9 Dead in SC Church Shooting - Hate Crime Confirmed.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Read my post and your linked article again. The Confederate battle flag is flying at a war memorial, in a historical / educational context. Not offensive.

So it's okay to fly the flags that symbolize the cause of treasonous slavers so long as it's to honor their sacrificies in traitorous battle against their countrymen. Got it.

Yes, essentially.

[West Aurelia]

So it's okay to fly the flags that symbolize the cause of treasonous slavers so long as it's to honor their sacrificies in traitorous battle against their countrymen. Got it.

I'd be surprised if there are Revolutionary War memorials in the UK.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

So it's okay to fly the flags that symbolize the cause of treasonous slavers so long as it's to honor their sacrificies in traitorous battle against their countrymen. Got it.

Yes, essentially.

Right. Not a war fought so that people could continue owning other people. Cute, though, and I'm sure that it's quiiiiiiite original to anyone who hasn't been around here for more than two months or so.

[Todeslager]

I'd be surprised if there are Revolutionary War memorials in the UK.

No Revolutionary War battles were fought on British soil (pun intended). At least they didn't burn the writings of Sir Edmund Burke, and now laugh about King George III's conversations with trees.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Yes, essentially.

Right. Not a war fought so that people could continue owning other people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart]

Cute, though, and I'm sure that it's quiiiiiiite original to anyone who hasn't been around here for more than two months or so.

Not my fault 'treasonous slavers' is applicable to Confederates and Patriots of the United States itself when it fought to come into being. Nor that there's rather widely accepted realization that war deaths of even morally culpable or guilty parties can be remembered under their own flag.

[Todeslager]

Yes, essentially.

Right. Not a war fought so that people could continue owning other people. Cute, though, and I'm sure that it's quiiiiiiite original to anyone who hasn't been around here for more than two months or so.

The 1787 US Constitution didn't outlaw slavery outright, but did ban the importation of slaves, placed a significant tax upon moving a slave across state lines, and banned slavers from adding 60% of their enslaved populations to their apportionments of representation in the branch of Congress that is empowered to alter tax laws. Slavery was intended to die of economic infeasibility by extreme taxation and tariff, and remained mostly solvent due to trade of cotton with European powers pre-Industrial Revolution. British exploitation of cheap / chattel labor in America perpetuated slavery just as much as America does now with China's vast supplies of disposable television sets.

And admit it, you own a Chinese TV set.

[Yumyumsuppertime]

Right. Not a war fought so that people could continue owning other people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart]

Cute, though, and I'm sure that it's quiiiiiiite original to anyone who hasn't been around here for more than two months or so.

Not my fault 'treasonous slavers' is applicable to Confederates and Patriots of the United States itself when it fought to come into being. Nor that there's rather widely accepted realization that war deaths of even morally culpable or guilty parties can be remembered under their own flag.

I've seen that. It's been used in other arguments on this very forum. Show me the place in the Federalist Papers or the Declaration of Independence (or, for that matter, any other founding document) where it was mentioned as a factor in the reasons for rebellion, and I'll grant the point. Just do it in another thread so that we don't further derail this one.

EDIT: Also? Difference between "Traitors who were also slavers", and "People who were traitors so that they could continue to be slavers."

[Todeslager]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somerset_v_Stewart]

Not my fault 'treasonous slavers' is applicable to Confederates and Patriots of the United States itself when it fought to come into being. Nor that there's rather widely accepted realization that war deaths of even morally culpable or guilty parties can be remembered under their own flag.

I've seen that. It's been used in other arguments on this very forum. Show me the place in the Federalist Papers or the Declaration of Independence (or, for that matter, any other founding document) where it was mentioned as a factor in the reasons for rebellion, and I'll grant the point. Just do it in another thread so that we don't further derail this one.

EDIT: Also? Difference between "Traitors who were also slavers", and "People who were traitors so that they could continue to be slavers."

The American Revolution was essentially slaver vs. slaver, as Britain didn't abolish slavery until 1833.

