. You did make some in your life, did you not? Did they affect your income and options?



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...