—“Nothing has changed! Nothing about Democrats has changed except, for a long time, the Democrats were able to fool minorities and working-class whites into thinking they’d abandoned their elitist, slave-owning roots. They tricked the same groups that, down south, the Democrats had consistently fooled before the Civil War.”
—“Nothing has changed! Nothing about Democrats has changed except, for a long time, the Democrats were able to fool minorities and working-class whites into thinking they’d abandoned their elitist, slave-owning roots. They tricked the same groups that, down south, the Democrats had consistently fooled before the Civil War.”
This. So much this!!! They have only pretended to be the champions of the working classes, the poor, the downtrodden, in order to gain power. They’ve always thought of themselves as our “betters” and entitled to tell the rest of the population how to live. Talk to most die-hard Democrats nowadays and really listen to what they say—you’ll find beneath the veneer of “caring” is an assumption that they know better and should be able to dictate to others what life choices to make. Their condescending comments about the “uneducated” betray that, as does their credentialism.
Also Jeff, I absolutely LOVE your argument about the mandates, brilliant! So glad the judge has enough sense to agree with your very logical assertion!
Sharp insights, RL. Apparently, too many Boomers still believe in peace at any price, but our legacy—Gen X in particular—sees through the Dem smoke screens of big brother and bold lies. Now, if all who recognize the obvious will turn out for midterms . . .
Agreed. I read somewhere that the election of 2024 was akin to a slave revolt, only this time it was the tax slaves. I think this is an insightful comment.
Now we need a full-scale revolution of the people in the inner cities of New York, Chicago, Detroit, Atlanta, Los Angeles etc, etc, etc, to look around and realize how badly they’ve been lied to and used by the perpetual democrat machine. Looks like it started this cycle… has a lot more room to grow!
I'll always disagree with this take. The "elitist slave-owning roots" are Jefferson, Madison, Washington, etc. They were our founding fathers. You can reject them, but I won't. And "down south" for generations, the Democrats were the party of small government, where as the Republicans were the big government party. That was the case until communists infiltrated the Democratic party, and longtime conservatives, even Reagan, defected and converted the GOP to the small government party. The Democrats didn't fool minorities and working class - they adopted policies which actively harm them (Communism).
I don't hold the slavery issue against the Founders at all. I get fatigued with the left's slavery obsession/cudgel. As with most everything, they are lying about it and have the story backwards.
Slavery was the dominant economic arrangement for most of the world for most of human history. It was likely invented by "black and brown" people, as those pyramids weren't going to build themselves. It was entirely common for ruling classes to have slaves of one sort or another, especially "black and brown" ruling classes.
So, the only thing unique about the US when it comes to slavery is that we ended it - pretty much for the world. We should feel proud about our role regarding slavery, not ashamed of it. In fact, I count at least 3 things that America gave the world that were truly progressive and genuinely humanitarian: 1A, 2A, and the end of slavery.
And IMO, that is why so many elites still hate America: we limited their power and ended their preferred way of doing business. (And Marxism/communism/etc. is just an intellectualized form of slavery.)
Yes, exactly. The ONLY reason people bring up slavery is to use it as a cudgel. It's one thing for the left to do it - I expect that. The modern day Democrats are so terrible as it is, I don't need Jeff or anyone else to bring up slavery as proof of how terrible the Democratic Party is. His piece is worthy of the NYTimes 1619 project.
The Democrats only were the party of the little guy and as much as they could control the little guy particularly through powerful unions. Which were just a different form of big government for the little guy in his workplace.
Also, the reason why the communist/socialist so easily fit into the Democrat party is because they’re so similar in terms of wanting to control the little guy.
Are there any of the big political bosses from the 1800s and early 1900s that were Republican? I’m asking, because I don’t know. But there were sure an awful lot of powerful Democrats that operated their cities like their own personal kingdom.
I would argue that the Democrats only wanted “small government” so no one would interfere with their abuses of people’s rights. The government has an obligation to enforce the bill of rights and ensure those freedoms are not infringed on. I don’t think “big government” in the 19th century was quite the same thing as “big government” in the 20th. Kind of like the Chamber of Commerce style defenses made of businesses with mask and jab mandates being sold as “businesses should be free to be run as the owner sees fit, without interference. Just shop/work somewhere else.”
