Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Civil Rights

Civil Rights Civil and Political Rights Forum - Civil rights and liberties


Thanks Tree83Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old March 9th, 2018, 04:00 PM   #121
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
Thank you! Good discussions are impossible when people can not relate to what each other are saying. YES, women's liberation came with the Military Industrial Complex.
I missed the part where I said the Military Industrial Complex created or was connected with the Women's Liberation Movement
I do recall saying that Madison Avenue (the hub of the TV and print advertising agencies until recent times) saw great gains to be made by latching on and pretending to be part of the cause if there was a sudden increase in the number of women entering the workforce. Reynolds Tobacco even went through the trouble of creating a cigarette with a splashy ad campaign for "emancipated women!" But the only way the Military Industrial Complex benefits is from the co-opted modern feminist movement that makes no official comment on military issues, foreign wars, war spending etc.. The early women's movements of 100 years ago, were decidedly enemies of their generations military leaders and arms merchants, and were even concerned for the killing and destruction caused for others by those wars.

Quote:
That is not all bad, but the destruction of the family is bad. For centuries women have humanized us and pressured for family order, and we are loosing that.
Until the rise of patriarchies, family order was maintained whether or not husbands stayed or went, because women (usually a grandmother) kept order in the family.

Quote:
Some of my old books push the division of labor too far, and some of them stress we have a democracy and we are to work together as equals. The Quakers were some of the strongest leaders of equality. This march for equality did not go as far as saying the fulltime homemaker is just a housewife.

But we have autocratic industry and that resulted in autocratic families and today we could call these autocratic families dysfunctional. Laborers have been treated very badly.and they came home and treated their families as badly as they were treated. To a large degree this was necessary preparation for their children who would also have to learn how to please the autocrats who rule over them. Sucking women into this and letting the family stop being a family is not good for humanity.
No surprise that leaders of hierarchies want cultural reinforcements to entrench their power and remove any challenges. Egalitarian societies do not need these kinds of customs, do not beat their children to make them orderly and authoritarian. Even the typical school classroom was created 200 years ago in Industrial Era England to train children to learn a few necessary skills and handle crushing boredom they would deal with later in life working factory machines, by sitting for six hours a day behind a desk listening to a teacher at the front of the class.

Quote:
Women tearing into each other when one of them says the traditional woman is very valuable, is sick. We can't even allow a woman the freedom to believe this or say it. Really women, when are you going to stop kicking me for believing what we have done for centuries, is very important? It isn't gays destroying the family, nor is it men, but it is women who can hardly wait to have careers and debt and be slaves to the system. Their place is now in the beast, no longer at home making their family independent and strong. As though all working women have wonderful fulfilling careers and enough income to live very well without help from anyone. As though their sisters who are not doing so well have leprosy and should have done better and are not valuable.
One stat that sticks with me is that the average house size today is 40% larger than a home of the 1950's..which had a family of six within its walls. that and two, three car families, the new appliances etc. etc. tells me that we are working for goals that have been imprinted on us by media and marketing/not real need! Both men and women could be working far, far less than we are today. The average work week could be 15 hours if we were living just a little more modestly instead of trying to keep borrowing more and moving up to try to advance our prestige or status with others.