The CSA was essentially a tax revolt and attempt to end around the ban on slave importation. Jefferson Davis, as a US Senator, campaigned for going to war with Cuba and Mexico to create more slave states to bring about more slave state representation in Congress to change said tax laws.

Jefferson Davis never saw combat, and most CSA soldiers were conscripts that never owned a slave or took a contract to replace a slaveholder that got drafted. All of them, North and South, are Americans, and as ugly as slavery is, firing artillery at Irish immigrants protesting a draft, raping civilians and burning down entire cities are equally if not more repulsive. We remember the fallen not to glorify their causes, but because they are our forbears.

Tearing down a Confederate battle flag on a Civil War Memorial is not going to sate you. You want the whole fucking war memorial torn down.

To which I can only reply, why not take all your pretentious and petty bullshit off Cherokee land?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

I've seen that. It's been used in other arguments on this very forum. Show me the place in the Federalist Papers or the Declaration of Independence (or, for that matter, any other founding document) where it was mentioned as a factor in the reasons for rebellion, and I'll grant the point. Just do it in another thread so that we don't further derail this one.

EDIT: Also? Difference between "Traitors who were also slavers", and "People who were traitors so that they could continue to be slavers."

The American Revolution was essentially slaver vs. slaver, as Britain didn't abolish slavery until 1833.

The CSA was essentially a tax revolt and attempt to end around the ban on slave importation. Jefferson Davis, as a US Senator, campaigned for going to war with Cuba and Mexico to create more slave states to bring about more slave state representation in Congress to change said tax laws.

Jefferson Davis never saw combat, and most CSA soldiers were conscripts that never owned a slave or took a contract to replace a slaveholder that got drafted. All of them, North and South, are Americans, and as ugly as slavery is, raping civilians and burning down entire cities are equally repulsive. We remember the fallen not to glorify their causes, but because they are our forbears.

Tearing down a Confederate battle flag on a Civil War Memorial is not going to sate you. You want the whole fucking war memorial torn down.

To which I can only reply, why not take all your pretentious and petty bullshit off Cherokee land?

To which I respond: if you're going to resort to stating what my intentions really are without evidence, then there's little point in continuing a dispute that was already off-topic to begin with.

And if you want to dispute the causes of the Civil War, I say again, start a goddamned thread on the matter.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I've seen that. It's been used in other arguments on this very forum. Show me the place in the Federalist Papers or the Declaration of Independence (or, for that matter, any other founding document) where it was mentioned as a factor in the reasons for rebellion, and I'll grant the point. Just do it in another thread so that we don't further derail this one.

EDIT: Also? Difference between "Traitors who were also slavers", and "People who were traitors so that they could continue to be slavers."

The American Revolution was essentially slaver vs. slaver, as Britain didn't abolish slavery until 1833.

The CSA was essentially a tax revolt and attempt to end around the ban on slave importation. Jefferson Davis, as a US Senator, campaigned for going to war with Cuba and Mexico to create more slave states to bring about more slave state representation in Congress to change said tax laws.

Jefferson Davis never saw combat, and most CSA soldiers were conscripts that never owned a slave or took a contract to replace a slaveholder that got drafted. All of them, North and South, are Americans, and as ugly as slavery is, raping civilians and burning down entire cities are equally repulsive. We remember the fallen not to glorify their causes, but because they are our forbears.

Tearing down a Confederate battle flag on a Civil War Memorial is not going to sate you. You want the whole fucking war memorial torn down.

To which I can only reply, why not take all your pretentious and petty bullshit off Cherokee land?

Nobody would've gotten raped or burned on either side if the Confederates hadn't been so very desperate to defend their peculiar institution.

[West Aurelia]

Life imprisonment will ensure he has no access to the public and would cost less than the death penalty. And death isn't anything to experience. There is no experience. Death is the end of experience. I doubt lethal injection is a hellish way to go, either.

The death penalty is more expensive than keeping someone in prison for life.

Last I checked, sodium thiopental wasn't delivered in platinum capsules. Care to source these claims?

