Current Events > The foundation of Donald Trumps presidency is the negation of Barack Obamas

(+) Yeah! (+)

Zeus posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

His political career began in advocacy of birtherism,

Except it actually goes back way further than that, so even that's objectively wrong.

FrisbeeDude posted...

A long, but very worthwhile read for those of the non troll persuasion

Why would non-trolls want to read trolling? Makes no sense.

Because they're all about identity politics while saying they're against identity politics.

And of course we get people eating it up. The article itself showed that the margin of support diminished as the mean income went up. Trump got less support from the rich white people who rule this country than from any other bracket. Yet somehow that supports their case because logic has no place here.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The left would rather talk about class than race. What a blatant fucking lie. Neither side cares about class more than race.

You'd have known this if you actually bothered to read the article.

You mean the article that says the left would rather talk about class?

So I needed to read the article (which I did) to find out that while they said the left would rather discuss class than race they really meant the opposite?

Well at least you admitted the article itself was bullshit.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

Zeus posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

His political career began in advocacy of birtherism,

Except it actually goes back way further than that, so even that's objectively wrong.

FrisbeeDude posted...

A long, but very worthwhile read for those of the non troll persuasion

Why would non-trolls want to read trolling? Makes no sense.

Because they're all about identity politics while saying they're against identity politics.

And of course we get people eating it up. The article itself showed that the margin of support diminished as the mean income went up. Trump got less support from the rich white people who rule this country than from any other bracket. Yet somehow that supports their case because logic has no place here.

Because those whites are still a majority.
---

A Novel Idea posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A Novel Idea posted...

So many typically-white conservatives and liberals are anti-"identity politics" and Coates just rakes them over the coals here. It's great.

its hilarious you think this is exclusive to whites.

Pathetically sad to be so far removed from reality that you think any conservative or liberal is playing anything but identity politics at this point.

"Typically white?" Did you read that part? I'm talking about the tendency of (typically-white) intellectuals from both camps, including folks like Bernie Sanders and Mark Lilla (both of whom get dragged sufficiently), to use the bludgeon of "identity politics" to shut down any mention of race in these discussions, particularly how white people--themselves included--tend to benefit disproportionately from policy and public sentiment. The discussion about the opiod epidemic in the essay is a great example of that.

Oh, if you're taking exclusively the politicians and not the supporters I agree mostly.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The left would rather talk about class than race. What a blatant fucking lie. Neither side cares about class more than race.

You'd have known this if you actually bothered to read the article.

You mean the article that says the left would rather talk about class?

So I needed to read the article (which I did) to find out that while they said the left would rather discuss class than race they really meant the opposite?

Well at least you admitted the article itself was bullshit.

He dissects the claim from the left (that they would rather talk about race) and dismantles using examples from the very same people being misleading. Like, do you even know how to read?
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Zeus posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

His political career began in advocacy of birtherism,

Except it actually goes back way further than that, so even that's objectively wrong.

FrisbeeDude posted...

A long, but very worthwhile read for those of the non troll persuasion

Why would non-trolls want to read trolling? Makes no sense.

Because they're all about identity politics while saying they're against identity politics.

And of course we get people eating it up. The article itself showed that the margin of support diminished as the mean income went up. Trump got less support from the rich white people who rule this country than from any other bracket. Yet somehow that supports their case because logic has no place here.

Because those whites are still a majority.

Lol. Just lol. So you don't wanna fix anything you just wanna complain. Got it.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Such succinct refutations of the articles salient points, and all from people that refuse to actually read it.

This article was written by a person who's only apparent understanding of this last election cycle came from Salon pieces. Get real.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

Zeus posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

His political career began in advocacy of birtherism,

Except it actually goes back way further than that, so even that's objectively wrong.

FrisbeeDude posted...

A long, but very worthwhile read for those of the non troll persuasion

Why would non-trolls want to read trolling? Makes no sense.

Because they're all about identity politics while saying they're against identity politics.

And of course we get people eating it up. The article itself showed that the margin of support diminished as the mean income went up. Trump got less support from the rich white people who rule this country than from any other bracket. Yet somehow that supports their case because logic has no place here.

Because those whites are still a majority.

Lol. Just lol. So you don't wanna fix anything you just wanna complain. Got it.

