Nothing is "unbeliveable " anymore is it?

Author: Stephen

Posts

Total: 73
Topic's author
#1
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,619
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2

A social experiment by Ami Horowitz shows New Yorkers gleefully signing a petition to take down statues of “slave owners” like George Washington, but suddenly becoming reticent when Horowitz mentions the Prophet Muhammad.



“I want to take down all statues of people who owned slaves in this country,” Horowitz told potential signatories, emphasizing how he wanted to remove the statue of George Washington in DC."
All of the people featured in the video gleefully signed the petition to take down statues of “slave owners” like Washington and Jefferson.
However, when it came to another infamous historical slave owner: 


#2
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Stephen
Lol, it was NEVER about slavery.
#3
MisterChris
MisterChris's avatar
Debates: 45
Posts: 2,897
5
10
11
MisterChris's avatar
MisterChris
5
10
11
-->
@Stephen
Yup, it's official, our country is dying
#4
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
1st off, I don't agree taking down statues of washington is necessary. But I thought there were 2 major points that make the comparison between washington and mohommad a poor one. 

1) one of these people is politician, the other is a religious leader. So banning Mohammad is overtly religious act, while taking down statues of washington is just a political one. 

2) Mohommad lived over 1000 years before washington. Virtually all societies used slaves at that time. Slavery was much better understood as an moral problem by the time washington was alive. Not to mention that chattel slavery tended to be much more brutal than the slavery used by many other societies. 
#5
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
I have to agree with HB here. Whatever is left of American culture still clings to the idea of religious freedom, even if the religions are barbaric and have leaders who did terrible things.

But that being said, the BLM movement wasn't overtly concerned about slavery when they promoted the tearing down of statues. BLM wants to fundamentally change America, not just the slavery part. Their manifesto on their website is absolutely chilling to anyone who has read about how Marxist revolutions start and end historically.
#6
Discipulus_Didicit
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Debates: 9
Posts: 5,758
3
4
10
Discipulus_Didicit's avatar
Discipulus_Didicit
3
4
10
They were all against the idea of taking down statues of Muhammad? Must not have included any muslims in the experiment.
Topic's author
#7
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,619
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
 banning Mohammad is overtly religious act, while taking down statues of washington is just a political one. 

religion is an ideology i.e. and idea, and in the case of Islam a very bad one.

Slavery was much better understood as an moral problem by the time washington was alive. Not to mention that chattel slavery tended to be much more brutal than the slavery used by many other societies. 

Your arguments here are simply nonsense. Slavery is slavery no matter who or when. Muhammad / Muslims took white westerners as well as black people as slaves, shall we demolish  all mosques named after Islamic figures?  You just do not want to go so far back that it debunks your  argument. This is not to mention there are countries where slavery still exists China being one of them; should the Chinese embassy in the USA be burned down? 

 The silence from the left is deafening when it is put to them the fact that  black people from one tribe in African would round up black people from other African tribes and sell them to Muslims or anyone who wished to buy them. 








#8
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
Well I worship the state, so if you take down George Washington, that is a religious act against me.

Lil surprised you are against taking down Washington (or “don’t think it is necessary”). Why is that?
#9
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Stephen
The Christian GOD and other similar GOD hypotheses are unbelievable.......But that's not politics....Sorry.


Slavery was and is less so now....And slavery was never exclusive....Though some disingenuous people like to suggest that slavery was an exclusive business relative to one particular moment and place in the past.

Why?....Because there is still profit to me made from it.......Racism is big business.
#10
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@bmdrocks21
Well I worship the state, so if you take down George Washington, that is a religious act against me.
that is completely unamerican. America, along with the rest of the western world, is a secular state. A division of church and state is critically important. 

Lil surprised you are against taking down Washington (or “don’t think it is necessary”). Why is that?
I am a history buff. No one in the history of the world has ever been perfect. Everyone has their flaws. Everyone has done things that are wrong. If we can only have monuments to people who are perfect, there will be no monuments. I think that, as a society, we can have a real conversation about what things we value and what we want to memorialize. 

#11
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Stephen
religion is an ideology i.e. and idea, and in the case of Islam a very bad one.
Islam isn't fundamentally that different from christianity. They are both about blind obedience to an unknowable deity. And if you disobey, you will be gravely punished. 

