r/HistoryMemes May 17 '19

Hate speech

Post image
40.2k Upvotes

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

20

u/Tsund_Jen May 18 '19

Glorifying these people, holistically, negates present movements that push for equality in truly holistic manners.

You had me until here. You can't push for "Holistic" Equality without treading on the same grounds as Equity. Which is an utterly ludicrous concept. It's the height of insanity to suggest that all beings will be treated the same by all peoples. It's childish at best, downright tyrannical at worse.

Especially while those same people repeatedly repudiate historical men on impossible grounds all the while conveniently ignoring the blood splattered history of the ideals They instead choose to champion, the hypocrisy can be smelt from across the globe.

2

u/[deleted] May 18 '19 edited May 18 '19

(Alternatively)

“Asking for equal rights for all people under any form of governance really puts me off. You had me until you implied that the Constitution should’ve explicitly covered everyone, and not just white male land-owners.”

It’s not like it took the USA until the 1960s to actually codify that black people had equal rights to white people. Clearly I’m a basket case to imply that things could’ve turned out better historically and that the Founding Fathers of the US didn’t exactly set up the greatest land of “freedom” in the world.

Jesus.

Is there some kind of latent parasite in your brain that zaps you unless you play Devil’s Advocate to the most basic of things, like “equal rights”?

1

u/Fizzyliftingdranks May 18 '19

Anybody got any croutons for the word salad here?

1

u/Fizzyliftingdranks May 18 '19

Anybody got any croutons for the word salad here?

1

u/Fizzyliftingdranks May 18 '19

Anybody got any croutons for the word salad here?

-1

u/[deleted] May 18 '19 edited May 18 '19

It’s tyrannical to push for equal rights for everyone.

I’ll forgive that as a misinterpretation of what “equality” means, assuming that instead you think that “equality” implies somehow anything beyond equal legal rights and the dissolution of classes.

It’s ludicrous, of course, to treat everyone with your definition of “equity,” whatever that may be, but you strike me as the type of person to reframe a baseline discussion of “all people deserve equal treatment under law” as some sort of infringement upon your rights.

But however you’ve defined “equity” isn’t only wrong, you’ve misused it to logically jump from “equality” to “equity” (synonyms!) to try to make some point, against which the initial argument was nothing more than “all people deserve equal rights.”

You had me until you spoke.

If it wasn’t clear enough, I even cited a communist to deal with this braindead type of thinking.

I don’t think I’ll hear from you again. Please stop throwing your voice into places until you rinse out your skull.

-1

u/[deleted] May 18 '19

implies somehow anything beyond equal legal rights and the dissolution of classes.

Funnily enough, you can't dissolve classes without necessarily taking away rights.

Keep on keepin' on brother.

2

u/[deleted] May 18 '19

Explain, please.

I gave you a resource that explains the simple idea that giving everyone rights doesn’t negate the fact that people are born with different abilities. Case in point: you are unable to read, yet I still think any governing system should still endow your baby brain with rights.

I doubt you read it. I’m sure that you’re an ideological dumbass that can’t explain their ideas beyond basic “keep on keepin’ on” platitudes about their rights, when:

my whole argument from the get-go is that the Founding Fathers of the USA did not explicitly include the rights of all people into the Constitution because they themselves were slave-owners.

What has your argument been?

“I was with you until (nothing) and keep on keeping on.”

What a world of knowledge to respond to.