gone

@bigdoggproblem said
Everyone did slavery.

That is not true. Republicans did not do slavery. All democrats.

Republicans were mostly, disgruntled Whigs, who formed their own party
because they felt the Whigs, who were abolitionist, were not aggressive
enough in that regard. So naturally, you would join the party who has as their
#1 plank, abolition, only if you agreed on at least that one point.

Just prior to the civil war, all slaves were owned by Democrats.

@earl-of-trumps said
That is not true. Republicans did not do slavery. All democrats.

Republicans were mostly, disgruntled Whigs, who formed their own party
because they felt the Whigs, who were abolitionist, were not aggressive
enough in that regard. So naturally, you would join the party who has as their
#1 plank, abolition, only if you agreed on at least that one point.

Just prior to the civil war, all slaves were owned by Democrats.

That's highly doubtful; do you any evidence supporting such a claim?

At any rate, this entire premise is ludicrous; you, me and everybody else knows that Southern Democrats bolted the party after the civil rights laws were passed in the 1960s and that those adhering to that philosophy are now the backbone of the Republican Party. Trump is not making speeches defending Confederate statutes and threatening to veto the defense budget if it includes a provision renaming military bases named after CSA generals to appeal to Democrats, is he?

I have never seen any Democrat defend the CSA or call Abraham Lincoln a "mass murderer" but most right wingers on this site have taken the side of the South in the Civil War.

@earl-of-trumps said
That is not true. Republicans did not do slavery. All democrats.

Republicans were mostly, disgruntled Whigs, who formed their own party
because they felt the Whigs, who were abolitionist, were not aggressive
enough in that regard. So naturally, you would join the party who has as their
#1 plank, abolition, only if you agreed on at least that one point.

Just prior to the civil war, all slaves were owned by Democrats.

Is this to say modern Democrats are answerable for the evils of Democrats of 150 years ago?

D's and R's have been around awhile, and there's no denying that the nature of the two parties has changed radically across the generations. They've completely reversed polarities by now, and I daresay the Democrats of the 1800s would likely "flip" to become Republicans if they were dropped into our own times somehow. Conversely today's Democrats would more likely than not switch to the GOP if a time machine transported them to the 1800s.

The Democratic Party and GOP are old institutions. What matters is who identifies with them today.

@soothfast said
Is this to say modern Democrats are answerable for the evils of Democrats of 150 years ago?

D's and R's have been around awhile, and there's no denying that the nature of the two parties has changed radically across the generations. They've completely reversed polarities by now, and I daresay the Democrats of the 1800s would likely "flip" to become Republicans if they ...[text shortened]... mocratic Party and GOP are old institutions. What matters is who identifies with them today.

I found this interesting description of the Democratic Party at its founding in 1828:

"The Democrats represented a wide range of views but shared a fundamental commitment to the Jeffersonian concept of an agrarian society. They viewed the central government as the enemy of individual liberty. The 1824 "corrupt bargain" had strengthened their suspicion of Washington politics. [...] Jacksonians feared the concentration of economic and political power. They believed that government intervention in the economy benefited special-interest groups and created corporate monopolies that favored the rich. They sought to restore the independence of the individual – the artisan and the ordinary farmer – by ending federal support of banks and corporations and restricting the use of paper currency, which they distrusted. Their definition of the proper role of government tended to be negative, and Jackson's political power was largely expressed in negative acts. He exercised the veto more than all previous presidents combined. Jackson and his supporters also opposed reform as a movement. Reformers eager to turn their programs into legislation called for a more active government. But Democrats tended to oppose programs like educational reform and the establishment of a public education system....Nor did Jackson share reformers' humanitarian concerns. He had no sympathy for American Indians, initiating the removal of the Cherokees along the Trail of Tears.[8]

The party was weakest in New England, but strong everywhere else and won most national elections thanks to strength in New York, Pennsylvania, Virginia (by far the most populous states at the time) and the American frontier. Democrats opposed elites and aristocrats, the Bank of the United States and the whiggish modernizing programs that would build up industry at the expense of the yeoman or independent small farmer.[9]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_United_States_Democratic_Party

Most of those ideas would fix comfortably within traditional 20th Century conservatism except that the concept that government is almost always the servant of the elites is a leftist, populist one.

@no1marauder said
That's highly doubtful; do you any evidence supporting such a claim?

At any rate, this entire premise is ludicrous; you, me and everybody else knows that Southern Democrats bolted the party after the civil rights laws were passed in the 1960s and that those adhering to that philosophy are now the backbone of the Republican Party. Trump is not making speeches defending ...[text shortened]... ass murderer" but most right wingers on this site have taken the side of the South in the Civil War.

That's doubtful?? wow. evience.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/07/11/politifact_rates_elder_false_on_democrats_and_slavery_but_elder_was_right_140756.html

In a recent appearance on Fox News, I made the following assertions:
-- Republicans did not own slaves. Democrats owned slaves;
-- Democrats founded the KKK;
-- Democrats opposed the 13th Amendment that freed the slaves, Democrats opposed the 14th Amendment that made the newly freed slaves citizens, and Democrats opposed the 15th Amendment that granted
them the right to vote; and
-- As a percentage of their party, more Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than did Democrats.

and your Southern Democrats bolted the party after the civil rights laws were passed in the 1960s and that those adhering to that philosophy are now the backbone of the Republican Party.