Your arguments here are simply nonsense. Slavery is slavery no matter who or when. 
no it isn't. There are very different forms of slavery. In some cultures, slaves are highly respected and well treated. For example the Janissaries of the ottoman empire. they were slaves, but they lived good lives and were very prestigious. There is evidence that people tried hard to get their children into the Janissaries because it would give them a better life. 

Europeans, and by extension americans, engaged in "Chattel Slavery". This was the most brutal and dehumanizing form of slavery. Basically, the slaves were believed to either be sub-human, or so "barbaric" that white people were doing them a favor by working them to death. This gave them the "moral" right to abuse, torture and kill their slaves. 

The silence from the left is deafening when it is put to them the fact that  black people from one tribe in African would round up black people from other African tribes and sell them to Muslims or anyone who wished to buy them. 
I don't hear about anyone in america wanting to build monuments to those slavers though. 
#12
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
I will take down neither. That would be probably equivalent to taking down every Mao's statue in China just because he persecuted some ppl.

#13
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Intelligence_06
I will take down neither. That would be probably equivalent to taking down every Mao's statue in China just because he persecuted some ppl.
mao killed millions and millions of his own people. If communism ever falls, it is entirely possible mao statues would come down. 

#14
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 172
Posts: 3,946
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
-->
@HistoryBuff
That is correct. However, tearing George Washington statues apart while the US is technically still intact is a big and unnecessary deal.
#15
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Intelligence_06
That is correct. However, tearing George Washington statues apart while the US is technically still intact is a big and unnecessary deal.
I don't see slave ownership on it's own being cause to tear down his statues. It is possible he did things that are bad enough to warrant that, if so i am not aware of them. But alot of historical figures owned slaves. Alot of historical figures did terrible things. If we set the bar for a monument at "perfect" then we won't have any monuments. 

Topic's author
#16
Stephen
Stephen's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 8,619
3
2
2
Stephen's avatar
Stephen
3
2
2
-->
@HistoryBuff
religion is an ideology i.e. and idea, and in the case of Islam a very bad one.
Islam isn't fundamentally that different from christianity.

Don't be silly. For a start, one is tolerant the other isn't. Have a guess which one isn't?


They are both about blind obedience to an unknowable deity. And if you disobey, you will be gravely punished. 

No, wrong again. One is about blind submission and the other isn't. Have a guess which one isn't?



The silence from the left is deafening when it is put to them the fact that  black people from one tribe in African would round up black people from other African tribes and sell them to Muslims or anyone who wished to buy them. 
I don't hear about anyone in america wanting to build monuments to those slavers though. 

Me neither, but you have ignored the uncomfortable  fact that blacks rounded up other blacks and sold them to the highest bidder. 

#17
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Stephen
Don't be silly. For a start, one is tolerant the other isn't. Have a guess which one isn't?
lol, no. Countless atrocities have been carried out for Christianity. Muslims were usually much more tolerant of other faiths inside their borders. Christians relentlessness attacked, suppressed or expelled religious minorities. 

No, wrong again. One is about blind submission and the other isn't. Have a guess which one isn't?
well since they both are, there is no point in guessing. 

Me neither, but you have ignored the uncomfortable  fact that blacks rounded up other blacks and sold them to the highest bidder. 
i don't understand how I could ignore something that is completely irrelevant. No one is talking about building statues to them, so how could what they did be at all relevant to a conversation about statues?

#18
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
i don't understand how I could ignore something that is completely irrelevant. No one is talking about building statues to them, so how could what they did be at all relevant to a conversation about statues?

Because Mohammed is the leader of a religion that de-Facto still practices slavery today in Africa and ME.

#19
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
Because Mohammed is the leader of a religion that de-Facto still practices slavery today in Africa and ME.
Apparently you don't know this, but Muhammad has been dead for like 1,400 years. He isn't the leader of anything. And that still doesn't explain how actions taken by random people in africa have anything at all to do with a discussion about what we build monuments to. 
#20
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
Founder, my bad.

My point is if this is actually about slavery, then the religion that practices slavery today wouldn't be tolerated.

