Robert wrote:
It well may be true, but we have seen this dance before. Those anonymous sources always seem to get things wrong. I would not be surprised if he wanted to do this, but just some anonymous source does not validate it for me.
Whether or not it is true is not really relevant to my larger point was that it sounds like folks here ON THIS FORUM are cheerleading the deployment of Federal troops to Seattle. Which strikes me as the polar opposite of an Anabaptist peacemaking approach to conflict resolution.
Ken,
A lot of people on this forum are not Anabaptists or conservative Anabaptists. A few tirelessly promote stereotypical left or right wing political views.
Sorry if it offends you but MN is basically a free speech zone where people like temporal1 may speak freely. If you didn’t like what she said, address her directly.
Who said I was offended? I have a very thick skin and have never been personally offended by anything I have ever read here on MN, much less anything that you or temporal1 has written. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency in some of the messages I'm seeing on this thread. And used her words as an example. That is the whole point of this forum is it not? To discuss these sorts of issues?
What is YOUR position? Do you think the government should call up Federal troops and threaten violence against peaceful protesters? Or do you think the better solution is to seek peaceful resolution?
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Ken wrote:
Whether or not it is true is not really relevant to my larger point was that it sounds like folks here ON THIS FORUM are cheerleading the deployment of Federal troops to Seattle. Which strikes me as the polar opposite of an Anabaptist peacemaking approach to conflict resolution.
Ken,
A lot of people on this forum are not Anabaptists or conservative Anabaptists. A few tirelessly promote stereotypical left or right wing political views.
Sorry if it offends you but MN is basically a free speech zone where people like temporal1 may speak freely. If you didn’t like what she said, address her directly.
Who said I was offended? I have a very thick skin and have never been personally offended by anything I have ever read here on MN, much less anything that you or temporal1 has written. I'm just pointing out the inconsistency in some of the messages I'm seeing on this thread. And used her words as an example. That is the whole point of this forum is it not? To discuss these sorts of issues?
What is YOUR position? Do you think the government should call up Federal troops and threaten violence against peaceful protesters? Or do you think the better solution is to seek peaceful resolution?
It’s not my business to order the government around or stake out political opinions.
If I were the President, I would not order the national guard until the governor requested it. With that said, I think lawless zones are a bad idea, and I’m not sure why anyone would want to promote them. If the mayor or governor really wanted control back, they would have it back within minutes. Obviously this is being used as a political tool by everyone involved.
'm not a cheerleader for these CHAZ activists who are breaking the law anymore than I am a cheerleader for religious groups who broke lawful quarantine orders by continuing to hold large group meetings.
Quarantine orders against normal religious services are unlawful, and courts have consistently sided with citizens on the first amendment.
If people want to meet and hold religious services, they have the freedom to do so, despite risks of spreading or catching disease. Despite what any petty tyrant would like to say otherwise.
Personally I am more concerned about disease spending at large mass protests than at church services.
As for the mass protests. I agree that they are an equal or greater concern. Although I see more masks at protests than I do at church services. Oregon is delaying the re-opening of Portland due to an uptick in Covid cases that is no doubt linked to some extent to the protests. That is indeed a problem. But again, I'm not any more in favor of using force against protesters who violate quarantine than I am in favor of using force against religious groups who break quarantine. And I support the governors here who are seeking more peaceful approaches to both.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Judas Maccabeus wrote:My guess is that reparations will sooner or later be in the list of demands, if it is not there already.
I grew up int he north where my family fought on the side of the Union. Should I pay less since it was Union families who paid the price? Should we just tax the south? The challenge is I moved to Texas and grew up there. Should I pay more or less? Do they still want the mule?
I think the reparations thing is something of a distraction but you do realize that the systemic discrimination they are talking about when it comes to reparations did not end in 1865 at Appomattox. You grew up in Texas? How many years after Appomattox were black students were finally admitted to attend the University of Texas or Texas A&M? Do you know when the first black football players were offered scholarships to UT? Texas was still fielding an all-white segregated football team as late as 1969. How many years after Appomattox were black farmers in Texas finally able to use the same price supports, loans, and crop insurance that white farmers had available? How many years after Appomattox were black GIs able to use the GI bill to attend Texas universities and use GI loans to buy houses in white suburbs?