Life imprisonment is no guarantee, and he's still using up space.

Lethal injection kills by suffocating the person to death. There's still going to be some reception of pain, and it isn't quick like a bullet to the head, either.

What would keeping him alive accomplish? If he's not going to be doing anything other than sitting in a jail cell all day, then he might as well be dead - at least he isn't draining money from the government in the latter.

The only legitimate use of force is to eliminate a threat. A person locked up in prison is no longer a threat.

[Todeslager]

The American Revolution was essentially slaver vs. slaver, as Britain didn't abolish slavery until 1833.

The CSA was essentially a tax revolt and attempt to end around the ban on slave importation. Jefferson Davis, as a US Senator, campaigned for going to war with Cuba and Mexico to create more slave states to bring about more slave state representation in Congress to change said tax laws.

Jefferson Davis never saw combat, and most CSA soldiers were conscripts that never owned a slave or took a contract to replace a slaveholder that got drafted. All of them, North and South, are Americans, and as ugly as slavery is, raping civilians and burning down entire cities are equally repulsive. We remember the fallen not to glorify their causes, but because they are our forbears.

Tearing down a Confederate battle flag on a Civil War Memorial is not going to sate you. You want the whole fucking war memorial torn down.

To which I can only reply, why not take all your pretentious and petty bullshit off Cherokee land?

To which I respond: if you're going to resort to stating what my intentions really are without evidence, then there's little point in continuing a dispute that was already off-topic to begin with.

Your holier-than-thou intentions were clear each time you have used your slave labor manufactured telecommunications device to demonize a state government for memorializing their ancestral war dead in a museum / monument under the flag they fought behind, for a cause you faux-disagree with.

And if you want to dispute the causes of the Civil War, I say again, start a goddamned thread on the matter.

I don't dispute the causes of the Civil War. I have simply fleshed out the context it occurred in. Slavers were chomping at the bit at finding a way to make their institution profitable in a heavily taxed, negative financial environment designed to end their enterprise, by expanding said enterprise into newly acquired federal territories. See Lincoln's speech on the Constitutional intent to end slavery by making it unprofitable that he delivered at Coopers Union. We are not in disagreement on the cause of the Civil War, I merely chose to expound upon the historical and legal whys of it.

[Todeslager]

The American Revolution was essentially slaver vs. slaver, as Britain didn't abolish slavery until 1833.

The CSA was essentially a tax revolt and attempt to end around the ban on slave importation. Jefferson Davis, as a US Senator, campaigned for going to war with Cuba and Mexico to create more slave states to bring about more slave state representation in Congress to change said tax laws.

Jefferson Davis never saw combat, and most CSA soldiers were conscripts that never owned a slave or took a contract to replace a slaveholder that got drafted. All of them, North and South, are Americans, and as ugly as slavery is, raping civilians and burning down entire cities are equally repulsive. We remember the fallen not to glorify their causes, but because they are our forbears.

Tearing down a Confederate battle flag on a Civil War Memorial is not going to sate you. You want the whole fucking war memorial torn down.

To which I can only reply, why not take all your pretentious and petty bullshit off Cherokee land?

Nobody would've gotten raped or burned on either side if the Confederates hadn't been so very desperate to defend their peculiar institution.

And the Ottoman Empire may never have come about if the Celts stayed in Asia Minor

We're way off topic, huh?

[Imperializt Russia]

So they're explicitly racist, then. I thought these were just typical neoconfederates with implicitly racist views.
Crime exists when I kill the Anglo-Normans.

Of course I would retaliate, I would simply be defending my own interests. I never once said my interests were right, nor do I acknowledge that any other interest or belief is right. I have simply chosen to be nationalistic to my ethnic background. If my ethnic background were to be eliminated, I wouldn't care because obviously I would also be dead, but say I survived. It's just a bunch of human deaths. Insignificant.

Functionally incorrect, because mass killings have wide-reaching impacts that are economic, political, strategic and yes, emotional.

