How can Conservatives be racist, if it is they who freed the slaves under Lincoln's presidency? Oh, but it's just the Hispanics, right? Look, I'm not even Conservative, nor am I a mainstream Liberal. As an Independent, I can see where Conservatives come from. Undocumented aliens who flee to this country expect government benefits, a job, free licensees. pampering etc. when they brought nothing to this country in return. If you deny ANYTHING to them, they will pull the race card. If WE went to YOUR country and tried pulling that crap, we'd be imprisoned and/or probably executed. Why should America be the exception? You damn illegals are making the hard-working taxpayer suffer more and more by the day. Unless you have something of wealth or business to bring to this country, then get the HELL out. This goes double if you're bringing deadly diseases over our borders. Go back to your own native country and stand up for your own damn selves, for God's sake. That's what us Americans do. Stop being a bunch of little cowards.
Where did you get that stat from ? Your " How to keep them down on the farm "Democrat Handbook ? Make grown up statements please .
View attachment 29810 8 out 10 ? Just where did you get that intelligent figure from? I'm going to suggest that this site requires at least an elementary education for posting . Come back in 7 years please .
Conservatives didn't free the slaves, lol. Read up on history a little bit. The Republican party of Lincoln has virtually nothing in common with the Republican party today.
That doesn't take away the fact that it was the same political party. There are cronies in both parties; always has been, always will be. Lincoln was a classical Liberal, but also fiscally Conservative, making him still Conservative to some degree, which is not a bad thing. Also, let's not forget to take note that Democrats were opposed to freeing the slaves, yet they're seen today as the "anti-racists"?
During that time period the Republican party was more liberal/Egalitarian and the Democratic party was more conservative/racist. This changed during the 20th century when liberal leaders of the Democratic Party such as Kennedy and Johnson embraced the Civil Rights movement. Republicans became more conservative and developed the Southern strategy. So you are in fact wrong for saying that conservatives freed the slaves. Those Republicans were socially liberal. Republicans today are conservative and many of them are racist.
Interesting that you cite a Republican from prior to the Republican Party becoming the Party of Racism after the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's. As for the statistics I cite they've been around since 2012 when a follow-up study was conducted for a 2008 study that found 72% of Republicans expressed explicit anti-black racial prejudice (i.e. the two studies confirm each other's results). http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2012/10/27/poll-black-prejudice-america/1662067/ There are no contradictory studies that establish the percentages of explicit racial prejudice found by the studies in 2008 and 2012 (cited) are incorrect although both had a margin of error of about 4%. While the percentages were not provided for "libertarians" as a card carrying Libertarian I'm very concerned because, based upon statements made by self-identified "libertarians" reflecting explicit anti-black racial prejudice, I believe that the percentage is above 50%. As I've repeatedly stated this is a problem that must be addressed "within" the political idology so Democrats need to address the 32% in their party, Libertarians need to address (my estimate) the 50% within the Libertarian Party, and Republicans need to address the 79% within the Republican Party. Living in denial of the extensive anti-black racial prejudice within our own political ideology by any of us merely propagates the invidious racial prejudice.
This is absolutely correct an up until the 1960's Republicans were generally social liberals. It was after the civil rights movement of the 1960's that the Democrats and Republicans exchanged hats and the Republicans became the social conservatives and the Democrats became the progressive liberals. We can see that as the Southern states switched from Democrat states to Republican states. The whites in the South didn't change their political beliefs based upon racial prejudice but did change political parties. They became Republicans because JFK and LBJ that lead the civil rights movement (supported by liberal Republicans in Congress) were DEMOCRATS just like they became Democrats because Lincoln was a liberal Republican. We can even establish a relative timeline as to when this was happened based upon the political career of former KKK Grand Wizard David Duke that changed from being a Democrat in the 1970's to becoming a Republican in the 1980's.
All true. This is confusing for people who don't understand America's political history. The parties switched sides. When people say the Republican party is the party of Lincoln it must be understood that the politics of the party was very different back then. The South has always been mostly conservative the parties just haven't always been the same.
And what happened after Lincoln freed the slaves? It went democratic...them after the civil rights bill, it went back to republican
I think conservatives are generally so embarrassed about the division and hatred their hideous ideology is responsible for, that they hope they can pin all of the atrocities of conservatism (slavery, jim crow laws, etc), on liberals, hoping there are enough gullible idiots out there who believe their tripe.
What I find ironic is that Republicans refer to themselves as "conservatives" when, in fact, they are "social-conservatives" and the two are not the same. The pre-civil rights era Democrats of the South (the Dixicrats) were also "social-conservatives" that supported racism and today Republicans are supporting that same racism in their passage of laws. The voter ID laws today are exclusively about blocking the votes of African-Americans and Hispanics where 25% of blacks and 18% of Hispanics don't have government issued ID. Voter impersonation fraud doesn't statistically exists and the voter ID laws only address voter impersonation at the polls. Wiconsin, for example, passed a voter ID law but when challenged in court the Republican administration couldn't provide an example of even one case of voter impersonation happening in Wisconsin. Not a single case of voter fraud is going to be prevented in Wisconsin by the voter ID law but the law immediately strips an estimated 49,000 blacks that are US citizens of their right to vote because they don't have government issued ID. The immigration quotas that Republicans support are exclusively about blocking Hispanic immigration and are, in principle, are identical to historic immigration laws that previously blocked Catholic, Jewish, and Chinese immigration that the KKK, at the height of it's political power, supported. These laws go against "conservative" political ideology that would refer back to Jefferson, Madison, and Washington all of which believed the Right of Liberty included the Right to Immigrate to the United States. The founders, in crafting the US Constitution, expressly omitted providing any authority to the US government to limit or restrict immigration by anyone that would choose to come to the United States for peaceful purposes. The Republican Party remains very racist today and the laws and agenda it supports reflect this racism because it isn't based upon a "conservative" political ideology or even the US Constitution.
Here's a good refutation of Nisbett. It's so good, in fact, Nisbett can't refute the refutation. Any comments?
Once again the problem is that people attempt to use the term "social conservative" and "Republican" interchangeably and the political ideology of "social conservative" doesn't wear a party hat. The foundation of "social conservatism" is the retention of existing social, economic, and political institutions (and/or the reinstatement of past institutions). When the United States was founded slavery was an existing institutions and the "social conservatives" literally fought in the Civil War to retain the existing institution of slavery. When former President Andrew Johnson stated, "This is a country for white men, and by God, as long as I am president, it shall be a government for white men" that was a statement made by a social conservative. The United States had been founded based upon White Supremacy in our social, economic, and political institutions and Johnson's words reflected the "social conservative" intent to retain the historic institutions of White Supremacy in the United States. After slavery was abolished with the 13th Amendment and the 14th and 15th Amendment gave former slaves equal rights and the right to vote it was the "social conservatives" that created the Jim Crow laws to prevent blacks from voting, because blacks hadn't been allowed to vote, and the segregation laws to prevent blacks from associating with whites, because blacks had never been allowed to mingle with whites equally in society. Of course the statement in the OP "We don't care what your color is – only how you assimilate with and produce something beneficial for society" is self-contradictory because the black man can't stop being black and therefore can't assimilate into the "white social, economic, and political institutions" that have always been based upon White Male Supremacy in the United States that the social conservatives, just like Andrew Johnson, are still fighting to maintain in America. The (racist) Dixiecrats of the South used to be the social conservatives and today the Republicans are the social conservatives. The party changed but not the political ideology of social conservatism.