Marxists don't need additional reasons to hate the founding fathers. Slavery is just a convenient tool in the box.
#21
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
My point is if this is actually about slavery, then the religion that practices slavery today wouldn't be tolerated.
ok, but your point is still irrelevant. You are talking about statues in America. No one is building monuments to the muslim slavers from africa in the US. So they are entirely unrelated to this discussion. 

Marxists don't need additional reasons to hate the founding fathers. Slavery is just a convenient tool in the box.
why do you think that everyone is a marxist? You use that to describe pretty much anyone who isn't right wing. 
#22
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@HistoryBuff
why do you think that everyone is a marxist? You use that to describe pretty much anyone who isn't right wing. 

People who divide the country into tribes, classes, and skin color are Marxists. It's literally what Marxists do, pit one class against another class. If they can tie skin color into class like Biden did saying "poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids" then any Marxist will support race-baiting. It's a convenient Alinsky tool the Marxists can use to seize power.

BLM is a tool for Marxists and is actually founded by, funded by, and run by Marxists. Go read their manifesto on their website. "Economic injustice" is a core Marxist belief.
#23
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,932
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
Truly nothing since Don Trumpet got into office. Crazy is as crazy does and no president is more crazy than D. Trumpet
#24
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ebuc
DonT Rump.

#25
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,932
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
T-Rump-elstiltskin = nothing is truly unbelievable anymore....bad { immoral/corrupt } orange man for sure.


#26
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
People who divide the country into tribes, classes, and skin color are Marxists. It's literally what Marxists do, pit one class against another class.
what? That has nothing to do with marxism. Trump loves to divide people up into tribes, classes and skin color. I guess by your definition trump is a marxist. 

BLM is a tool for Marxists and is actually founded by, funded by, and run by Marxists. Go read their manifesto on their website. "Economic injustice" is a core Marxist belief.
how is "economic injustice" marxist? 
#27
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
Trump loves to divide people up into tribes, classes and skin color.

The only Tribe Trump believes in is the American Tribe. That rankles the globalist Marxists. The only colors Trump supports was formerly green before he lost a Billion dollars being president, and currently, the colors red-white-and-blue together.

If the academic Marxists can tie skin color into class like Biden did saying "poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids" then any Marxist will support race-baiting. It's a convenient Alinsky tool the Marxists can use to seize power.

BLM is a tool for Marxists and is actually founded by, funded by, and run by Marxists. Go read their manifesto on their website. "Economic injustice" is a core Marxist belief.

Go study up on Marxism, specifically the part where the proles seize power from the bourgeoisie.

#28
ebuc
ebuc's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,932
3
2
4
ebuc's avatar
ebuc
3
2
4
D Trumpet only has two classes or trbes of people,

Himself { narcissist self } all others.

Mohamed Ali claimed he was the greatest, and he was.

D Trumpet claims he is the greatest, and all know its his narcissist ego  running the presidential scam.

All also know his narcissistic scam does not work with out support of the ignorant, the immoral and the corrupt.

All know their exists only one tribe on Earth and it is the human tribe and this rankles those with no access to their empathy centers in their brains.






#29
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,003
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@ebuc
DonT Rump.

Every Washington DC politician is narcissistic. Trumpybear just does it better.
#30
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Greyparrot
The only Tribe Trump believes in is the American Tribe.
You can't actually believe that do you? He is constantly trying to divide people. Mexicans are rapists. Protesters are terrorists. Democrats are traitors. etc. It is his bread and butter. 

If the academic Marxists can tie skin color into class like Biden did saying "poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids" then any Marxist will support race-baiting. It's a convenient Alinsky tool the Marxists can use to seize power.
lol do you actually believe that biden is a marxist? He is basically a republican. If biden is a marxist to you, then the entire country is. 

BLM is a tool for Marxists and is actually founded by, funded by, and run by Marxists. Go read their manifesto on their website. "Economic injustice" is a core Marxist belief.
you haven't explained why you think economic justice is marxist. Every country in the history of the world has had issues with economic injustice. The vast, vast majority of them were not marxists. 

Go study up on Marxism, specifically the part where the proles seize power from the bourgeoisie.
ok. the american "proles" rose up and seized power from the british. Are they marxists too? Rising up against injustice does not make you a marxist. It sounds like you don't actually know what marxism is and just use it as a term to attack people who disagree with what you want. So even right wing people like Biden become "marxist".