[HMS Vanguard]

Functionally incorrect, because mass killings have wide-reaching impacts that are economic, political, strategic and yes, emotional.

Political, yes.
Emotional, of course, hence political.
Economic... I guess if you're in big data pricing ad placement on TV channels.
But strategic? I am lost with that one.

[HMS Vanguard]

Right. Not a war fought so that people could continue owning other people. Cute, though, and I'm sure that it's quiiiiiiite original to anyone who hasn't been around here for more than two months or so.

The 1787 US Constitution didn't outlaw slavery outright, but did ban the importation of slaves, placed a significant tax upon moving a slave across state lines, and banned slavers from adding 60% of their enslaved populations to their apportionments of representation in the branch of Congress that is empowered to alter tax laws. Slavery was intended to die of economic infeasibility by extreme taxation and tariff, and remained mostly solvent due to trade of cotton with European powers pre-Industrial Revolution.

That's what the Confederates believed, yet the actual response of the European powers to the Union blockade was indifference and free labour in Egypt and India took up the slack. Britain had been using its political power and influence to abolish slavery worldwide since at least the Congress of Vienna.

British exploitation of cheap / chattel labor in America perpetuated slavery just as much as America does now with China's vast supplies of disposable television sets.

And admit it, you own a Chinese TV set.

Chinese people aren't (in this sense) slaves. Their low incomes - getting not so low - are determined by the free market in labour, just like yours.

[Imperializt Russia]

It's unlikely that they would throw out a white person who wanted to pray with them.

Unlikely? They didn't. They let Roof join their bible study group, he was there for about an hour before he shot them. And afterwards, the family members of some of the victims forgave him, which just boggles my atheist mind. Anyone shoots my family members, they're not getting forgiven.

I assume this is part of the "don't give him the race war he wants" thing, and also Christianity's thing for forgiveness.
I would greatly prefer this to "fucking whites" and black vigilantes going and killing Roof's family members in retaliation.

[Imperializt Russia]

Functionally incorrect, because mass killings have wide-reaching impacts that are economic, political, strategic and yes, emotional.

Political, yes.
Emotional, of course, hence political.
Economic... I guess if you're in big data pricing ad placement on TV channels.
But strategic? I am lost with that one.

The economy is damaged from the loss of hundreds, thousands or millions of participants, particularly if through some violent event like a race war.
This concept is new to you?

"Strategic" here is really the sum effect of each, plus external factors that came alongside.

[Imperializt Russia]

As someone with a mental illness ...

Mental illness gets trotted out a lot to explain away the actions of murderers, and it's not correct to do so. Mentally ill people are more likely to be the victims of violence than perpetrators of it - they commit crimes and violence at the same rate as the rest of the population. Having a mental illness doesn't make one violent (and it doesn't serve as exculpation if you are).

The reason people are eager to label murderers as mentally ill is because if they're mentally ill, well, obviously they don't think like us. Nobody like us would ever do such a thing, there must be something wrong with someone like that! It's something like the "no true Scotsman" fallacy; no sane person would shoot up a church!

In reality, evil isn't extraordinary, and doesn't require a brain any different from the norm. We've known about the banality of evil since the Nuremburg trials; the fact that ordinary, rational people can commit atrocities shouldn't be news to anyone. Roof - or Breivik, or whoever - aren't mentally ill; they're just wrong, and have followed their wrong thinking to its logical conclusions.

They could be mentally ill.

Apart from the fact that they aren't.

[Ardoki]

Yeah. A bunch of assassinations against leaders is comparable to the Holocaust.

And a thousand nationalists were killed. You think that is comparable to 11 million deaths.

I am pretty sure that 2nd link is not assassination upon leader. Besides you have problems with mathematics, no offence to you:

100 000 000 > 6 000 000.

Not to mention that Hitler himself was as socialist as USSR. He fulfils as many of the ten planks as Stalin did.

Not to mention that swastika was originally socialist symbol:

.... Soviets using nazi symbol....

... and Nazis using communist symbol!