Quote:
It isn't "alpha" males who are a mother's worst enemy. The women who slam each other and are intentionally hurtful, are the enemy of women. I started this thread with the hope women here were supportive of each other.
The alpha male I was referring to are guys who try to show off, think they're tough, brag about themselves etc.. I think the best thing that could happen for us all...even improving social cohesion..being helpful and supportive and such, is when today's unstable, already bankrupt system collapses. Sociologists have noted for some time that people act much better after disasters such as fires, earthquakes, and floods occur, and work together and help each other/while during the 'normal' times they are all engaged running faster in the rat race!
right to left is offline  
Old March 10th, 2018, 06:10 AM   #122
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
I missed the part where I said the Military Industrial Complex created or was connected with the Women's Liberation Movement
I do recall saying that Madison Avenue (the hub of the TV and print advertising agencies until recent times) saw great gains to be made by latching on and pretending to be part of the cause if there was a sudden increase in the number of women entering the workforce. Reynolds Tobacco even went through the trouble of creating a cigarette with a splashy ad campaign for "emancipated women!" But the only way the Military Industrial Complex benefits is from the co-opted modern feminist movement that makes no official comment on military issues, foreign wars, war spending etc.. The early women's movements of 100 years ago, were decidedly enemies of their generations military leaders and arms merchants, and were even concerned for the killing and destruction caused for others by those wars.
You didn't mention the Military Industrial Complex but you sure did a good job explaining a problem with it. A high tech military does not need our sons, now our patriotism because it doesn't take a year to mobilize the population for war. We can mobilize for war in 4 hours and in a few more hours we can do more damage than the men who fought in WWII could do in several months. All you military needs from us is our tax dollars. Now especially when our income depends on the military industry rather than on making vacuums, people will support that industry. If that means selling weapons around the world and making assault raffles available to the public, oh well. It isn't like we are thinking about having a picnic with our families. We are not thinking of our time with family. We are thinking of what we want to buy, in part because everyone is educated for an industrial society with unknown values, not for family life. I think I am wasting my time trying to explain the what military technology and education for the Military Industrial Complex has to do with the destruction of families?

Quote:
Until the rise of patriarchies, family order was maintained whether or not husbands stayed or went, because women (usually a grandmother) kept order in the family.
Oh yes, I strongly agree grandmothers kept the family order. But also the division of labor was very much about the difference in strength. Men did heavy labor and this was essential to survival, and women were every industry a family needed. She made everything the family needed from food to clothing, soup and candles. She cared for the little children and as soon as the children were all enough to be helpful, they were doing chores and the young men were helping their fathers. I would say this was forced patriarchy but a matter of our different strengthens. Women seem better suited for tedious work while men are better at heavy labor. This division of labor is no longer necessary and I am sure some of us can appreciate how much life has changed.

Quote:
No surprise that leaders of hierarchies want cultural reinforcements to entrench their power and remove any challenges. Egalitarian societies do not need these kinds of customs, do not beat their children to make them orderly and authoritarian. Even the typical school classroom was created 200 years ago in Industrial Era England to train children to learn a few necessary skills and handle crushing boredom they would deal with later in life working factory machines, by sitting for six hours a day behind a desk listening to a teacher at the front of the class.
William James and Monroe were education experts in late 1800 and early 1900. I assure you, they were not educating children from boring factory work. I know a popular author of a book about education said that, but he was wrong and I have the books that prove that.

"The point of contact between Christianity and Roman thought world was in its relation to the Stoic philosophy. Peculiarly appropriate to the Roman acharacter, and prepared for by all of their early historical experience, the Stoic philosophy, as formulated by a few leading exponents among the Romans and held by a large and saving element among the better members of society, expressed the highest attainment in moral thought reached by the ancients. According to this philosophy, virtue itself was made the highest pleasure attainable." From Monroe's book about the History of Education.

That is the happiness of which Thomas Jefferson spoke and education for democracy is about making the knowledge available to all. OUR EDUCATION WAS NOT ABOUT PREPARING ANYONE FOR INDUSTRIAL JOBS. IT WAS ABOUT PREPARING CITIZENS FOR DEMOCRACY. AND EDUCATION FOR DEMOCRACY INCLUDES THE VALUES OF VALUE ORDER.

(Children are awake and need my attention so it is time to close. I don't think anyone cares what I am saying about education, democracy and family anyway. No one knows what the enlightenment has to do with our democracy, and no one cares. But that will not stop me from trying to wake people up. However, now the children need my attention, and my pay is hope they will understand the old lessons about freedom, liberty and virtues and they might be more successful in saving the democracy left to them, I am.)
Thanks from hoosier88
Athena is offline  
Old March 10th, 2018, 09:40 AM   #123
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post
You didn't mention the Military Industrial Complex but you sure did a good job explaining a problem with it. A high tech military does not need our sons, now our patriotism because it doesn't take a year to mobilize the population for war. We can mobilize for war in 4 hours and in a few more hours we can do more damage than the men who fought in WWII could do in several months. All you military needs from us is our tax dollars. Now especially when our income depends on the military industry rather than on making vacuums, people will support that industry. If that means selling weapons around the world and making assault raffles available to the public, oh well. It isn't like we are thinking about having a picnic with our families. We are not thinking of our time with family. We are thinking of what we want to buy, in part because everyone is educated for an industrial society with unknown values, not for family life. I think I am wasting my time trying to explain the what military technology and education for the Military Industrial Complex has to do with the destruction of families?
I know! It destroys families on the homefront and the places that are the objects of attack and regime change in foreign lands, let's not forget!