The legacy of slavery and discrimination continues to this day. If you are white then you benefited from it whether or not you or your family actually participated, and regardless of which side you ancestors fought or didn't fight during the Civil War. I benefited from it by living in a country that put more resources into white schools and white communities than it did to communities of color. I benefited by being white and male for every job interview I ever attended. For every apartment I ever rented, and for every loan I ever applied for. I benefited I didn't have as many students of color to compete with at college than would have been the case in a colorblind society. And I benefited by not being harassed by police every time I drove through my neighborhood, and not getting arrested for some of the stupid stuff I did when I was young. And my kids continue to benefit from the same things today.
It's interesting to me to notice how many of those "benefits" CA's have been voluntarily abstaining from for years. My grandpa didn't go to college on the GI bill, he didn't use a GI loan to buy a house, neither my grandparents nor my parents had any college education at all, they didn't have to rely on their whiteness to keep them from getting in trouble because they didn't do stupid stuff like using drugs, drinking, running from police, or carrying guns in public, and they didn't even send their children to the white schools in the areas where they lived. Oh, and they didn't use subsidized loans or take advantage of crop insurance, or all the other government handouts that would have been available to them as white people. Not saying it's wrong for people to use those benefits, but it's somewhat hard for me to identify with the guilt that comes from having been pushed up by all these items while others missed out.
Robert wrote:
I grew up int he north where my family fought on the side of the Union. Should I pay less since it was Union families who paid the price? Should we just tax the south? The challenge is I moved to Texas and grew up there. Should I pay more or less? Do they still want the mule?
I think the reparations thing is something of a distraction but you do realize that the systemic discrimination they are talking about when it comes to reparations did not end in 1865 at Appomattox. You grew up in Texas? How many years after Appomattox were black students were finally admitted to attend the University of Texas or Texas A&M? Do you know when the first black football players were offered scholarships to UT? Texas was still fielding an all-white segregated football team as late as 1969. How many years after Appomattox were black farmers in Texas finally able to use the same price supports, loans, and crop insurance that white farmers had available? How many years after Appomattox were black GIs able to use the GI bill to attend Texas universities and use GI loans to buy houses in white suburbs?
The legacy of slavery and discrimination continues to this day. If you are white then you benefited from it whether or not you or your family actually participated, and regardless of which side you ancestors fought or didn't fight during the Civil War. I benefited from it by living in a country that put more resources into white schools and white communities than it did to communities of color. I benefited by being white and male for every job interview I ever attended. For every apartment I ever rented, and for every loan I ever applied for. I benefited I didn't have as many students of color to compete with at college than would have been the case in a colorblind society. And I benefited by not being harassed by police every time I drove through my neighborhood, and not getting arrested for some of the stupid stuff I did when I was young. And my kids continue to benefit from the same things today.
It's interesting to me to notice how many of those "benefits" CA's have been voluntarily abstaining from for years. My grandpa didn't go to college on the GI bill, he didn't use a GI loan to buy a house, neither my grandparents nor my parents had any college education at all, they didn't have to rely on their whiteness to keep them from getting in trouble because they didn't do stupid stuff like using drugs, drinking, running from police, or carrying guns in public, and they didn't even send their children to the white schools in the areas where they lived. Oh, and they didn't use subsidized loans or take advantage of crop insurance, or all the other government handouts that would have been available to them as white people. Not saying it's wrong for people to use those benefits, but it's somewhat hard for me to identify with the guilt that comes from having been pushed up by all these items while others missed out.
Yeah, I dunno. My grandfather was a CA farmer in Oregon from the 1920s until retirement in the early 1970s. I would be curious how many government programs he relied on. I really don't know. I might ask my dad sometime. He did buy two different farms, one in Albany in the 1920s and later one near Salem in the 1940s. I'm willing to guess that he would not have gotten a loan on either farm had he been a black farmer. And hence, would never have been allowed to actually be a farmer in Oregon. The legacy of black farmers being denied credit is very real and wasn't limited to the south.
