Scandinavia and the World

Comments #9489755:


The roof is on fire, eh? 1 6, 6:08am

@TheChief From the fact that there is a stark difference between saying "we should make sure certain liberties are not violated" and "we should only let white, property owning men vote".

It was on the campaign trail in South Carolina.
Feel free to skip to around 3:30 if you don't want to hear him babble about those misleading planed parenthood videos.

*cough*'several of the founding fathers said that the propertied classes should have more sway *cough*. They set it up because they feared the people actually having control of the government and being a threat to their property. Remember, this was shortly after Shay's rebellion, keep in mind what would be in many of these well off elite's heads after such an uprising.

Except the choice has been between to ass holes for decades. People would actually care if the government wasn't so corrupt and it wasn't a choice between bought and paid for politicians 1 and 2.

Jefferson also kept his 400+ slaves and despite wanting to end the practice, also wanted to deport all blacks afterwards.

I meant the U.S. government, you being so literal is just silly.

That's a cute way of wording it, but really they are clearly saying that one economic class aught to rule over the other while the one that is ruled over not even be able to vote, and I'm sure it's just a coincidence that they class they want to hold power is the one they belong to. They feared a threat to their own wealth and influence, and thus decided to politically repress the poor. You are literally defending that act of denying suffering based on economic status.

Why do I dislike the U.S. government? Because it's corrupt and imperialist. Why am I not some wacky patriot? Because patriotism is dangerous and makes you do things like defend political repression of the poor ;)

I guess that's why Pinochet needed the help of the U.S. and the military to overthrow a democratically elected government rather than win an election. And Why Franco had to crush the republic with military force rather than win an election... But let's just assume might makes right and military victory means popular support. And of course them staying in power had everything to do with having popular support and nothing to do with political repression and often help from the U.S. in such repression. You're no better than a rape apologist who claims "oh, if she really didn't want it she would have fought harder".

Or better yet, a U.S. backed military coup is the death of democracy, or a fascistic reaction to progress is the death of democracy.

The existence of flowers doesn't affect the smell of rot.

America wearing England's shirt