One good thing about having an unbalanced nitwit like Trump as US president, is he highlights the existential risks of increasing military and increasing nuclear-armed military forces, that more sedate and rational-appearing leaders attempt to normalize. So, for the first time in a generation, the obvious risks of total nuclear annihilation cannot be sidelined and minimized while the arms makers carve out a trillion dollars over the next 10 years to fund their dreams.

Quote:
Oh yes, I strongly agree grandmothers kept the family order. But also the division of labor was very much about the difference in strength. Men did heavy labor and this was essential to survival, and women were every industry a family needed.
Until the Industrial Revolution came along to ruin the planet and make worker's lives miserable, the only "mans" work that women didn't usually take part in were hunting and warfare...and even that wasn't absolute. Since the women of 'barbarian' tribes that lived on open plains had to be able to use swords and bows to defend their settlements when the men were away hunting...or trying to attack a neighboring community! And looking back at the historical examples, Russian archaeologists have unearthed evidence that the "amazons" that made classic Greek philosophers and thinkers lose their shit: the Sarmatians and Scythians of the Ukraine and Black Sea region, had women warriors among their numbers. It had long been dismissed and discounted as mere folklore until a few skeletons found buried with their swords and helmets were identified as female...so there's not a lot that's absolute when it comes to mens and women's roles in a society. And these warrior women were not an anomaly on the battlefield, since at one of the digs, one of every six skeletons unearthed was female! It was a different way of living over there at that time for sure!

Quote:
She made everything the family needed from food to clothing, soup and candles. She cared for the little children and as soon as the children were all enough to be helpful, they were doing chores and the young men were helping their fathers. I would say this was forced patriarchy but a matter of our different strengthens. Women seem better suited for tedious work while men are better at heavy labor. This division of labor is no longer necessary and I am sure some of us can appreciate how much life has changed.
Most sweatshop-type workplaces I ever worked in assigned the heavy lifting grunt work to men, and had women doing the tedious handwork on the lines; but how much of this reflects different natural abilities between men and women, and how much was just applying culturally-enforced expectations?

Quote:
William James and Monroe were education experts in late 1800 and early 1900. I assure you, they were not educating children from boring factory work. I know a popular author of a book about education said that, but he was wrong and I have the books that prove that.

"The point of contact between Christianity and Roman thought world was in its relation to the Stoic philosophy. Peculiarly appropriate to the Roman acharacter, and prepared for by all of their early historical experience, the Stoic philosophy, as formulated by a few leading exponents among the Romans and held by a large and saving element among the better members of society, expressed the highest attainment in moral thought reached by the ancients. According to this philosophy, virtue itself was made the highest pleasure attainable." From Monroe's book about the History of Education.

That is the happiness of which Thomas Jefferson spoke and education for democracy is about making the knowledge available to all. OUR EDUCATION WAS NOT ABOUT PREPARING ANYONE FOR INDUSTRIAL JOBS. IT WAS ABOUT PREPARING CITIZENS FOR DEMOCRACY. AND EDUCATION FOR DEMOCRACY INCLUDES THE VALUES OF VALUE ORDER.
I take a different approach when I see the names of Monroe and Jefferson invoked in any discussion. I am reminded that these men and most other Founding Father...except possibly Thomas Paine were not interested in any kind of egalitarian democracy we think of today! These men were elitist slave-holding landowners let's not forget! So, only a fraction of the adult population of the new America were able to vote because they had to be property-owning white men to enjoy the franchise!

