Racism...Forever?

We all know that Cotton agrees with the sentiment. He can just drop the charade.

 

He actually wants the people he thinks should be allowed to vote know that, while being able to claim that the people he shouldn't be allowed to vote are misinterpreting it.

 

Bingo!

 

After reading that, I was feeling better about the "cancel culture" that was outraged at Tom Cotton having a voice in the NYT.

And Arkansas ... man. Aren't you embarrassed as a state? You really, truly should be.

 

There is a certain percentage that aren't and with as young as he is, will want to make him Senator for life

 

This could be Haley, and it could be Hawley.

 

I see them going the way of the Whig Party.

 

He "response" was even more pathetic.

What he said:
Cotton told the paper, “We have to study the history of slavery and its role and impact on the development of our country because otherwise we can’t understand our country. As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil upon which the union was built, but the union was built in a way, as Lincoln said, to put slavery on the course to its ultimate extinction."

His response tweet:
“I said that *the Founders viewed slavery as a necessary evil* and described how they put the evil institution on the path to extinction, a point frequently made by Lincoln,” Cotton tweeted.

No, you did not say that "the Founders viewed slavery as a necessary evil." This is simply not true, Senator Cotton. You said, "As the Founding Fathers said, it was the necessary evil..."

If you had meant "The Founders viewed slavery as a necessary evil," (with the implication that you disagreed with that notion), then you should have said that.

1) Cotton used the grammatical "trick" of adding the dependent clause "As the Founding Fathers said..." to provide validation and, I might say, cover for his belief.

2) Cotton stated "Founding Fathers said," in his statement, not "Founders viewed," as in his response tweet. Those are very different statements with very different meanings.

3) Cotton changed the definite article "the" in "the necessary evil," to the indefinite article "a" in "a necessary evil." This completely changes the tone and context.

Also, please provide period-specific evidence that the "Founders" either "said" or even "viewed" slavery as a "necessary evil."

I do not have the time or the energy to breakdown the second half of each statement.

Tom Cotton, you graduated from Harvard Law, you damned well know what words mean. Own up to your racism.

Frankly, I don't think he can own up to his racism, as I suspect that it is so ingrained in his being that he cannot see it.

Although, his use of language to completely change the meaning, tone and context of his statement implies that he might be looking for cover.

 

Everybody knows Harvard Law is a for-profit factory. Some really smart people come out of there, for sure. But when you enroll roughly 3x as many JD candidates as other top schools (Yale+Stanford+UChi combined!!!), you're going to get some Tom Cotton's.

 

And Ron DeSantises.

 

Cotton should know that now in the Trump era you don't have to do verbal and grammatical gymnastics to craft dog whistles anymore.

 

Again, I suspect that he knows that, but it gives him a level of "deniability" which he is attempting to employ.

 

Deniability is for lewsers.

 

So, Senator Tom Cotton, then?

 

While one or two of the founders of the movement may be a socialist (one described themselves as trained Marxist, what ever that means), the movement is has so many chapters and ideologies, that one can not be pinned down on them (other than justice reform and police reform).

https://www.tampabay.com/news/natio...act-is-black-lives-matter-a-marxist-movement/

Now some socialists groups may support BLM, but it does not mean the reverse is true.

https://www.socialistalternative.org/marxism-fight-black-freedom/black-lives-matter-marxism/

 

From the link:

The first thing, I think, is that we actually do have an ideological frame. Myself and Alicia in particular are trained organizers. We are trained Marxists. We are super-versed on, sort of, ideological theories. And I think that what we really tried to do is build a movement that could be utilized by many, many black folk​

​

I wonder what's going to happen if he reads deeply into the Marx-Engels correspondance. Thanks to a passing adherence to phrenology, Marx had some less than enlightened things to say about people of color. He wasn't exactly opposed to colonialism, IIRC, either.

 

The 3 founders are women and pro gay rights, Marxists were also not very kind to gay people.


Just another example on how many people on the left and the right have no clue on what Marxism and/or socialism really is.


In the defense of Marx and other socialist writers, everyone was homophobic in the late 1800 and early 1900's. So this was probably mostly cultural over ideological.

 

I hope you're not trying to claim that socialism is homophobic, because a notable socialist from 160 years ago was homophobic.

 

Just like the founding fathers are racist, it was a process of the time they lived.

But yes I did say that in the last sentence, it was do to the times, not likely due to ideology

 

Well, actually, he is.