Southern conservatives were adamantly opposed to what we refer to today as Corporate Welfare. The term "lobbyist" was coined by U.S. Grant. Yes, conservatives lost that war. They were afraid a strong central government would infringe on the rights of States to remain sovereign in their governance. They lost that war, too.
And yet, those particular slave owners put into place a system where the average person, the non elites, without titles or riches, had unheard of freedoms and rights.
Actually, both parties were infiltrated. NeoCon worship, afterall, springs from the Trotskyites who seeing that they were not getting anywhere fast decided to change their spots with an optical remake. Too much to go into now, but it was both of the two main political parties which have pushed America over the cliff and into the pit. Trump has shaken things up a great deal, but!
The but is that everything is political doings is a mirage, a grand illusion. And it still remains to be seen what comes out of this new swirling of 'change'.
The NeoCons were originally Democrats. I think they moved into the Republican party because they didn't like the Dems 'hippie' culture at the time, but I'm not sure.
Most of the left/Dem policy failures come down to their own misplaced or deranged version of "caring." It's become a pseudo-religion to them. Their decades-long failures in the fields of medicine, healthcare, criminal justice, and finance are obvious examples. Their failure in mental health (incl. "transgenderism") is maybe the most glaring. It's obvious to most of us regular people that enabling selfishness, laziness, stupidity, criminality, addiction, delusion, or insanity is never good...but enablement is a well they go to often in the name of "caring."
In their minds, they just "know better" b/c the "studies say" - which is the same as saying b/c their god says so. (Funny that their god always seems to demand more government and more spending, in the name of "caring.") Despite all the evidence from actual outcomes and the mountains of pushback from regular non "chosen" people, they just keep going with a failed ideology. Hubris. Is it a coincidence they named their signature "achievement" Pride? Is it a coincidence that's also a deadly sin?
—“Nothing has changed! Nothing about Democrats has changed except, for a long time, the Democrats were able to fool minorities and working-class whites into thinking they’d abandoned their elitist, slave-owning roots. They tricked the same groups that, down south, the Democrats had consistently fooled before the Civil War.”
This. So much this!!! They have only pretended to be the champions of the working classes, the poor, the downtrodden, in order to gain power. They’ve always thought of themselves as our “betters” and entitled to tell the rest of the population how to live. Talk to most die-hard Democrats nowadays and really listen to what they say—you’ll find beneath the veneer of “caring” is an assumption that they know better and should be able to dictate to others what life choices to make. Their condescending comments about the “uneducated” betray that, as does their credentialism.
Also Jeff, I absolutely LOVE your argument about the mandates, brilliant! So glad the judge has enough sense to agree with your very logical assertion!
Sharp insights, RL. Apparently, too many Boomers still believe in peace at any price, but our legacy—Gen X in particular—sees through the Dem smoke screens of big brother and bold lies. Now, if all who recognize the obvious will turn out for midterms . . .
Agreed. I read somewhere that the election of 2024 was akin to a slave revolt, only this time it was the tax slaves. I think this is an insightful comment.
Tax slaves is a great way of putting it!
I’ve been using that phrase for a few years now. The govt absolutely keeps us in our place with taxes and tax policy, I think it applies.
The IRS definitely is used as a whip to keep the tax slaves in line 😕
Now we need a full-scale revolution of the people in the inner cities of New York, Chicago, Detroit, Atlanta, Los Angeles etc, etc, etc, to look around and realize how badly they’ve been lied to and used by the perpetual democrat machine. Looks like it started this cycle… has a lot more room to grow!
I'll always disagree with this take. The "elitist slave-owning roots" are Jefferson, Madison, Washington, etc. They were our founding fathers. You can reject them, but I won't. And "down south" for generations, the Democrats were the party of small government, where as the Republicans were the big government party. That was the case until communists infiltrated the Democratic party, and longtime conservatives, even Reagan, defected and converted the GOP to the small government party. The Democrats didn't fool minorities and working class - they adopted policies which actively harm them (Communism).
I don't hold the slavery issue against the Founders at all. I get fatigued with the left's slavery obsession/cudgel. As with most everything, they are lying about it and have the story backwards.