Historians have long mused and been baffled at exactly what caused the revolt of the 13 colonies to begin with. Times were prosperous and they were getting richer, and the rancor against a British Crown that did little to interfere with the workings of far off colonies(as long as they payed their taxes) left them perplexed. More recently, the African American historian- Gerald Horne wrote a book last year in which he proposed that the FF's feared that England...which refused to recognize the rights of slaveholders by their high courts and was moving towards abolition of slavery in their Caribbean and African colonies, would move to abolish slavery in America also! So, Horne sees the Revolution as a counter-revolution by the elite landowning class to maintain slavery AND to remove the British restrictions that kept Americans from extending their colonies across the Mississippi River.

Regarding education and life in general; I'm aware that Jefferson did not like industrialization as he saw it in England and did not want it for America! He described his preferred nation as one of merchants and yeoman farmers...but had no plans for land reform to make farmers equal. Jefferson and Washington changed John Locke's "Life, Liberty and Land" to "life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness" and that meant if you don't have land, get out there into indian country, kill some indians and take their land and then you can become a property owner just like us...if you survive! So, when Jefferson talks of education preparing citizens for democracy, I'm thinking his vision of citizen democracy is nothing like I envision!

Last edited by right to left; March 10th, 2018 at 09:44 AM.
right to left is offline  
Old March 10th, 2018, 10:15 AM   #124
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NM
Posts: 1,845
New lamps for old

Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
...

I take a different approach when I see the names of Monroe and Jefferson invoked in any discussion. I am reminded that these men and most other Founding Father...except possibly Thomas Paine were not interested in any kind of egalitarian democracy we think of today! These men were elitist slave-holding landowners let's not forget! So, only a fraction of the adult population of the new America were able to vote because they had to be property-owning white men to enjoy the franchise!
Yes, but not just any Caucasian would do. They had to be WASP of property - emphasis on the Protestant. Prospective voters could not be Roman Catholic, Jewish, Islamic, Native People, Black, women & on & on. We have since extended the franchise. The next great effort is to form the electorate in long-term planning & administration & goal-setting.
Thanks from Athena
hoosier88 is offline  
Old March 11th, 2018, 09:49 AM   #125
end capitalism now
 
right to left's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,603
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier88 View Post
Yes, but not just any Caucasian would do. They had to be WASP of property - emphasis on the Protestant. Prospective voters could not be Roman Catholic, Jewish, Islamic, Native People, Black, women & on & on. We have since extended the franchise. The next great effort is to form the electorate in long-term planning & administration & goal-setting.
That's right! That was the whole reason why Catholic newcomers created their own colony-then-state- Maryland. Most of what's happened regarding rights existing in practice/as opposed to theoretical rights, is that the broad, unspoken definition of the white race has been expanded over time. As you mentioned, at first it was just White Anglo Protestants from the British Isles; then it was expanded to include other northern Europeans...Germans, Scandinavians..then Euro Catholics..then Southern Europeans...then Jews, but the loose definition of who does and doesn't qualify as part of the white majority will never be expanded to include blacks and other darker skinned peoples, nor will it include Iranians, Arabs (just as white as Italians for that matter) or Muslims as long as Arab, Iranian and Muslim nations are on the enemies list.

A quick example of how far universal rights extend under conservative white thinking is the Philando Castille police shooting incident in Minnesota a couple of years ago. Castille was black, but a legal gun owner with a concealed carry permit...which he informed the cop about and still got shot dead; and if that wasn't bad enough, where the fuck was the NRA defending this gun owner's right to bear arms for his own personal protection? Did Wayne LaPierre have anything to say about the Castille Shooting? Did Alex Jones start fomenting and regurgitating rage about the State killing a free, law-abiding citizen like he did back after the Ruby Ridge Case?

Actually getting universal rights practiced for everyone is harder than declaring them as theoretical goals, and it doesn't seem to happen in societies divided by entrenched wealth hierarchies where a mostly white elite doesn't see democracy as to their benefit, and just wants the people who are likely to be their core supporters to have full rights and privileges.