Do you even know what you're complaining about anymore?
---

that all sounds nice and good in a vacuum

but did those same people all vote against Obama? Did all the white voters who voted Obama into office die or go completely 360 such that they now hated Obama and wanted to vote Trump just because he is white (despite Clinton and Bernie being white)?

the logic just isn't adding up


but this is an interesting line that shows some motivations of the writer:

FrisbeeDude posted...

Moreover, to accept that whiteness brought us Donald Trump is to accept whiteness as an existential danger to the country and the world.

---

Mal_Fet posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Such succinct refutations of the articles salient points, and all from people that refuse to actually read it.

This article was written by a person who's only apparent understanding of this last election cycle came from Salon pieces. Get real.

What a stellar argument from the dude who gleefully enjoys pointing out the fallacious arguments from other people.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The left would rather talk about class than race. What a blatant fucking lie. Neither side cares about class more than race.

You'd have known this if you actually bothered to read the article.

You mean the article that says the left would rather talk about class?

So I needed to read the article (which I did) to find out that while they said the left would rather discuss class than race they really meant the opposite?

Well at least you admitted the article itself was bullshit.

He dissects the claim from the left (that they would rather talk about race) and dismantles using examples from the very same people being misleading. Like, do you even know how to read?

lol actions speak louder than a few choice words selected to prove his point.
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

that all sounds nice and good in a vacuum

but did those same people all vote against Obama? Did all the white voters who voted Obama into office die or go completely 360 such that they now hated Obama and wanted to vote Trump just because he is white (despite Clinton and Bernie being white)?

Read the article broheim.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Such succinct refutations of the articles salient points, and all from people that refuse to actually read it.

Par for the course for the regular lemmings of this board
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The left would rather talk about class than race. What a blatant fucking lie. Neither side cares about class more than race.

You'd have known this if you actually bothered to read the article.

You mean the article that says the left would rather talk about class?

So I needed to read the article (which I did) to find out that while they said the left would rather discuss class than race they really meant the opposite?

Well at least you admitted the article itself was bullshit.

He dissects the claim from the left (that they would rather talk about race) and dismantles using examples from the very same people being misleading. Like, do you even know how to read?

lol actions speak louder than a few choice words selected to prove his point.

He's essentially agreeing with you yet you're still whining. Weird.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The left would rather talk about class than race. What a blatant fucking lie. Neither side cares about class more than race.

You'd have known this if you actually bothered to read the article.

You mean the article that says the left would rather talk about class?

So I needed to read the article (which I did) to find out that while they said the left would rather discuss class than race they really meant the opposite?

Well at least you admitted the article itself was bullshit.

He dissects the claim from the left (that they would rather talk about race) and dismantles using examples from the very same people being misleading. Like, do you even know how to read?

lol actions speak louder than a few choice words selected to prove his point.

He's essentially agreeing with you yet you're still whining. Weird.

Because I don't accept shit just because it agrees with me. I want it backed up sufficiently or expressed accurately.

I'm not a DNC or GOP drone who only cares about their own narrative.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

The left would rather talk about class than race. What a blatant fucking lie. Neither side cares about class more than race.

You'd have known this if you actually bothered to read the article.

You mean the article that says the left would rather talk about class?

So I needed to read the article (which I did) to find out that while they said the left would rather discuss class than race they really meant the opposite?

Well at least you admitted the article itself was bullshit.

He dissects the claim from the left (that they would rather talk about race) and dismantles using examples from the very same people being misleading. Like, do you even know how to read?

lol actions speak louder than a few choice words selected to prove his point.

He's essentially agreeing with you yet you're still whining. Weird.

Because I don't accept shit just because it agrees with me. I want it backed up sufficiently or expressed accurately.

I'm not a DNC or GOP drone who only cares about their own narrative.

Then actually read the article and quit swiping at windmills or looking for contextless snippets to refute.
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

but this is an interesting line that shows some motivations of the writer:

FrisbeeDude posted...

Moreover, to accept that whiteness brought us Donald Trump is to accept whiteness as an existential danger to the country and the world.

No kidding. A race victim with a couple of degrees and decent writing is just a race victim who can use fancy sounding language to mask his disdain for white people.

