well this thread degenerated fast
My politics is based in historical evidence, which I maintain is about what actually happened. "a political thought can be politically correct only if it is scientifically painstaking". So to be politically incorrect is in the first place to be deluded, because you're in denial of what actually happened, and thus what is actually happening. And in the second place to be unscientific. So rather than strive for a politics of denial of reality, obfuscation of blame (the misidentification of perpetrators), and sweeping generalizations, I strive for completely evidence-based claims in political discourses that I participate in.
Old_Gregg why are u paying lip service to complexity and then making sweeping generalizations about human history? PS: neoliberal capitalism already abolished borders, haven't you heard of multinational corporations, or just individuals buying a visa. we don't have territories, or borders: we have lawyer fees.
either way, the tribe always has it's own form of political correctness.
also that you think borders exist outside of a courtroom/legislature, except for as a security apparatus, is adorable. Will you make a prediction about California seceding from the U.S please?
now for some juicy truews to top off this post, 100% real bonafide:
http://abovethelaw.com/2016/12/jury...-black-man-five-times-in-the-back-is-a-crime/
"Walter Scott was murdered. On video. In broad daylight. The only question is whether the murder of black people by police is illegal. The South Carolina jury cannot reach consensus on that point. White people cannot achieve broad-based agreement that the murder of black people is wrong."
http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/poverty-doesnt-need-technology-it-needs-politics-1789520902
"Poverty and wealth are inextricably linked. The economy is not a zero-sum game, but the fruits of the economic growth that creates and fuels wealthy nations like ours are hoarded to a shocking extent by a tiny group at the top, which warps our political system, starves our economy of demand, and fuels poverty both directly and indirectly. Philanthropy is fine and dandy. Show me a good charity, though, and I’ll show you an idea that could be practiced on much larger scale by a government. (One of the world’s most effective anti-poverty charities does nothing but send money directly to poor people. Hello, redistribution of wealth.) Fighting poverty—and making our nation more economically fair—is not a mystifying riddle waiting for a technological breakthrough. It is a question of political will. If we want to push more wealth down the economic chain, we will."
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/803567993036754944?ref_src=twsrc^tfw
"Nobody should be allowed to burn the American flag - if they do, there must be consequences - perhaps loss of citizenship or year in jail!"
I recall from my childhood and from deck nite posts that there are many evangelist christians who identify american nationalism with their God. Not that donald trump puts god on the same level as he reserves for american nationalism.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-weissman/trumps-corporate-takeover_b_13305864.html?
https://medium.com/public-citizen/c...n-at-federal-agencies-c42d32cb5ec1#.fvhobltdr
http://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2016/11/29/glen-newey/the-clean-hands-problem/?utm_source=LRB online email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=20161129 online&utm_content=usca_nonsubs
"For the US, Castro’s great crime wasn’t heading a repressive regime – ‘strong men’ such as Batista, Rafael Trujillo, Saddam Hussein, Mobutu Sese Seko or General Suharto got away with murder as long as they were US clients – or even his professed Marxism (Nixon and Kissinger were happy enough to cosy up to Mao Zedong when interest dictated); but that his regime was a standing rebuff to US might. Kennedy was ready to risk nuclear apocalypse to put paid to it.
It would be pleasing to think that the post-Castro era might herald an end to internment without trial on the island of Cuba, and the release of prisoners who have been tortured while in custody. Unfortunately, Barack Obama’s administration has failed to carry out its promise to close Guantánamo."
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/former...s-get-so-angry-when-you-question-nationalism/
Nationalism has long been considered a “Christian” virtue in America, and many of us end up believing it.
All cultures have a tendency to blend cultural values and practices in with the Christian faith (a process technically called “syncretism”), and for generations this has been the case with nationalism and our faith (something uniquely American; this isn’t the case in Canada for example). The two have been blended together so strongly in our culture that any suggestion we separate the two becomes an infuriating concept that literally
feels all wrong. Being a good American often becomes synonymous with being a good Christian, which is a false pairing. In fact, sometimes being a good Christian will mean one is
radically disloyalto whatever empire they find themselves in.
We’ve long been taught that we as a nation are “exceptional” compared to everyone else (See “American Exceptionalism”).
From our earliest years, we’re taught that the United States is the greatest nation in the history of mankind. I don’t mean this metaphorically either– just listen to some of our politicians closely and you’ll hear folks actually say this, repeatedly. In fact, during the last presidential election one of the candidates stated during a debate that the United States remained the “greatest hope for the future of the world”. Instead of simply being appreciative for where we live and appreciative for what we have, we take it a step further and idolize the nation itself, which means that when someone questions this belief system, it feels like blasphemy. We are
not the hope of the world– the hope of the world is a man named Jesus, and to suggest differently is nothing short of idolatry.
We’ve rarely been taught to think critically about our nation.
Being taught that we are the greatest nation in the history of the world means there’s something we’re not being taught: critical thinking. While there is much to love and appreciate about our country, we arrived at our place in the world by a history of utter atrocities against humanity– some of which we are still actively committing, such as killing children with drones and calling it a “bug splat”. However, because of the pairing of nationalism and Christianity and because of our belief that we are the “greatest”, when people question our violent history and present reality it creates too much tension for us to handle. As a result, we attack the person who brings it up in hopes to assuage our own desire to avoid the full truth.
Conservative commentators even have a term for folks who talk about our moral national failings– they call it the “hate America crowd”. This is precisely because thinking critically about our nation goes against our national value of exceptionalism. Such critical thinking risks revealing that we
might have believed a lie, and that our loyalties might be in the wrong place.
Growing up, we’re not often taught the truth about God’s Kingdom.
In America, we’ve often replaced the Kingdom Jesus spoke so often about with our own nation– thinking that God established America, instead of remembering that he came to establish a Kingdom that was “
not of this world“, to quote Jesus. The truth of God’s Kingdom is that it is nearly impossible to live in it if one is still stuck holding onto loyalties to an earthly kingdom.
Jesus calls us to forsake
everything to follow him, and this includes forsaking our loyalties to
anyone but him. When it comes to issues such as sexual ethics, we’re taught that Jesus wants all of us, and that we’re to forsake the ways of our culture in favor of his Kingdom. However, when it comes to nationalism, we’re told that it’s actually good and right to hold onto the values of our culture and that there’s no incompatibility between the two. The actual truth however, is that God’s kingdom is so radically different from anything you will find in this world that it is completely impossible to harmonize the two– something that’s true on sexual ethics but is
also true about nationalistic idolatry.
tl-dr
Deck Knight is guilty of idolatry at the minimum.