Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Should the Democratic Party Change Its Name?
My answer? It is the party of slavery.
Yes, after their support for slavery and racist laws and regulations for all those decades it’s clear that the well documented and unambiguous racist history of that party should make us all demand that the party distance itself from their history of racism. The party name makes me blanch every time I hear it or read it. How can anyone be associated with such a party that is laced with a sordid history of hatred and bigotry and racism?
Published in Politics
Maybe you’d be happier on another website.
What an odd remark.
Kakistocrats.
From Wiki: A kakistocracy (English pronunciation: /kækɪsˈtɑkɹəsi/) is a state or country run by the worst, least qualified, or most unscrupulous citizens
The Boobean People’s Front? Or, the People’s Front of Boobea?
Or, you could just drop the “ic” and make it the Democrat Party.
This drives them nuts.
Ah yes the archipelago that represents the majority of the population, wealth, and industry of the nation. What fools these Democrats be.
As to the OP. It seems the Democrats are rather keen on ditching their ties to Slavery and racism, while the Right is desperately picking up what they have cast off. Whoever gets the South gets to hold the racial hot potato. To see Republicans fighting for the upkeep of the statues of traitorous Democrats. What has happened to our all encompassing hate of them?
I propose that both parties rename themselves in the following manner, by switching names and adding “Anti-“.
I like National Review and strongly disagree with this statement, even though I think I also have a disagreement with several editors over what should be done about Civil War monuments. If you listened to the last podcast, you might recall Charlie was not into the practice of removing statues, and Rich mentioned that there will be an article in NR that defends keeping these in place, as NR encourages debate. I have certainly had this debate with friends of my own who are from the South, and we do not all see it in the same way.
As for the Democratic Party changing its name, I’m all for it!!! But the canard that they will use there–a narrative which is bolstered by the White Supremacists who are disgusting and using Civil War monuments for a gross purpose–is the idea that the Democrats of yore would now all be Republicans. At least that’s what they say about the Democrats from the past that they say they don’t like.
Come on, Fred. I often agree with some of your thoughts, but sometimes you should just lighten up.
You know, I’m not a big fan of paganism, but I still think it’s wrong for ISIS to destroy the temples in Palmyra. How about you?
So the City of Baltimore and Charlotesville are like ISIS? It would seem to me that removing your own property is a lot different than being a bunch of vandals destroying someone else’s stuff.
Ah, but you will retort what about those people who tore down a statue yesterday? To which I will say that arrests have been made and criminal charges have been issued, as they should have been. The system works it would seem to me.
Do Eastern Europeans have to keep up statues of Communist icons erected all through out their cities and towns during their enslavement to that odious ideology? Of course the Confederate monuments were not erected during the Confederacy but rather after to celebrate what had and could have been, supposedly. I prefer erecting monuments to generals who win wars.
I’ll wake up with my degree, bank account, and oversized genitalia. So yeah.
Sure, but how much of this is a city deciding on its own to remove a statue, and how much of this is a bunch of fascists agitating for the removal of monuments and marching over the countryside looking for statues to tear down? Not a lot of the former, too much of the latter.
The fascists will not be mollified. If given the opportunity, they would launch rockets at Mt. Rushmore and bring it crashing down. They have no limiting factor.
Where do you draw the line?
The new name of the Party of Lincoln?
The Party of Trump.
[ spit take ]
Jesus, Doc! Two days in a row you’ve caused a “spit take!” Keep this up, pretty soon, I’m gonna have to buy a new monitor.
Can you describe what it would look like for people to peacefully petition and a city to agree to the removal of a statue, whose meaning has changed since it was first erected, and for it not to be giving in to the Left?
You mean like removing the Lenin statue in Seattle?
Your point is well taken. Your sentiments my own. History agrees.
But, perception is the issue.
We need to allow the Dems to wreck themselves. They are doing pretty well on their own.
Recall, the Whigs did this to themselves, and several new partisan groups gelled again later. A completely new one was The Free Soil Party which devolved into the Republican Party.
So, let’s just let the Dems foul and taint their own name. The see what happens. Though Plutocrats gets my vote, in case it matters…
Question. Do you believe that Charlottesville City Councilior Bob Fenwick would describe the process to remove the Robert E. Lee statue as “peacefully petitioned”? Here’s a link that provides some factual data.
That’s the left’s portrayal and narrative you’ve got ahold of there.
It’s easier nowadays to just use Prager University to explain this: https://www.prageru.com/courses/history/why-did-democratic-south-become-republican
That was very interesting. Thanks for the article.
The one with blood on his hands — is this the one? The left in the country and in the world do love their own mass murderers, don’t they?
Forcing the whole country to watch as the leftists in the present Democratic Party debate this would be worth its weight in gold.
Larry! Expand this, and submit it (under a nom de plume like Ali Wantizu) to HuffPo or Slate! I’ll bet you could gin up a movement!
If we’re proposing new names, I think that the Dems should be the Popular Front. Or was that the People’s Front?
Seriously: what would happen if a bunch of traditional Americans showed up and pulled this affront (to common decency) of a monument down?
The cops would be called and everyone involved would be FORCED to leave the area and they would prevent the destruction of private property. Arrests would be made BEFORE the statue was toppled.
Violent leftists scumbags get special treatment by mayors, university administrators, the MSM and the Democrats. Now we have to face the hard reality that the NT elites are more with these same people nowadays. The NT elites are in lock step in driving the narrative to be about Trump and not the destruction of private property.
I had to look it up. Good heavens—there really is one! It’s for sale—a mere $250,000 and it’s yours, to melt down, break your toes on, or genuflect before as you see fit.
Splitter!
Why now? That’s the question.
I’ve asked it before, but I’ll ask it again: How did eight years of GWB result in the hope-filled election of Barack Obama…and eight years of Barack Obama left us with this complete mess—of which, though I often find myself defending him, DJT is a feature?
I think the answer is found right there in your question. I’ve boldfaced it for you. ; )
BLM leader DeRay McKesson responded to questions about his movement’s culpability for inciting violence by asserting that his “people take to the streets as a last resort. . . . So when I think about anything that happens when people are in the street, I always start by saying, ‘People should not have had to have been there in the first place.’”
Speech is violence, violence is speech. This isn’t entirely new and isn’t entirely false: we are signifying creatures who will make communicative symbols out of anything. But the same behavior that we are told must be interpreted as a desperate last resort against oppression when engaged in by some people becomes a mere expression of innate evil and probably “privilege” too, when engaged in by others.
It’s interesting how things progress. We haven’t a lot to complain about these days so the left (since they never sleep) just starts on the next item on their long list of complaints about this country and western values. They learn to be opportunistic, of course, but they have a bunch of items simmering on the back burner that they can bring forward when the time seems right.
Obama said he was against same sex marriage but was never denigrated by the left for his “bigoted homophobic beliefs.” Later he changed his mind (pretended to, anyway) and everything was go and the skids were already greased.
The reason the left didn’t go after him earlier is because they knew he was lying (to get elected) and that he was an utterly reliable red diaper baby.