Posted on 07/22/2019 11:41:23 AM PDT by detective
The Washington Times' Cheryl Chumley found a poll that tells us a lot about why Democrats, the historic party of racism, think the way they do (non-subscription version here):
In what has to be one of the most interesting polls of the day, Rasmussen Reports finds that "one-in-three Democrats think it's racism any time a white politician criticizes a politician of color."
Think what that means.
White politicians can't say a word against black politicians, Hispanic politicians, Asian politicians — any politician with a skin color that deviates from white — without being accused of racism, according to about a third of Democrats.
Without being guilty of being racist, that is.
That's just crazy. That's just speech-stifling, freedom-chilling crazy.
It's also, as Chumley herself notes later in the piece, actually pretty racist.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
What about if you disagree with someone who BELIEVES they are black?
Meanwhile Obama couldnt be racist because he didnt have the power structure to blah blah blah...
We’ve all heard of “peak oil,” which has been taking its time to arrive.
What I want to know, is when we will reach “peak white guilt,” so this sort of political propaganda gets ignored? I, and many on FR, are well past that point, but apparently it hasn’t occurred through more than half of the population. If it had, the Left would stop using it.
Then they must agree with Diamond and Silk and with Black Conservative Patriot. Otherwise by their own definition they’re racist.
Complete, flipping, morons.
Bump
Sub Republican and white for Democrat and black/hisp/asian and imagine the reaction. It would be prima facie evidence of white supremacy, but will this ever be called non-white supremacy? Obviously not.
They would gladly throw in prison anyone who they accuse of being racist.
If we create a society in which African Americans are simply declared to be right about everything, and no one can disagree with them without being called a racist, then we are in trouble.
The Bell Curve is a real thing.
Wake up each day to a new set of rules.
Read Solzhenitsyn. The arrival of collectivism ultimately causes people to stop talking or having eye contact with each other, a systemic loss of trust.
No, it isn’t “curling back on itself”. This is a reversion to tribal morality akin to Shariah law and the Code of Hammurabi.
You have castes/classes based on ethnicity and/or faith. Your standing in court, the moral authority you have and value as a person (if any) depends on your LEVEL.
Liberals imagine that society has white men on top, white women next, and then people stacked like a ladder based on demographic membership. They originally said let’s give blacks and women equal status, which they have.
NOW they say things are still unfair, let’s oppress the current generation and invert what we think was the pyramid three generations ago ... in the name of fairness. And creating a new, tiered moral structure.
You have castes/classes based on ethnicity and/or faith. Your standing in court, the moral authority you have and value as a person (if any) depends on your LEVEL.
Liberals imagine that society has white men on top, white women next, and then people stacked like a ladder based on demographic membership. They originally said let’s give blacks and women equal status, which they have.
NOW they say things are still unfair, let’s oppress the current generation and invert what we think was the pyramid three generations ago ... in the name of fairness. And creating a new, tiered moral structure.
Curling is racist?
“Racism curling in on itself: 32% of Democrats think it’s racist to disagree with anyone who’s black”
What about those blacks who think it’s NOT racist to disagree with someone who’s black? I guess if the left disagrees with THEM then they must consider themselves racist (which would be okay, since guilt is one of their favorite things).
Why do they always write this stuff like it’s supposed to be shocking or a surprise? Normal Americans have understood this “statistic” to be true for quite some time now.
Why is anyone surprised by this?
How many beans make five?
1. You (White) feel you should not openly disagree with a black person because you believe black people are higher up the social ladder than you are and have more privilege so disagreeing with them might cause you loss.
Which translates to the exact reasons a black man in the 1940s might have felt he should not openly disagree with a white man. Racism from the societal top to the bottom.
2. You feel you should not openly disagree with a black person because you feel they are lower on the social ladder than you, but need to be protected, patronized, and glorified. You feel they could lose status or be hurt from an argument with a superior white.
Which translates to pure racism on your part (socially higher than they are), treating them specially because they need special help.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.