Conservative

382 readers

27 users here now

A place to discuss pro-conservative stuff

Be excellent to each other. Civility, No Racism, No Bigotry, No Slurs, No calls to violences, No namecalling, All that good stuff, follow lemm.ee's rules, follow the rules of your instance, etc.
We are a Pro-Conservative forum. Posts must have a clear pro-conservative, or anti left-wing bias. We are interested in promoting conservatism and discussing things that might get ignored elsewhere. All sources are acceptable, however reputable sources with a reputation for factual reporting are preferred.
Dissent is allowed in the comments, but try to be constructive; if you do not agree, then provide a reason which is backed up by references or a reasonable alternative interpretation of the provided facts. That means the left wing is welcome to state their opinions, but please keep it in good faith.

A polite request, not a rule, if you feel the need to report a comment, please don't reply to it.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

-14

Judge halts toppling of Reconciliation Monument in Arlington National Cemetery | Blaze Media (www.theblaze.com)

submitted 11 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

37 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

The article basically argues that the switch did happen, but it's hard to say it's because of racist sentiments.

Does this mean that a change in white voters’ perceptions of the parties’ racial sympathies, particularly in the South, is the only explanation for the long-term switch that occurred in this demographics’ party loyalty from the 1960s to today? Certainly not. Univariate explanations for shifts in the political landscape are always tempting. But race-related policies and prejudices are but one explosive factor in the multifaceted set of causes that have led American politics to evolve as they have.

Like...yeah, but the racists still moved over to the Republican party. It may not have been because they were racists, but the switch still happened nonetheless, and they took their racist views with them.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Not really. Which party still wants to divide people into races? The Democrats. The Democrats is all about dividing people into groups that are not important. People should be treated as people and not classifications.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago

Not really what?

The Democrats is all about dividing people into groups that are not important. People should be treated as people and not classifications.

Divisions of the world aren't inherently bad either. A foreign national as a national security risk is a useful categorization in some contexts. But if you're just hanging out with people and talking to your Indian friend, it'd be unnecessary to classify him as such. Similarly, racial categories are arguably useful in some contexts. If I were a doctor, I might be concerned about high blood pressure in an African American patient. The context matter for categorizing people in the first place which categories should be used.

Because if people should be treated as people, then why should anyone be denied entry into the country? What is the point of a border but to keep people on the other side out? What is the basis for exclusion if people are just people?