Can you please provide evidence to prove their authenticity.

Because I looked at them really closely with an image editor, and you can clearly see they are fakes. Even someone with just a cursory knowledge of historic symbolism, knows they cannot possible be correct.

EDIT:

The first one is obviously a fake. If it were truly Soviet it would say 'CCCP' (Союз Советских Социалистических Республик). Instead it has 'PCCP' written on it, which proves it has nothing to do with the Soviet Union. I'm not sure if you were trying to mislead me, as it is obviously fake.

The second one does nothing to prove the Nazis were Socialist. Have you ever heard of a Socialist who privatises state-owned corporations?

[HMS Vanguard]

I am pretty sure that 2nd link is not assassination upon leader. Besides you have problems with mathematics, no offence to you:

100 000 000 > 6 000 000.

Not to mention that Hitler himself was as socialist as USSR. He fulfils as many of the ten planks as Stalin did.

Not to mention that swastika was originally socialist symbol:

.... Soviets using nazi symbol....

... and Nazis using communist symbol!

Can you please provide evidence to prove their authenticity.

Because I looked at them really closely with an image editor, and you can clearly see they are fakes. Even someone with just a cursory knowledge of historic symbolism, knows they cannot possible be correct.

EDIT:

The first one is obviously a fake. If it were truly Soviet it would say 'CCCP' (Союз Советских Социалистических Республик). Instead it has 'PCCP' written on it, which proves it has nothing to do with the Soviet Union. I'm not sure if you were trying to mislead me, as it is obviously fake.

The second one does nothing to prove the Nazis were Socialist. Have you ever heard of a Socialist who privatises state-owned corporations?

Do you have any opinions on this image:



"Marxism is the guardian angel of capitalism - Vote National Socialist List 1"

[Ardoki]

Can you please provide evidence to prove their authenticity.

Because I looked at them really closely with an image editor, and you can clearly see they are fakes. Even someone with just a cursory knowledge of historic symbolism, knows they cannot possible be correct.

EDIT:

The first one is obviously a fake. If it were truly Soviet it would say 'CCCP' (Союз Советских Социалистических Республик). Instead it has 'PCCP' written on it, which proves it has nothing to do with the Soviet Union. I'm not sure if you were trying to mislead me, as it is obviously fake.

The second one does nothing to prove the Nazis were Socialist. Have you ever heard of a Socialist who privatises state-owned corporations?

Do you have any opinions on this image:



"Marxism is the guardian angel of capitalism - Vote National Socialist List 1"

It is proof of the Nazis hate for Marxism.

[Imperializt Russia]

Can you please provide evidence to prove their authenticity.

Because I looked at them really closely with an image editor, and you can clearly see they are fakes. Even someone with just a cursory knowledge of historic symbolism, knows they cannot possible be correct.

EDIT:

The first one is obviously a fake. If it were truly Soviet it would say 'CCCP' (Союз Советских Социалистических Республик). Instead it has 'PCCP' written on it, which proves it has nothing to do with the Soviet Union. I'm not sure if you were trying to mislead me, as it is obviously fake.

The second one does nothing to prove the Nazis were Socialist. Have you ever heard of a Socialist who privatises state-owned corporations?

Do you have any opinions on this image:



"Marxism is the guardian angel of capitalism - Vote National Socialist List 1"

This new thing called propaganda?
Hitler and many high-ranking Nazis hated communists and communism. They threw van der Luube under the bus to pin the Reichstag burning on him, interred thousands of communists in concentration camps and later death camps, and launched a war of annihilation against the slavs and communists in the east.

[HMS Vanguard]

It is proof of the Nazis hate for Marxism.

Do you consider their somewhat unique reasons for doing so remotely interesting?

[Ardoki]

It is proof of the Nazis hate for Marxism.

Do you consider their somewhat unique reasons for doing so remotely interesting?

The Nazis privatised many formerly state-owned enterprises.

They were heavy supporters of capitalism, despite what their propaganda said (which you seem to have a keen interest in).