laripu

For me, that's not entirely enough. The extent to which I don't want to be associated with hate and violence is such that I must distance myself even more than that. So I won't be reading or posting on liberalforum any more. I'm going to delete the shortcuts to it from my phone and various computers. Mostly, it's been interesting, and sometimes educational. Mostly, you're good people. Thanks to all for letting me be a part of it. Bye.

My wife and I are in a red state, Florida. Half the people in red states are either Black, or Democrat voters, or just conservatives who didn't and don't support Trump or his policies. Neither my wife not I are immoral. You, suggesting that people in red States should be killed, you are immoral.

Ah, you advocate peace through mass murder. And you advocating terror. I'm 100% right about you. You're an angry and dangerous person, just another tribal extremist.

I wrote that their are angry and dangerous people on both sides if a political divide. By lauding a terrorist, the evil Robapierre, you prove you are one of them. I will have nothing to do with you. You advocate violence to people you don't even know.

Wrong, and dangerous. I'm on record in these fora, saying that 35% of every nation consists of angry, dangerous people. That's part of our human evolution. They can be in either side of any contentious issue. You are one of them. When someone calls people sub-human, they show their true colors. You may profer liberal views, but you're a person with a dangerous and extreme viewpoint. If liberals follow that viewpoint, they will follow it right to the same concentration camps, albeit with different inhabitants. The goal of the leader, though, will always be the same: to motivate followers and gain power. The followers will realize their crimes and won't be able to peacefully back out. It described Hitler, Stalin, Trump, and quite possibly you. I started a thread about that exact thing. See here:

That's only the second worst eventuality. It would be worse if he won the election, which could also happen. But in your hypothetical scenario, once the states certified their election results, he would still be in office from election day until inauguration day. In that time, I expect he would be under the influence of various people, some for and some against his coup. I hope that people at that level would against such an action, but I can't predict whether that's true. Maybe my fellow Americans been do deluded as to accept dictatorship; I don't know. If that's so, there will be a lot of very pissed off people in both sides with the right to bear arms. There may be armed skirmishes between supporters of the new president and those of the would-be dictator. If he attempted it, many Americans on both sides of the argument would die. More than 100, less than a hundred thousand.

Leonard Cohen wrote: And he was right. Dehumanization and demonization of opponents is disgraceful when one side does it. When both sides do it, especially the side that deluded itself that it knows better, then it leads inexorably to disaster. Get ready for the future.

I know more than the scientists do, believe me. I have a big brain, the size of Uranus, and an IQ of over 42 thousand. They couldn't get it exactly because it broke the machine that measures IQ, but I have an unbelievable IQ, the highest IQ in the entire galaxy, believe me. About black holes, no one knows more about black holes than I do. I know how they feel, and how they smell. I've been right next to many black holes, and I don't let them pull on me. It's incredible, they try, but they can't move me. And no one has created more jobs for black holes than I have. No one in history has been as good for black holes as I have. The lying press said I had no gravitas. Gravitas, what does that even mean? I have more gravitas than any black hole, believe me. So I know, more than anyone, that the picture of the black hole is fake. At the very least, the hair is dyed that orange color, but it's fake. I know all about hair dye. And black holes. Big league.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/black-hole-photo_n_5cade1d3e4b0e833aa341d26

What you quoted, 30,000 years ago to today, is plenty of time for a species to increase the percentage of certain characteristics, when the characteristics involve the killing of those that don't have them. That's not natural selection, that's artificial selection, very nearly selective breeding. At the same time, cooperation, nurturing and love had survival benefit, so we have those too. Here's what I contend: the more people there are, the more technology, cooperation, and intelligence become important and necessary. Over time racism and violence, while still around, have outlived their usefulness. I'm definitely on the nature side of nature/nurture. You can try to teach a cow to do calculus, but you'll wind up pacing in poo.

If you allow people to - unjustly - use you, they will continue to use you without end. They will not respect you or your needs. I don't offer advice about what you should do. That's up to you. But if you allow yourself to be used, you will continue to be used, and you will not be respected.

I don't think the US is the most racist country on earth. I think it has the most freedom for everyone to express anything they want to. So every kind of angry/ugly says anything they want to. I think racism is an attribute of every person in varying degree (and nearly zero in some), and in great degree in about 35% of every population and every nation all over the earth. The reason is evolution. For an evolutionary period of time, angry hatred of other tribes was of survival benefit. So we've got it. But freedom of expression is widespread, and what we see here is widespread, or soon will be, everywhere. And since evolution is a truth that cannot be denied by people's politics, we will see racism from all corners of the political spectrum. There will also be liberal racism, where it is expedient. I guess I'm saying that I don't have much faith in the short term future. We must keep fighting the fight, voting against the ugly right, and it will help a little. But it won't fix it permanently, and we can never stop fighting.

She may have been politically clumsy, but she was right.The problem is the deplorables. They'll still be there and still be a problem, long after Trump is dust in the ground. This DailyKos article describes the problem well.

Employers don't want the bureaucracy, but they'll still have to pay, via taxes, for universal single payer healthcare. Healthcare is expensive unless you cut the profits out of every part of it. See my post above about Canada, where I'm from. Doctors work harder and make a lot less money (but are still rich). Hospitals don't get the latest greatest machines. And they don't take as good care of the physical attributes like paint and cleaning. That makes the process much less expensive. The important thing is: when they do that, the outcomes are not worse than what we have in the US. But even with all that, both employer and citizen taxes go up a lot. It will be better for poor people and lower middle class. It will be more expensive for upper middle class people, and up.