Slavery was the dominant economic arrangement for most of the world for most of human history. It was likely invented by "black and brown" people, as those pyramids weren't going to build themselves. It was entirely common for ruling classes to have slaves of one sort or another, especially "black and brown" ruling classes.
So, the only thing unique about the US when it comes to slavery is that we ended it - pretty much for the world. We should feel proud about our role regarding slavery, not ashamed of it. In fact, I count at least 3 things that America gave the world that were truly progressive and genuinely humanitarian: 1A, 2A, and the end of slavery.
And IMO, that is why so many elites still hate America: we limited their power and ended their preferred way of doing business. (And Marxism/communism/etc. is just an intellectualized form of slavery.)
Well said!!
Very insightful! Thanks!
Yes, exactly. The ONLY reason people bring up slavery is to use it as a cudgel. It's one thing for the left to do it - I expect that. The modern day Democrats are so terrible as it is, I don't need Jeff or anyone else to bring up slavery as proof of how terrible the Democratic Party is. His piece is worthy of the NYTimes 1619 project.
The Democrats only were the party of the little guy and as much as they could control the little guy particularly through powerful unions. Which were just a different form of big government for the little guy in his workplace.
Also, the reason why the communist/socialist so easily fit into the Democrat party is because they’re so similar in terms of wanting to control the little guy.
Are there any of the big political bosses from the 1800s and early 1900s that were Republican? I’m asking, because I don’t know. But there were sure an awful lot of powerful Democrats that operated their cities like their own personal kingdom.
Exactly.
Imho, back then the Republicans were the party of cities and big business. Communist infiltration was never going to work out in that party.
The GOP political bosses of that era were the Rockefellers, thus the term "Rockefeller Republican".
I would argue that the Democrats only wanted “small government” so no one would interfere with their abuses of people’s rights. The government has an obligation to enforce the bill of rights and ensure those freedoms are not infringed on. I don’t think “big government” in the 19th century was quite the same thing as “big government” in the 20th. Kind of like the Chamber of Commerce style defenses made of businesses with mask and jab mandates being sold as “businesses should be free to be run as the owner sees fit, without interference. Just shop/work somewhere else.”
Southern conservatives were adamantly opposed to what we refer to today as Corporate Welfare. The term "lobbyist" was coined by U.S. Grant. Yes, conservatives lost that war. They were afraid a strong central government would infringe on the rights of States to remain sovereign in their governance. They lost that war, too.
That has very little to do with my comment. Not sure what you’re trying to argue here.
And yet, those particular slave owners put into place a system where the average person, the non elites, without titles or riches, had unheard of freedoms and rights.
Actually, both parties were infiltrated. NeoCon worship, afterall, springs from the Trotskyites who seeing that they were not getting anywhere fast decided to change their spots with an optical remake. Too much to go into now, but it was both of the two main political parties which have pushed America over the cliff and into the pit. Trump has shaken things up a great deal, but!
The but is that everything is political doings is a mirage, a grand illusion. And it still remains to be seen what comes out of this new swirling of 'change'.
The NeoCons were originally Democrats. I think they moved into the Republican party because they didn't like the Dems 'hippie' culture at the time, but I'm not sure.
‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️‼️
Most of the left/Dem policy failures come down to their own misplaced or deranged version of "caring." It's become a pseudo-religion to them. Their decades-long failures in the fields of medicine, healthcare, criminal justice, and finance are obvious examples. Their failure in mental health (incl. "transgenderism") is maybe the most glaring. It's obvious to most of us regular people that enabling selfishness, laziness, stupidity, criminality, addiction, delusion, or insanity is never good...but enablement is a well they go to often in the name of "caring."
In their minds, they just "know better" b/c the "studies say" - which is the same as saying b/c their god says so. (Funny that their god always seems to demand more government and more spending, in the name of "caring.") Despite all the evidence from actual outcomes and the mountains of pushback from regular non "chosen" people, they just keep going with a failed ideology. Hubris. Is it a coincidence they named their signature "achievement" Pride? Is it a coincidence that's also a deadly sin?
Agree. And there is definitely a pride component to it imo (and not just the rainbow kind).