Do they even know that he was the villain?

Do they even know that he was the villain?


Thanks /u/PenneGesserit for posting on r/SelfAwareWolves! Please reply to this comment with an explanation about how this post fits r/SelfAwareWolves and have an excellent day! *To r/SelfAwarewolves commenters*: As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion. In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. **If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them**. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/SelfAwarewolves) if you have any questions or concerns.*


What are they even attempting to say with the “normalizing pedophiles” bit?


They think the “gay agenda” is to eventually welcome pedophiles into the umbrella of LGBTQ rights. Well, most of them don’t really think that. It’s just a convenient excuse to deny rights to gay people.


LGBTQ people have more or less the same view of pedophilia as "normal" people (I am part of that community). The closest thing I have ever heard to "normalizing pedophilia" is that people should be able to get help without risk of humiliation and having their life ruined because of something they *might* do.


There are a lot of problems where lines are blurry, where the courts do not typically act for justice, or institutions have more power than they should to block justice. All big ministries, not just the Roman Catholic Church, have a youth-pastor problem, for example. Imagine for a second that Alice and Bob are sixteen years old and in a consensual, sex-intesive relationship in the US. In all fifty states, this is protected by Romeo-and-Juliet laws... unless Bob is Bobbi, in which case whether R&J laws apply depends on the state _or county_ in which Alice and Bobbi are actively making out. In California, Alice and Bobbi are still safe. In Mississippi, they're screwed. In Oklahoma or Virginia I'd have to look up the statutes of the state or even county they're in. Even then it may become a matter of whether or not Alice's family is influential enough to bury Bobbi, usually by influencing a career-minded DA. And it gets worse if **a)** Bobbi is Robert's deadname, or is her transition name. Either way. Hint: when it's decidedly _not_ legal, and Alice's family gets Bobbi convicted of statutory rape, Bobbi ends up on the sex offender registry for child sexual abuse _even if Alice is older than Bobbi (by months)._ Another example is what happens when Alice sexts Bobbi (or Robert, it doesn't matter) in their day-to-day relationship. Then Eve sees this pic and reports it to law enforcement, who crack open Bobbi's iPhone and finds: Child porn. Of Alice taken by herself. Now Bobbi is charged with possessing child porn. Alice is _also_ charged with _creating and distributing_ child porn (yes, of herself), which she sent exclusively to Bobbi. If Eve stole the pic and put it on the internet, or sent it to all her friends (whether to enjoy the pic or to revel in Alice's scandal doesn't matter) then Eve is _also_ charged with distribution of CP, and all of her recipients can be charged with possession. Only one state (Maine, I think) has carved out an exception for sexting teens. In all the other states, kids can be imprisoned for years (or until they become adult) and are permanently on the sex offender registry. This is the US in 2021. Note that all these invocations of the US legal system or new additions to sex offender registries have nothing to do with actual [Uncle Ernies fiddling about](https://youtu.be/ygdgE-rA6lg). Actual child sex abuse cases are more complex on their own, even when they're gross, but even Democrats are glad to lock up poor losers while our fantastically rich ones go to Uncle Jeffrey's parties. Discussion for another time. **Edits:** Punctuation, cleanup and postscript. **PS:** The new recently-canceled feature of the iPhone line which would screen contents of Apple Backup for child porn could quickly become an increased vector of teen sexts into the legal system as Apple decides to report detected ones to law enforcement. (They might be suppressed, but the courts really don't like to enforce the 4th amendment, especially when it comes to children and sex.)


"Even then it may become a matter of whether or not Alice's family is influential enough to bury Bobbi, usually by influencing a career-minded DA." This happened to a coworker of mine. In Arkansas, it's legal for someone up to 2 years older to have sex with someone below 18, like an 18yo with a 16, or a 19yo with a 17yo. But the 16yo was the daughter of some small town big shot, so my 18yo coworker was pressured to make a plea deal. He was not happy when I told him he got fucked over. Even less happy when I printed out the law from the official Arkansas website I found it on to show him proof.


Which is especially fucking rich seeing as only one party has religious members proudly fighting to keep child marriage "traditions" alive in the South, and it ain't the Democrats.


Every conservative accusation is an admission of guilt




Also, Ted Nugent. Who totally is a pedoph… patriot.


Remember how pedophile ted nugent has that famous song "jail bait", about having sex with under age teens?


It's not pedophilia when it's a kick ass rock star fucking 14 year olds


It doesn't count if they're groupies


It's not just that, a lot of them don't see a difference between being gay and being a pedophile.


Makes sense when they don't care that much about consent or people having agency in their own lives. For us it's easy the difference is always consent but if for them consent is less of a deal than "respecting the lord's word" or whatever then yeah it's basically the same amount of fucked up in their minds.


See: claiming they're going to get attacked by trans people in the bathroom.


I've even seen them go further than that. "If a man can sleep with a man, what's next? Fucking animals?!" It's like... how... HOW do you make this leap.. wtf?!?!


They've been saying that for years. Still nobody is trying to normalize pedophilia. In fact, some time ago a few NNN users were caught larping as MAPs (minor attracted persons) and liberals, to attack their character. I would say most people who identify as MAPs on Twitter are just alt-right trolls who repeat gay-rights arguments as a "gotcha" against LGBT rights


Yeah I was in a queer community and people were randomly shitting on MAPs a lot during that period, venting that it's disgusting to even try to associate it with the community. Some self-proclaimed MAP actually came forward specifically to say that the MAP community never had any plans to join the queer community or use their identity as a sexual minority thing and that it was basically started by queerphobic trolls to try to delegitimize the LGBTQIA+ to outsiders. I checked and it's true. The entire MAP thing was started by trolls. Some people reclaimed it apparently for some reasons but generally most of it is trolling from queerphobic people trying to make us sounds perverse. It's the same argument as the whole Super Straight thing. "Well if we don't get included that's discriminatory against a sexual minority. So they'll have to get us in".. Like.....no....Because nuances. Alt-right trolls are too stupid to understand nuances tho so of course.