And before that we have family roots that go back to the homesteading days. That was a time when free land was only given out to white pioneers and not black pioneers. Not by law, but by deliberate practice.
But yes, to the extend that CA communities live in isolated communities far from the center of society and national economy then really aren't drivers of that society. That is certainly true. The Inupiats living along in the Alaska Arctic weren't doing much to oppress people of color and weren't benefiting from segregation either. I'm sure you can find thousands of isolated American communities for which you can basically say the same thing. That doesn't absolve us as a nation from righting past wrongs and working to create a more just society today.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Ken wrote:
I think the reparations thing is something of a distraction but you do realize that the systemic discrimination they are talking about when it comes to reparations did not end in 1865 at Appomattox. You grew up in Texas? How many years after Appomattox were black students were finally admitted to attend the University of Texas or Texas A&M? Do you know when the first black football players were offered scholarships to UT? Texas was still fielding an all-white segregated football team as late as 1969. How many years after Appomattox were black farmers in Texas finally able to use the same price supports, loans, and crop insurance that white farmers had available? How many years after Appomattox were black GIs able to use the GI bill to attend Texas universities and use GI loans to buy houses in white suburbs?
The legacy of slavery and discrimination continues to this day. If you are white then you benefited from it whether or not you or your family actually participated, and regardless of which side you ancestors fought or didn't fight during the Civil War. I benefited from it by living in a country that put more resources into white schools and white communities than it did to communities of color. I benefited by being white and male for every job interview I ever attended. For every apartment I ever rented, and for every loan I ever applied for. I benefited I didn't have as many students of color to compete with at college than would have been the case in a colorblind society. And I benefited by not being harassed by police every time I drove through my neighborhood, and not getting arrested for some of the stupid stuff I did when I was young. And my kids continue to benefit from the same things today.
It's interesting to me to notice how many of those "benefits" CA's have been voluntarily abstaining from for years. My grandpa didn't go to college on the GI bill, he didn't use a GI loan to buy a house, neither my grandparents nor my parents had any college education at all, they didn't have to rely on their whiteness to keep them from getting in trouble because they didn't do stupid stuff like using drugs, drinking, running from police, or carrying guns in public, and they didn't even send their children to the white schools in the areas where they lived. Oh, and they didn't use subsidized loans or take advantage of crop insurance, or all the other government handouts that would have been available to them as white people. Not saying it's wrong for people to use those benefits, but it's somewhat hard for me to identify with the guilt that comes from having been pushed up by all these items while others missed out.
Yeah, I dunno. My grandfather was a CA farmer in Oregon from the 1920s until retirement in the early 1970s. I would be curious how many government programs he relied on. I really don't know. I might ask my dad sometime. He did buy two different farms, one in Albany in the 1920s and later one near Salem in the 1940s. I'm willing to guess that he would not have gotten a loan on either farm had he been a black farmer. And hence, would never have been allowed to actually be a farmer in Oregon. The legacy of black farmers being denied credit is very real and wasn't limited to the south.
But yes, to the extend that CA communities live in isolated communities far from the center of society and national economy then really aren't drivers of that society. That is certainly true. The Inupiats living along in the Alaska Arctic weren't doing much to oppress people of color and weren't benefiting from segregation either. I'm sure you can find thousands of isolated American communities for which you can basically say the same thing. That doesn't absolve us as a nation from righting past wrongs and working to create a more just society today.
No, not necessarily, yet at the same time I don't think the Inupiats have any obligation to try to create a society where everyone has access to handouts that they don't receive themselves. I don't think I have any obligation to work to ensure that the college admission process is fair to everyone, etc.
Too many people with not enough to do. Anyone actually work?
JM.
my thoughts exactly. But why work if there are people outside willing to send you everything you need. The whole thing is just ludicrous and would be actually funny if it was not so serious.
ken_sylvania wrote:
It's interesting to me to notice how many of those "benefits" CA's have been voluntarily abstaining from for years. My grandpa didn't go to college on the GI bill, he didn't use a GI loan to buy a house, neither my grandparents nor my parents had any college education at all, they didn't have to rely on their whiteness to keep them from getting in trouble because they didn't do stupid stuff like using drugs, drinking, running from police, or carrying guns in public, and they didn't even send their children to the white schools in the areas where they lived. Oh, and they didn't use subsidized loans or take advantage of crop insurance, or all the other government handouts that would have been available to them as white people. Not saying it's wrong for people to use those benefits, but it's somewhat hard for me to identify with the guilt that comes from having been pushed up by all these items while others missed out.