LOL please. Backbone, all right. The backbone was in the North. Republicans were hated down south

@Soothfast Is this to say modern Democrats are answerable for the evils of Democrats of 150 years ago?

Yes. If people whose roots were in Europe when slavery raged in the US are now told that they are responsible for slavery because their skin is white, then hell, yes.

@earl-of-trumps said
That's doubtful?? wow. evience.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/07/11/politifact_rates_elder_false_on_democrats_and_slavery_but_elder_was_right_140756.html

[quote]In a recent appearance on Fox News, I made the following assertions:
-- Republicans did not own slaves. Democrats owned slaves;
-- Democrats founded the KKK;
-- Democrats opposed the 13 ...[text shortened]...
LOL please. Backbone, all right. The backbone was in the North. Republicans were hated down south

What about the "are now" did you miss?

I'm starting to think you are pretty deliberately dishonest in refusing to deal with points that refute your ideas.

Abraham Lincoln is reviled by right wingers these days.

@earl-of-trumps said
That is not true. Republicans did not do slavery. All democrats.

Such sweeping statements have an infinitesimal chance of being true.

All I would need to do to refute it is show that at least one Republican owned a slave.

@no1marauder said
What about the "are now" did you miss?

I'm starting to think you are pretty deliberately dishonest in refusing to deal with points that refute your ideas.

Abraham Lincoln is reviled by right wingers these days.

You can't change history. And you can see how democrats have made racism
mainstreamed and in our laws. racial discrimination in entry to schools?
what is this??? It's racism. Who institutes these ideas? Democrats.

I had no idea that Republicans now revile Lincoln. Never heard of such a thing.
Democrats hate him, too. Strange that. But I'll take your word for it, since I don't
really care. The cancel culture can so what it wants.

Still waiting for them to cancel the donkey as the symbol of the Democratic Party

suuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.

@bigdoggproblem said
Such sweeping statements have an infinitesimal chance of being true.

All I would need to do to refute it is show that at least one Republican owned a slave.

It is true.

Just prior to the civil war, all slaves were owned by Democrats.

The leftists tried so hard to find an exception. They think they have one in
Ulysses Grant. Truth is, his wife inherited one slave and the Grants set him
free. Grant was a poor man and could have sold the slave for $700, a lot of
money in those days. So in my world, that example does not really work.

If one thinks that example works then one slave was owned by a Republican for
just a short while, then freed. The rest of the slaves were owned by Democrats.

You have to understand, BigDog, the major plank in the Republican party, the
cause that created the party, was abolition. If you jumped from the Whig party,
the Democratic Party, or the Free Soliers, it was to get on the abolition bandwagon.

Not really a surprise to see such results.

@earl-of-trumps said
You can't change history. And you can see how democrats have made racism
mainstreamed and in our laws. racial discrimination in entry to schools?
what is this??? It's racism. Who institutes these ideas? Democrats.

I had no idea that Republicans now revile Lincoln. Never heard of such a thing.
Democrats hate him, too. Strange that. But I'll take your word for it ...[text shortened]... r them to cancel the donkey as the symbol of the Democratic Party

suuuuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrre.

Your ravings are just that.

Right wingers hate the idea that pervasive racial discrimination in the US might actually be remedied by taking it into account. They know that the systemic nature of racism in the US favors whites over blacks and they'll do almost anything to preserve that.

And it doesn't have anything to do with what one or more political said or did 150 or so years ago. YOU and others like you are the impediment to racial equality NOW as you continue to support institutions that practice racism and bitterly resist reforms that would lessen the damage it inflicts.

@earl-of-trumps said
It is true.

Just prior to the civil war, all slaves were owned by Democrats.

The leftists tried so hard to find an exception. They think they have one in
Ulysses Grant. Truth is, his wife inherited one slave and the Grants set him
free. Grant was a poor man and could have sold the slave for $700, a lot of
money in those days. So in my world, that example doe ...[text shortened]... ree Soliers, it was to get on the abolition bandwagon.

Not really a surprise to see such results.

It is a ridiculous assertion that ALL slaves were owned by Democrats before the Civil War. AT least 10 prominent Republican officeholders did. https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/jun/27/fact-checking-larry-elders-reparations-chatter-fox/

More to the point, the Republicans in 1860 did not support abolition:

"4. That the maintenance inviolate of the rights of the states, and especially the right of each state to order and control its own domestic institutions according to its own judgment exclusively, is essential to that balance of powers on which the perfection and endurance of our political fabric depends; "

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/republican-party-platform-1860

@no1marauder said
Your ravings are just that.

Right wingers hate the idea that pervasive racial discrimination in the US might actually be remedied by taking it into account. They know that the systemic nature of racism in the US favors whites over blacks and they'll do almost anything to preserve that.

And it doesn't have anything to do with what one or more political said or did 15 ...[text shortened]... titutions that practice racism and bitterly resist reforms that would lessen the damage it inflicts.

Would you favor a school entrance program, SAT scores - everything, done with
no name or photo or land of birth of the applicant known?

Just give every applicant form for entry a number. How's that?

@earl-of-trumps said
Would you favor a school entrance program, SAT scores - everything, done with
no name or photo or land of birth of the applicant known?

Just give every applicant form for entry a number. How's that?

No.

That does not take into account the disadvantages that minorities incur in the educational system and outside of it.

@no1marauder - "No."

r-word.