This article is complete horseshit, and it's no surprise Less Intelligent Shaun King posted it and eats this stuff up.
---

The Admiral posted...

a race victim

what does this mean?
---

darkphoenix181 posted...

The Admiral posted...

a race victim

what does this mean?

It means someone who perpetually feels victimized just because of the color of their skin, and in turn obsesses about race and sees racism in situations where it's non-existent.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Such succinct refutations of the articles salient points, and all from people that refuse to actually read it.

This article was written by a person who's only apparent understanding of this last election cycle came from Salon pieces. Get real.

What a stellar argument from the dude who gleefully enjoys pointing out the fallacious arguments from other people.

Ok let's see here:

It is insufficient to state the obvious of Donald Trump: that he is a white man who would not be president were it not for this fact.

^ Unsubstantiated claim based on no data.

whiteness—that bloody heirloom which cannot ensure mastery of all events but can conjure a tailwind for most of them. Land theft and human plunder cleared the grounds for Trump’s forefathers and barred others from it.

^ No society today has forefathers that didn't engage in conquest and slavery. Not one. Singling out wipeepo for this reeks of victim complex.

His political career began in advocacy of birtherism

^ False. Donny was involved with politicians and politics in general for decades before that.

But long before birtherism, Trump had made his worldview clear. He fought to keep blacks out of his buildings

^ Every major company dealt with discrimination cases, and in the case of Trump, he's clearly not the guy who goes through residency applications. That's what landlords do.

called for the death penalty for the eventually exonerated Central Park Five; and railed against “lazy” black employees. “Black guys counting my money! I hate it,” Trump was once quoted as saying. “The only kind of people I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes every day.”

^ Clearly he called the death penalty for them because they're black, NOT because they were suspected of gangrape. And the "lazy employees" and jews quote is only found in a book written by a disgruntled ex-employee of his, and is corroborated by nobody else besides fake news sources that care more about railing against Trump than reporting accurate news.

Shall I continue?
---

@A_Good_Boy


Why are you encouraging people to not think critically lol. Nothing is stupider than someone encouraging willful ignorance. I did read the article. I read it before my first post.

Sorry I didn't eat it up like you did.
---

Indeed, the panic of white slavery lives on in our politics today. Black workers suffer because it was and is our lot. But when white workers suffer, something in nature has gone awry. And so an opioid epidemic among mostly white people is greeted with calls for compassion and treatment, as all epidemics should be, while a crack epidemic among mostly black people is greeted with scorn and mandatory minimums. Sympathetic op‑ed columns and articles are devoted to the plight of working-class whites when their life expectancy plummets to levels that, for blacks, society has simply accepted as normal. White slavery is sin. ****** slavery is natural. This dynamic serves a very real purpose: the consistent awarding of grievance and moral high ground to that class of workers which, by the bonds of whiteness, stands closest to America’s aristocratic class.
---

This bit is good, and dovetails with an argument I was having on here a week or two ago.

The tightly intertwined stories of the white working class and black Americans go back to the prehistory of the United States—and the use of one as a cudgel to silence the claims of the other goes back nearly as far. Like the black working class, the white working class originated in bondage—the former in the lifelong bondage of slavery, the latter in the temporary bondage of indenture. In the early 17th century, these two classes were remarkably, though not totally, free of racist enmity. But by the 18th century, the country’s master class had begun etching race into law while phasing out indentured servitude in favor of a more enduring labor solution. From these and other changes of law and economy, a bargain emerged: The descendants of indenture would enjoy the full benefits of whiteness, the most definitional benefit being that they would never sink to the level of the slave. But if the bargain protected white workers from slavery, it did not protect them from near-slave wages or backbreaking labor to attain them, and always there lurked a fear of having their benefits revoked.

---

I'm still waiting on who this person is renowned by..
---

Capn Circus posted...

I'm still waiting on who this person is renowned by..

I'm sure he was awarded for this excellent piece demanding reparations for black people:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/06/the-case-for-reparations/361631/
---

Capn Circus posted...

I'm still waiting on who this person is renowned by..

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/29/444221706/journalist-ta-nehisi-coates-among-2015-macarthur-genius-award-winners
---

Y'all actually entertained him? You know what comes next, right?
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

@A_Good_Boy


Why are you encouraging people to not think critically lol. Nothing is stupider than someone encouraging willful ignorance. I did read the article. I read it before my first post.