Yeah, I dunno. My grandfather was a CA farmer in Oregon from the 1920s until retirement in the early 1970s. I would be curious how many government programs he relied on. I really don't know. I might ask my dad sometime. He did buy two different farms, one in Albany in the 1920s and later one near Salem in the 1940s. I'm willing to guess that he would not have gotten a loan on either farm had he been a black farmer. And hence, would never have been allowed to actually be a farmer in Oregon. The legacy of black farmers being denied credit is very real and wasn't limited to the south.
But yes, to the extend that CA communities live in isolated communities far from the center of society and national economy then really aren't drivers of that society. That is certainly true. The Inupiats living along in the Alaska Arctic weren't doing much to oppress people of color and weren't benefiting from segregation either. I'm sure you can find thousands of isolated American communities for which you can basically say the same thing. That doesn't absolve us as a nation from righting past wrongs and working to create a more just society today.
No, not necessarily, yet at the same time I don't think the Inupiats have any obligation to try to create a society where everyone has access to handouts that they don't receive themselves. I don't think I have any obligation to work to ensure that the college admission process is fair to everyone, etc.
And I could say that I don't think I have any obligation to defend the religious liberties of Amish and CA people who live in Pennsylvania, because whatever happens to them doesn't affect me. And after all, I'm not personally violating their rights either. No one is responsible for doing everything, or solving all the worlds problems. But I think we are all obligated to do our part in creating a more just world, however small that part may be.
They came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.
- Martin Niemöller
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Ken wrote:If you are white then you benefited from it whether or not you or your family actually participated, and regardless of which side you ancestors fought or didn't fight during the Civil War.
This really infuriates me. This sets me off and I will not respond because it will take me to a place I do not need to go.
Please do not throw white privilege at me. You will not like the results.
0 x
Try hard not to offend. Try harder not to be offended.
I think I am funnier than I really am.
Ken wrote:
Yeah, I dunno. My grandfather was a CA farmer in Oregon from the 1920s until retirement in the early 1970s. I would be curious how many government programs he relied on. I really don't know. I might ask my dad sometime. He did buy two different farms, one in Albany in the 1920s and later one near Salem in the 1940s. I'm willing to guess that he would not have gotten a loan on either farm had he been a black farmer. And hence, would never have been allowed to actually be a farmer in Oregon. The legacy of black farmers being denied credit is very real and wasn't limited to the south.
But yes, to the extend that CA communities live in isolated communities far from the center of society and national economy then really aren't drivers of that society. That is certainly true. The Inupiats living along in the Alaska Arctic weren't doing much to oppress people of color and weren't benefiting from segregation either. I'm sure you can find thousands of isolated American communities for which you can basically say the same thing. That doesn't absolve us as a nation from righting past wrongs and working to create a more just society today.
No, not necessarily, yet at the same time I don't think the Inupiats have any obligation to try to create a society where everyone has access to handouts that they don't receive themselves. I don't think I have any obligation to work to ensure that the college admission process is fair to everyone, etc.
And I could say that I don't think I have any obligation to defend the religious liberties of Amish and CA people who live in Pennsylvania, because whatever happens to them doesn't affect me. And after all, I'm not personally violating their rights either. No one is responsible for doing everything, or solving all the worlds problems. But I think we are all obligated to do our part in creating a more just world, however small that part may be.
They came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.
- Martin Niemöller
OK, but that's not what I'm suggesting as the determining factor. I wasn't suggesting we should simply ignore those things that don't affect us directly. Would you say that the minimum wage worker at Starbucks really has an obligation to try to ensure that Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have equal access to PPP (or similar) funding for any small businesses they might own? If I wear cheap serviceable shoes myself, and wear them until they wear out, do I really have an obligation to ensure that the neighborhood children have fair access to $500 Nikes? I don't think I do.
