I like socialist Helen better!

My great great grandmother, a Republican, supported the League of Nations. That was at the time that the Republican Party was run by the Klan in her state, which I believe she resisted.

@WilyRickWiles Well, now. Let's rewrite some history here. The Klan was an institution created by the Democrat party. That's the first time I have heard of the claim the Republican Party of a State ran the Klan. Not saying it isn't true. I'd have to check the archives. Now it would vastly improve the search if I knew what State that was.

Helen was a sufragette. Her view exposes how far Marx's influence had spread into America by 1913. But socialism was becoming popular in Europe at the time. The Kaiser already had "free" public education and health insurance. She must have felt a little snubbed by Wilson as he was probably of the opinion women were not much more than chattel. Politically they were on the same page.

@FrankZeleniuk They had governors in two states (that I know of). This was the second Klan (of course since it was around Wilson's time).

@FrankZeleniuk
Colorado: [history.denverlibrary.org]
Indiana: [beltmag.com]
And of course Goldwater was friendly to them.
And well, we don't have to get into Trump.

@WilyRickWiles Well, as you know Wilson was a racist. You could outright state your position with impunity at the time. The Klan was not an illegal organization. Good work. You found two Republican Governers in the 1920's, which you might note, was after Wilson's Presidency, that were KKK supporters. Did you find more recent ones? I know there were Robert Byrd, Al Gore senior, and a few others that filibustered the passing of the Civil Rights Act in 1964. But here is a minefield for you: "On final passage, in the U.S. House of Representatives, 136 out of 171 Republicans (80%) voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 while only 153 out of 244 Democrats (only 63%) voted for it. In the U.S. Senate, 27 out of 33 Republicans (82%) voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 while only 46 of 67 Democrats did (69%)."
That means 35 Republican congressmen and 6 Senators voted against the civil rights act. It's gold Wily, gold?
Check it out! Maybe you want to ask yourself why 91 Democrat congressmen and 19 Democrat Senators voted against it. Democrats also voted against Eisenhower's 1957 Civil Rights Bill.

Goldwater was friendly? Does being friendly count? Biden was friendly to Robert Byrd.

Yeah let's not get into Trump. You might find when he bought Maralago he opened the club to Blacks which were previously barred from membership. Or when he gave Jennifer Hudson a hand when her family was decimated by her brother-in-law. Who was not a policeman by the way. And she didn't support his Presidency.

The fact is Wily, if you want to find racism you will have no problem finding real examples. Many historical examples but fewer modern ones. If one is going to resist arrest, pull a weapon or flea the scene of a crime there is a higher chance one might get shot and color isn't really a factor. But looking a person in the eye is not racist. Asking them where they are from is not racist. But I'm sure someone can imagine those things are racist.

Let me ask you this question. Are whites in Black neighborhoods safer than blacks in white neighborhoods? I don't know. I live in Canada. Our government tried to pull that race card crap on us up here. Trouble is there is very little racism up here. The BLM movement had a few rallies but most of that has died down. You can find racism here I am sure but the press and the liberals here couldn't make the accusation of systemic racism stick.

Take off the racist glasses and observe reality. Make sure the racism you see is actual not because you want it to be racist.

Thanks for the dialogue.

@FrankZeleniuk As I always say, slice that vote by region. Ah yes, the votes in favor were Rockefeller Republicans and Northern Democrats.

@FrankZeleniuk Goldwater was the a Republican Presidential candidate. He ran against the Civil Rights Act. He pandered to the KKK. Strom Thurmond, a Dixiecrat, changed parties to support him.

@FrankZeleniuk It was a realignment that Goldwater openly sought and got. That's how we got to where we are today.

@FrankZeleniuk Violence is most often interpersonal and the product of people not having everything they need to survive. Even a police commander will tell you that.

@FrankZeleniuk

@FrankZeleniuk Has it occurred to you how ideologically sick the Republican Party has become if its rallying cry is "blue lives matter"? Do you not see the lineage? You say the past is behind us while still trying to connect Democrats to the KKK. I think if the KKK were prominent today you would argue that they are not really racist just like you do for today's Republicans.

@FrankZeleniuk It's like you have an ideology of forever living in the moment, never able to make any connections except the conviction that status quo power relations are natural.

@WilyRickWiles "Violence is most often interpersonal and the product of people not having everything they need to survive. Even a police commander will tell you that."

And that is not true. But I agree a police commander will probably tell me that. It's just the popular psychological/sociologic theory of the day. Violence is the product of people not having enough to live. That little bit of fluff is a justification, an excuse, to commit crime. We have a welfare state that provides for people that do not have enough to survive. All that does is create a demand for more welfare. It doesn't resolve the problem it serves to exacerbate it. The thing that will resolve it is a deep respect for the concept of the sanctity of person and property, a deep sense of personal honor and integrity.
it is difficult to improve oneself without that. If the honest citizen tries to accumulate some wealth and escape the vicious cycle of poverty. There are any number of factions that will attempt to relieve him of it. Including the government. There are gangs, tax-collectors, drug-pushers, even crooked cops that will take advantage of the disadvantaged. It isn't necessarily the disadvantaged that turn to criminality. The cause of violence in poor communities is not poverty itself.

@FrankZeleniuk So slums are a result of the moral failings of their inhabitants, got it. Have you studied the geography, history, and governance of any slums?

@WilyRickWiles I never said that, "slums are a result of the moral failings of their inhabitants. They are essentially beaten down by drug pushers, gangs, crooked police, and government itself that doesn't protect them. Most of them are honest and would just like to live their lives safely but are overwhelmed by criminality from the people they should be able to trust, government and police, .who are often on the take bribed by drug cartels and gangs to overlook their crimes.