And that's where we get to women...who cannot be completely disenfranchised today, but effectively have lesser rights than men in actual fact if we go beyond the few women of privilege like female politicians or a handful of CEO's grabbing the brass ring, and note that 70% of American workers working for minimum wage are women...many of them have children as well, and the conservative attacks on reproductive rights is flimsily disguised as concern for 'life' while intended as a direct encumbrance on the actual freedoms that women can act on in their daily lives!

Last edited by right to left; March 11th, 2018 at 09:52 AM.
right to left is offline  
Old March 12th, 2018, 08:35 AM   #126
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
I know! It destroys families on the homefront and the places that are the objects of attack and regime change in foreign lands, let's not forget!

One good thing about having an unbalanced nitwit like Trump as US president, is he highlights the existential risks of increasing military and increasing nuclear-armed military forces, that more sedate and rational-appearing leaders attempt to normalize. So, for the first time in a generation, the obvious risks of total nuclear annihilation cannot be sidelined and minimized while the arms makers carve out a trillion dollars over the next 10 years to fund their dreams.


Until the Industrial Revolution came along to ruin the planet and make worker's lives miserable, the only "mans" work that women didn't usually take part in were hunting and warfare...and even that wasn't absolute. Since the women of 'barbarian' tribes that lived on open plains had to be able to use swords and bows to defend their settlements when the men were away hunting...or trying to attack a neighboring community! And looking back at the historical examples, Russian archaeologists have unearthed evidence that the "amazons" that made classic Greek philosophers and thinkers lose their shit: the Sarmatians and Scythians of the Ukraine and Black Sea region, had women warriors among their numbers. It had long been dismissed and discounted as mere folklore until a few skeletons found buried with their swords and helmets were identified as female...so there's not a lot that's absolute when it comes to mens and women's roles in a society. And these warrior women were not an anomaly on the battlefield, since at one of the digs, one of every six skeletons unearthed was female! It was a different way of living over there at that time for sure!

Most sweatshop-type workplaces I ever worked in assigned the heavy lifting grunt work to men, and had women doing the tedious handwork on the lines; but how much of this reflects different natural abilities between men and women, and how much was just applying culturally-enforced expectations?
I think the Spartan women are perhaps the best example of women who could equal their males because they are the best documented. The life of a Spartan woman was almost the extreme opposite of the life of an Athena woman. Neither extreme is desirable. Much later, on farmers in the early United States, I am sure some women attempted to plow the fields like a man, and I am equally sure I woman rather have a man do that work because by nature men are stronger than women. And here is why:

Quote:
https://www.healthline.com/health/lo...ects-on-body#7

Testosterone is one of many factors involved in the development of muscle bulk and strength. Testosterone increases neurotransmitters, which encourage tissue growth. It also interacts with nuclear receptors in DNA, which causes protein synthesis. Testosterone increases levels of growth hormone. That makes exercise more likely to build muscle.

Testosterone increases bone density and tells the bone marrow to manufacture red blood cells. Men with very low levels of testosterone are more likely to suffer from bone fractures and breaks.

Testosterone also plays a role in fat metabolism, helping men to burn fat more efficiently. Dropping levels of testosterone can cause an increase in body fat.........

Testosterone plays a role in certain behaviors, including aggression and dominance. It also helps to spark competitiveness and boost self-esteem. Just as sexual activity can affect testosterone levels, taking part in competitive activities can cause a man’s testosterone levels to rise or fall. Low testosterone may result in a loss of confidence and lack of motivation. It can also lower a man’s ability to concentrate or cause feelings of sadness. Low testosterone can cause sleep disturbances and lack of energy.
Now we should bring oxytocin into the discussion.

Quote:
https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/275795.php

Oxytocin is a hormone and a neurotransmitter that is involved in childbirth and breast-feeding. It is also associated with empathy, trust, sexual activity, and relationship-building.

It is sometimes referred to as the "love hormone," because levels of oxytocin increase during hugging and orgasm. It may also have benefits as a treatment for a number of conditions, including depression, anxiety, and intestinal problems.