Sorry I didn't eat it up like you did.

I've never seen anyone characterize the refusal to read an argument, argue against contextless snippets, and whining when people agree with you as "critical thinking" before. That's a new one.
---

Antifar posted...

This bit is good, and dovetails with an argument I was having on here a week or two ago.

The tightly intertwined stories of the white working class and black Americans go back to the prehistory of the United States—and the use of one as a cudgel to silence the claims of the other goes back nearly as far. Like the black working class, the white working class originated in bondage—the former in the lifelong bondage of slavery, the latter in the temporary bondage of indenture. In the early 17th century, these two classes were remarkably, though not totally, free of racist enmity. But by the 18th century, the country’s master class had begun etching race into law while phasing out indentured servitude in favor of a more enduring labor solution. From these and other changes of law and economy, a bargain emerged: The descendants of indenture would enjoy the full benefits of whiteness, the most definitional benefit being that they would never sink to the level of the slave. But if the bargain protected white workers from slavery, it did not protect them from near-slave wages or backbreaking labor to attain them, and always there lurked a fear of having their benefits revoked.

See this is it right here. Systematic racism is ingrained in our society. The problem is we have too much of the vocal minority perpetuating the belief that the majority of the lower or middle class had, and more importantly, still have any impact on it period.

That's the crux of it for me personally. Both sides are being deluded by the perpetrators and go out of the way to rationalize it.

Not you personally, I pretty much like all that you post but for the most part the situation itself is just an oroboros.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

@A_Good_Boy


Why are you encouraging people to not think critically lol. Nothing is stupider than someone encouraging willful ignorance. I did read the article. I read it before my first post.

Sorry I didn't eat it up like you did.

I've never seen anyone characterize the refusal to read an argument, argue against contextless snippets, and whining when people agree with you as "critical thinking" before. That's a new one.

K. I mean, it's all wrong but if that's how you precived it more power to you.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

@A_Good_Boy


Why are you encouraging people to not think critically lol. Nothing is stupider than someone encouraging willful ignorance. I did read the article. I read it before my first post.

Sorry I didn't eat it up like you did.

I've never seen anyone characterize the refusal to read an argument, argue against contextless snippets, and whining when people agree with you as "critical thinking" before. That's a new one.

K. I mean, it's all wrong but if that's how you precived it more power to you.

It's all wrong by way of you refusing to read it? Pretty remarkable that you can argue against something you don't even know about.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

@A_Good_Boy


Why are you encouraging people to not think critically lol. Nothing is stupider than someone encouraging willful ignorance. I did read the article. I read it before my first post.

Sorry I didn't eat it up like you did.

I've never seen anyone characterize the refusal to read an argument, argue against contextless snippets, and whining when people agree with you as "critical thinking" before. That's a new one.

K. I mean, it's all wrong but if that's how you precived it more power to you.

It's all wrong by way of you refusing to read it? Pretty remarkable that you can argue against something you don't even know about.

What did this post do for you? You regurgitated the same delusional bullshit stemming from some absurd belief that anyone who doesn't agree with you must not have read the content.

Do you expect anything actually out of this? do you think anyone on this board cares about the conversation between you and I? I mean, really, what the fuck are you looking to get here dude because I'm not gonna agree with you no matter how many times you pretend it's because I didn't read the article.
---

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

@A_Good_Boy


Why are you encouraging people to not think critically lol. Nothing is stupider than someone encouraging willful ignorance. I did read the article. I read it before my first post.

Sorry I didn't eat it up like you did.

I've never seen anyone characterize the refusal to read an argument, argue against contextless snippets, and whining when people agree with you as "critical thinking" before. That's a new one.

K. I mean, it's all wrong but if that's how you precived it more power to you.

It's all wrong by way of you refusing to read it? Pretty remarkable that you can argue against something you don't even know about.

What did this post do for you? You regurgitated the same delusional bullshit stemming from some absurd belief that anyone who doesn't agree with you must not have read the content.

Do you expect anything actually out of this? do you think anyone on this board cares about the conversation between you and I? I mean, really, what the fuck are you looking to get here dude because I'm not gonna agree with you no matter how many times you pretend it's because I didn't read the article.