Now in Chicago, on the south side, people are overwhelmed. They are poorly served by the education system and learn early to distrust people. and they are told that whitey hates them so they can't leave. Community activists enrich themselves by maintaining the status quo.

I imagine you have studied a lot about geography, history and governance in slums. Looking and scouring for those little tidbits of where racism exists. You have a purpose to prove racsim and as I said you will find it, come hell or high water. Do you look for any goodness in humanity while you are looking for racism? The Reverend Al Sharpton is surely a good man? He must make you feel that your efforts are well worth it and that's good. Although he too sees through the lens of racism. Systemic, no less. But he just calls for more government to line his pockets. He doesn't appeal to Republicans though he is allied with Democrats.

@FrankZeleniuk Scouring isn't necessary. Opening one's eyes and a map of often all that's needed. Do you blame the Jews for the Holocaust too?

@FrankZeleniuk You rightly criticize the neoliberal Democrats' policies toward slums. Have you considered when the plot was lost?

@FrankZeleniuk Do you have any thoughts that aren't pure theory from the business lobby?

@WilyRickWiles "Do you blame the Jews for the Holocaust too?"
The Holocaust happened to the Jews, it happened to captured soldiers, it happened to useless eaters. It happened to Poles. Is responsibility about assigning blame? The war itself should not have happened. There is a similarity to our discussion in that there was racism involved. Hitler spent the 1920's fighting communists in German cities. Most Jews in Germany were communists at the time. Marx and Engels were Jews. Communism to him was a Jewish conspiracy. Science bolstered Hitler's position through Eugenics. Jews lost German citizenshiip from 1935 to 1945. Science backed Hitler and claimed the Aryan Race superior. So you have a relegation of a class of people to being just subjects of the State. And further degradation to being sub-human. That makes for war.

See any similarities to the race issue in America? America though, shed itself of the idea based in earlier centuries that Blacks were, and women, I might add, chattel or sub-human. It's a gradual evolving towards a better civilization. Finally, in 1965. the civil rights bill granted full equality under the law for Blacks ended segregation and Jim Crow laws. So the plot was never lost. Systemic racism was purged form its laws. There were still social adjustments to be made and a law doesn't immediately erase or change people's ideas.

Instead of seeing racism everywhere which puts it there solidly you have to change your mind. Laws will continue or strengthen a concept. Therefore no laws should be made regarding race if you want to eliminate race. The laws should be applied equally to individuals only. That will not eliminate racism in some people's minds but it makes any racist act against an individual punishable.

I do approach life through an economics lens if that is what you mean by "pure theory from the business lobby". Marx's economics are devastating to a society with no chance of success much longer than 3 generations or ninety years.

Tell me something though has your approach of acquiring aid from the government permanently changed anyone's life for the better or have you just been applying band-aids wherever you can? I don't see slums disappearing. Is that because Republicans aren't helping or maybe it is because Democrats are helping? Famous quote that drives fear into the hearts of citizens, "We're from the government and we're here to help."

@FrankZeleniuk Like I said, the government has never done much to help when it comes to systemic racism in the US. In Chicago they built railroad tracks and highways and used redlining to pen blacks in. They enabled violence by neighboring white gangs. They barred blacks from public housing except for highrises concentrated in the ghetto which they left to rot and finally tear down with no replacement. They just settled a 50-year housing segregation lawsuit but little change is in sight. Then they closed their schools, hospitals, and mental health clinics. Now the police and developers are working to gentrify the area around the edges as blacks move out. This is how capitalism preys on its own people. White racists still abound in the real estate industry. In fact one was at the coup. She lost her job but was quickly rehired.

When did "aid" from the government work? When it built the suburbs for white people, aside from the racism of course. And of course there are many other examples of successful public sector spending in the US and world.

@WilyRickWiles Chicago? Solidly democrat for a hundred years. A labor union town. Built in a time when racism was real and systemic. We were actually making progress from 1965 to 2008. Then a socialist was elected. Everyone cheered a glass ceiling had been broken. He didn't admit his ideology was based in socialism but he had several moments when he evolved. He was going to "fundamentally transform" America. Now we know what he meant. Trump's election bucked the socialist trend but Obama had endeared himself to the press, Hollywood, social media and the well was poisoned. Identity politics ran rampant. Trump was the target of these identity groups and he is now being utterly decimated along with the Republican party who have engaged in self flagellation and are most apologetic. Apologize to the left and they will swoop down for the kill.

But these identity groups have among them anti-Americans. It is an unholy alliance that will move to the next target. The anti-American groups, that are anathema to individual rights, seem to hold the reins of power right now and America has a few more notches to be driven down and torn apart. With the Republican party out of the way they can move on to the next target that will try and show some muscle. Who's next to purge? Whoever is not on board with globalism. Islam? The LGBT community? A community that is comprised of unlikely allies, if you have read Charles Murray's book "The Madness of Crowds" they have already started to attack one another. BLM is Marxist so they are fine for now. They can contribute much to the socialist anti-American cause. The CCP will be allowed to flood in but they will try and dominate UN international interests.So they are a danger once they decide not to play ball.

Who knows though. it ain't over til the fat lady sings as they say. It's a long shot and I don't think Trump has any allies powerful enough to help him stay in power.

@FrankZeleniuk LOL @ "A socialist was elected." You can put paragraphs together but you're not a serious thinker. Feel free to give an example to support your case of progress anytime.

@WilyRickWiles I do like to forget being serious at times and enjoy being a little humorous.

Is that an insult by the way? A serious thinker would not, in my estimation, have a hammer and sickle for an avatar.