Oxytocin is produced in the hypothalamus, a part of the brain. Females usually have higher levels than males.
These hormones are strongly related to our behaviors. A woman can become more manly or a man more feminine acting like a man or woman.
There is truth to avoiding sex and having a stronger, more aggressive male. So before a football game or when in the military, don't have sex and don't cuddle a baby. But if you are going to do a tedious job, have sex and cuddle a baby. It is not just a matter of being, manly or feminine but also a choice of activities.


you said...
Quote:
I take a different approach when I see the names of Monroe and Jefferson invoked in any discussion. I am reminded that these men and most other Founding Father...except possibly Thomas Paine were not interested in any kind of egalitarian democracy we think of today! These men were elitist slave-holding landowners let's not forget! So, only a fraction of the adult population of the new America were able to vote because they had to be property-owning white men to enjoy the franchise!

Historians have long mused and been baffled at exactly what caused the revolt of the 13 colonies to begin with. Times were prosperous and they were getting richer, and the rancor against a British Crown that did little to interfere with the workings of far off colonies(as long as they payed their taxes) left them perplexed. More recently, the African American historian- Gerald Horne wrote a book last year in which he proposed that the FF's feared that England...which refused to recognize the rights of slaveholders by their high courts and was moving towards abolition of slavery in their Caribbean and African colonies, would move to abolish slavery in America also! So, Horne sees the Revolution as a counter-revolution by the elite landowning class to maintain slavery AND to remove the British restrictions that kept Americans from extending their colonies across the Mississippi River.
That Black history is a point of view and it may have some validity, but I think the bigger concern was that England would impose the Chruch of England on everyone. This would make the reason for revolution strong in the north where states had begun with religious colonies competing against each other and they were passionate about their particular beliefs and customs. Also, Washington was one of the men wanting to make his fortune in land speculation, and England made a treaty with Native Americans preventing the spread of Europeans, thus preventing land speculators like Washington from making huge profits.

I love a quote from Aldous Huxley about the spirit of tyranny always being strong. And the American Revolution was fought by men who fought for liberty and Jefferson protected the individual liberty they gained. Isn't that what separated him from the Federalist?

Quote:
https://fee.org/articles/thomas-jeff...rty-and-power/
It is well known, of course, that Thomas Jefferson was an outspoken advocate of individual liberty. He defined it this way: “Of liberty then I would say that in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will, but rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others.”[3] Moreover, Jefferson professed a passionate attachment to liberty. He wrote to Dr. Benjamin Rush that he had “sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”[4] His belief in liberty was based in the natural rights doctrine, itself grounded in natural law theory. Most proponents of natural rights maintained that natural rights were altered and reduced when man entered society. Jefferson, by contrast, argued that “the idea is quite unfounded that on entering into society we give up any natural right.”[5] In any case, Jefferson was a vigorous advocate of individual liberty.

you said
Quote:
Regarding education and life in general; I'm aware that Jefferson did not like industrialization as he saw it in England and did not want it for America! He described his preferred nation as one of merchants and yeoman farmers...but had no plans for land reform to make farmers equal. Jefferson and Washington changed John Locke's "Life, Liberty and Land" to "life, liberty and the PURSUIT of happiness" and that meant if you don't have land, get out there into indian country, kill some indians and take their land and then you can become a property owner just like us...if you survive! So, when Jefferson talks of education preparing citizens for democracy, I'm thinking his vision of citizen democracy is nothing like I envision!
Land reform was having more land. That a major reason for the revolution and the reason for the Louisiana Purchase and sending Louis and Clark to the west coast.

The pursuit of happiness did not mean killing native Americans for land. It meant pursuing knowledge. Our failure to understand this and what it has to do with the enlightenment, democracy, and liberty is why I keep ranting about education. Is it worth a thread? I don't think people care. People come here with their own ax to grind, not to get information. I have spent 3 hours on this post, because of looking for information and then attempting to organize and word my reply. I accused of repeating myself, and that I do because it seems no one pays attention to what I say. Then in time to a move to a different forum hoping for a different result.