I'm not looking for you to agree with anything here (don't know if you've noticed, but I'm not the articles author). What I'd like is for you to actually read the article and base your refutations around its contents instead of launching into a tirade against what you imagine it says, sorta like how you've already demonstrated in this very topic when you decided to attack the left and the articles take on their view of class instead of race. And by read it actually read the article in its entirety. Don't just CTRL+F: "class" and and think you've hit a ringer. You're just being lazy and it's annoying trying to read along with a discussion when one side refuses to read what's being argued about.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

I'm not looking for you to agree with anything here (don't know if you've noticed, but I'm not the articles author). What I'd like is for you to actually read the article and base your refutations around its contents

"Muh racism muh privilege fuck white people"

^ The entire article summed up in one incoherent sentence.

Go ahead. Try to deny it.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

I'm not looking for you to agree with anything here (don't know if you've noticed, but I'm not the articles author). What I'd like is for you to actually read the article and base your refutations around its contents

"Muh racism muh privilege fuck white people"

^ The entire article summed up in one incoherent sentence.

Go ahead. Try to deny it.

Lmao
---

FrisbeeDude posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

I'm not looking for you to agree with anything here (don't know if you've noticed, but I'm not the articles author). What I'd like is for you to actually read the article and base your refutations around its contents

"Muh racism muh privilege fuck white people"

^ The entire article summed up in one incoherent sentence.

Go ahead. Try to deny it.

Lmao

Post #70.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

Zeeak4444 posted...

@A_Good_Boy


Why are you encouraging people to not think critically lol. Nothing is stupider than someone encouraging willful ignorance. I did read the article. I read it before my first post.

Sorry I didn't eat it up like you did.

I've never seen anyone characterize the refusal to read an argument, argue against contextless snippets, and whining when people agree with you as "critical thinking" before. That's a new one.

K. I mean, it's all wrong but if that's how you precived it more power to you.

It's all wrong by way of you refusing to read it? Pretty remarkable that you can argue against something you don't even know about.

What did this post do for you? You regurgitated the same delusional bullshit stemming from some absurd belief that anyone who doesn't agree with you must not have read the content.

Do you expect anything actually out of this? do you think anyone on this board cares about the conversation between you and I? I mean, really, what the fuck are you looking to get here dude because I'm not gonna agree with you no matter how many times you pretend it's because I didn't read the article.

I'm not looking for you to agree with anything here (don't know if you've noticed, but I'm not the articles author). What I'd like is for you to actually read the article and base your refutations around its contents instead of launching into a tirade against what you imagine it says, sorta like how you've already demonstrated in this very topic when you decided to attack the left and the articles take on their view of class instead of race. And by read it actually read the article in its entirety. Don't just CTRL+F: "class" and and think you've hit a ringer. You're just being lazy and it's annoying trying to read along with a discussion when one side refuses to read what's being argued about.

@A_Good_Boy
I think you're taking everything the wrong way. That or I wasn't paying attention and worded things weirdly.

I agree with the premise, I just don't agree with how they got there.

If I didn't make that clear before I hope that gives you more insight.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

FrisbeeDude posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

A_Good_Boy posted...

I'm not looking for you to agree with anything here (don't know if you've noticed, but I'm not the articles author). What I'd like is for you to actually read the article and base your refutations around its contents

"Muh racism muh privilege fuck white people"

^ The entire article summed up in one incoherent sentence.

Go ahead. Try to deny it.

Lmao

Post #70.

---

Lmao
---

Meh. The author messed up Black Panther so...
---

Obama never should have mocked him at that white house dinner. that was what started everything. and ever since, revenge has been on Trump's mind. I wonder if Obama regrets that dinner

Zikten posted...

Obama never should have mocked him at that white house dinner. that was what started everything. and ever since, revenge has been on Trump's mind. I wonder if Obama regrets that dinner

It's hilarious to go back and look in Trump's eyes when Obama mocked him.

You can see the wheels in Trump's head turning and he is thinking "Bitch you will pay for this if it's the last thing I ever do"
---

Zikten posted...

Obama never should have mocked him at that white house dinner. that was what started everything. and ever since, revenge has been on Trump's mind. I wonder if Obama regrets that dinner

The dinner was in 2012

Trump was picking on Obama since 2007
---