Pursuing knowledge was not possible when the hours of a workday pretty much number of daylight hours in a day, seven days a week. Our liberty was protected when it was made law that children could not work in the factories during school hours. Arguing that their education was about preparing them industrial work, is a very stupid argument. Industry tried to close our schools when we mobilized for war, claiming they were not getting their monies worth from education and that the war caused a labor shortage. Industry would have loved to bring an end to child labor law and get that cheap labor back. It had been common to use children in factories and mines and this assured they grew up ignorant and had no chance of doing better in life.

Now we are getting far from the topic of the importance of domestic women and a woman's right to be a full-time mother, and to expect to be supported.
It appears that discussion will never happen with members of this forum. People just are not relating to that human experience from the position of a woman who thinks raising children is the most important thing we can do, and obviously, the women feel very threatened by the topic.

Maybe we should drop this thread and move on to what ownership has to do with liberty? As I face the powerlessness of poverty with my low-income neighbors and our long-time established relationships are being destroyed because we have to move, when we seriously need to depend on each other, I think the land issue is worthy our focus.
Athena is offline  
Old March 13th, 2018, 05:45 AM   #127
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoosier88 View Post
Yes, but not just any Caucasian would do. They had to be WASP of property - emphasis on the Protestant. Prospective voters could not be Roman Catholic, Jewish, Islamic, Native People, Black, women & on & on. We have since extended the franchise. The next great effort is to form the electorate in long-term planning & administration & goal-setting.
And there are good reasons for this. And that was what free public education was about.

Nothing about humans is black and white. However, the dream of democracy involved many things. One of the most important factors of democracy is family order so humans are not like a swarm of ants.

However, family order does support tribal thinking and that excludes "those" from "us". That is not good for democracy.

However, a democracy that is not well educated is dysfunctional and will self-destruct, so the elector must be well educated. That education is not education for technology. Understanding technology has nothing to do with self-government.

However, that education does unite "those people" with "us" and it makes us a strong and united democracy centered on the values and principles of democracy. Each individual carrying the same set of values, and yet recognizing the importance of different points of view, and different talents and interest. All having internalized authority.
Athena is offline  
Old March 13th, 2018, 06:03 AM   #128
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,772
Quote:
Originally Posted by right to left View Post
That's right! That was the whole reason why Catholic newcomers created their own colony-then-state- Maryland. Most of what's happened regarding rights existing in practice/as opposed to theoretical rights, is that the broad, unspoken definition of the white race has been expanded over time. As you mentioned, at first it was just White Anglo Protestants from the British Isles; then it was expanded to include other northern Europeans...Germans, Scandinavians..then Euro Catholics..then Southern Europeans...then Jews, but the loose definition of who does and doesn't qualify as part of the white majority will never be expanded to include blacks and other darker skinned peoples, nor will it include Iranians, Arabs (just as white as Italians for that matter) or Muslims as long as Arab, Iranian and Muslim nations are on the enemies list.

A quick example of how far universal rights extend under conservative white thinking is the Philando Castille police shooting incident in Minnesota a couple of years ago. Castille was black, but a legal gun owner with a concealed carry permit...which he informed the cop about and still got shot dead; and if that wasn't bad enough, where the fuck was the NRA defending this gun owner's right to bear arms for his own personal protection? Did Wayne LaPierre have anything to say about the Castille Shooting? Did Alex Jones start fomenting and regurgitating rage about the State killing a free, law-abiding citizen like he did back after the Ruby Ridge Case?

Actually getting universal rights practiced for everyone is harder than declaring them as theoretical goals, and it doesn't seem to happen in societies divided by entrenched wealth hierarchies where a mostly white elite doesn't see democracy as to their benefit, and just wants the people who are likely to be their core supporters to have full rights and privileges.

And that's where we get to women...who cannot be completely disenfranchised today, but effectively have lesser rights than men in actual fact if we go beyond the few women of privilege like female politicians or a handful of CEO's grabbing the brass ring, and note that 70% of American workers working for minimum wage are women...many of them have children as well, and the conservative attacks on reproductive rights is flimsily disguised as concern for 'life' while intended as a direct encumbrance on the actual freedoms that women can act on in their daily lives!
One group of human beings have maintained the separation from others better than the Jews. They maintain their tribal mentality and Native Americans could take a lesson form them as they too want to maintain their tribal identity and customs. Is this compatible with democracy? Yes, as individuality is compatible with democracy. However, there must be social agreements to be a united nation and transmitting those social agreements is the purpose of public education.

Who is not disenfranchised today? Especially, the poor. A democracy must be capable of managing economic decisions that meet everyone's needs, but education for technology is not preparing us for that. We are prepared to be dependent on authority, not to be the authority a democracy requires.

70% of American workers working for minimum wage are women...many of them have children as well,

And who is caring for the children? Working women living in poverty is not the feminist dream, but is a reality. There are not enough high paying jobs for everyone. Few of us wait long enough and get enough education to do anything but be mothers and fathers and maybe we would all be happier if it was good enough to just be a good human being whose main goal is to raise and healthy and happy family.
Athena is offline  
Old March 15th, 2018, 01:10 AM   #129
Senior Member
 
xMathFanx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Athena View Post

70% of American workers working for minimum wage are women...many of them have children as well,

And who is caring for the children? Working women living in poverty is not the feminist dream, but is a reality.
@Athena

People are generally sold the lie that most people grow up to have careers, while in truth those with careers account for only a few percent of the population. The rest will have a job, that is work they would not elect to do if they were not being paid for it.

Now, as you say, if both parents are going off to work all day, who is looking after the children? Answer--nobody. If one elects to have children, they have a responsibility to look after them which would require a reorganizing of one's life quite a bit. In the US, it is perfectly feasible to do so with one full-time salary plus another part-time work, if necessary (which, now with the internet, is more feasible than ever before). It honestly seems as though the children & the family are an after-thought to personal desires of the parents as the standard today.
Thanks from Sabcat and Athena
xMathFanx is offline  
Old March 15th, 2018, 01:38 AM   #130
Riot Grrrl
 
Lyzza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Stage Left
Posts: 5,680
Quote:
Originally Posted by xMathFanx View Post
@Athena

People are generally sold the lie that most people grow up to have careers, while in truth those with careers account for only a few percent of the population. The rest will have a job, that is work they would not elect to do if they were not being paid for it.

Now, as you say, if both parents are going off to work all day, who is looking after the children? Answer--nobody. If one elects to have children, they have a responsibility to look after them which would require a reorganizing of one's life quite a bit. In the US, it is perfectly feasible to do so with one full-time salary plus another part-time work, if necessary (which, now with the internet, is more feasible than ever before). It honestly seems as though the children & the family are an after-thought to personal desires of the parents as the standard today.
LOL!

Are there packs of feral children running around your neighborhood?

Every working couple i know has daycare, babysitter, family, or their kids are in school. Maybe you have heard of these things?

Last weekend i was surrounded by a bunch of older women while volunteering, and they all worked and raised families. Now, they are talking about how their children are doing the same. Strange, none of them had issues with unsupervised and/or unloved children.

More baseless bullshit from this SUPREME bullshit factory of a thread.....
Thanks from Clara007
Lyzza is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Issues > Civil Rights

Tags
call, liberation, women



Search tags for this page
Click on a term to search for related topics.
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Liberation Of Mosul By US Iraq Peshmerga Forces Underway skews13 Current Events 77 October 19th, 2016 10:17 AM
Readout of the Vice Presidentís Meeting With Chinese Peopleís Liberation Army Chief o The White House The White House 0 May 16th, 2014 06:12 AM
A Global Goal on Gender Equality, Womenís Rights and Womenís Empowerment Mrs. CJ Parker Civil Rights 9 May 23rd, 2013 06:48 PM
Readout of the Presidentís Call with University of Connecticut Womenís Basketball Coa The White House The White House 0 April 11th, 2013 07:40 AM
Liberation Theology waitingtables Religion 36 May 6th, 2008 04:34 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.