That does sound like their typical homophobic bullshit.


Probably a nod to Q Anon


White ignoring Matt ‘Interstate sex trafficker/all around diddler’ Gaetz


Yeah that one hits new levels of hypocrisy. Republican voters constantly forgive and reelect child molesters into power but it's the other side doing the normalisation...


Fake newz!!!!1!!eleven! /s


Its wishful thinking on their behalf. Just look at all the republicans that got caught diddling kids.


Yeah for real, I have no doubt that if someone introduced a law to lower the age of consent to 16 nationwide you'd have tons of Republicans champing at the bit to push it through. It's always projection all the time.




It's a way for them to justify violence against political opponents.


Well I’ve seen positions before that pedophiles and child molesters are two separate things. And that one can be attracted to children, but make an active effort to never indulge it because they understand how terrible it is. For personal reference, I once had a customer that had done a lot of business with me over the years. He seemed like a pretty cordial fellow, and even though we had pretty differing political stances, we could enjoy debating with each other. One day, and I don’t remember how the conversation started, but we’d been talking about the definition of a child molester. And then he said something I’ll never forget. “Well, what if she tried to seduce you?” And my stomach kinda did a lurch. Keep in mind that we weren’t talking about kids that had already hit puberty. So I took a deep breath, and decided I’d do what I could to give him a non-judgmental explanation. Fortunately, I’d had training in raising troubled children, so I could relay to him the facts. That the kids that do that aren’t actually interested in sex or any sexual contact. That it’s learned behavior from a truly broken household as one of the only methods to receive affection, and that it’s trauma informing their actions. That it can take years to recover, and a lot of patience. Once he got it, he fell pretty silent, and I changed the subject, much to his visible relief. And I think it stuck with him. He used to commonly talk about kids in what seemed to be harmless contexts but could still be construed as questionable. But after, kids never once came up in our talks. Perhaps I would have been better served reporting my misgivings to the police. But I felt that maybe he just needed a friendly voice that could give him a real route out.


>Well I’ve seen positions before that pedophiles and child molesters are two separate things. And that one can be attracted to children, but make an active effort to never indulge it because they understand how terrible it is. I mean, that's scientific fact. It's not one people talk about often, because they either don't know it, or have gotten tired of people calling them a pedophile just for saying it, but pedophiles and child molesters are not the same thing, and conflating them as if they are is dangerous. Here's an expert on the matter: [https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2017/11/11/pedophilia-and-child-sexual-abuse-are-two-different-things-confusing-them-is-harmful-to-children/#content](https://blogs.bmj.com/medical-ethics/2017/11/11/pedophilia-and-child-sexual-abuse-are-two-different-things-confusing-them-is-harmful-to-children/#content) "In other words, non-offending pedophiles should not be stigmatized so long as they do not offend, nor mistaken for sexual abusers. Instead, they should be encouraged to seek treatment for their disorder before they cause harm to children — which will only happen if we can keep clear about the difference between (a) and (b)."


Also, the vast majority of child molesters aren't actually pedophiles but molest kids for other reasons than being specifically attracted to kids, like convenience, power or other abusive reasons.


*Matt Gaetz has left the chat*


Conservatives: Democrats were the *real* confederates! Democrats: *Removes confederate statues* Conservatives: THEY'RE TRYING TO ERASE ***OUR*** HISTORY!1!


Also important to mention the party switch. But republicans aren't great at history


Not just the Southern Strategy, but the fact that the Democrat Party split in three leading up to the Civil War


Even the modern KKK has three different distinct groups. What's really hilarious is, one of them opposes Nazi imagery and memorabilia because they oppose socialism. The other two groups understand that the Nazis were not actually socialists. So it's like, within a group of dimwits, there's an even higher level of dimwit.


The dimmest wit


The Black Hole of wit.


Hierarchy of halfwits


It's over 9000!


The dimwittiest!


Not sure if that's gonna me my next band name, or just the title of my autobiography.


That's hilarious. They're simultaneously smarter than the other KKK because they oppose the Nazis, and also stupider because they think they were actually socialists.


Being right for the wrong reason, within the context of still being wrong. It’s a hell of a Gordian knot to untie.


Unwinnable argument. If you showed them incontrovertible proof the Nazis weren't socialists, they'd just start liking Nazis.


Of course it’s unwinnable with people like that. It’s like playing chess with a pigeon. It will knock over all the pieces, shit on the board, and then strut around like it won.


Accurate analogy. They won't see the error of their ways till their ideology personally hurts them, and not even then, in many cases


When the Wizard takes INT as a dump stat they turn into a Grand Wizard


Oh man, the KKK so much more ridiculous than you'd ever imagine. The modern KKK from the 1920's was also a pyramid scheme. I highly recommend the Behind the Bastards episodes on them, it's truly hilarious.


Wait which group is on the higher dimwit level, the dumber one or the marginally less dumb one?


Hmm. I think it would be the marginally less dumb ones. I mean if a two year old and an adult both do a dumb thing, the adult is the bigger dimwit. So the ones with enough reasoning power to think critically about their beliefs, but still arrive at an idiotic conclusion, would be the bigger dimwit.


And again at the 1948 Democratic Convention when Hubert Humphrey said they needed to "get out of the shadow of states' rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights," leading to the adoption of civil rights to the Democratic Platform by a narrow margin.


Of course, certain corners of the right will claim that what *looks* like Democrats' support of black people is *really* them holding them down and "keeping them poor" to keep them reliant on the Democrats and dutifully voting for them, thus proving the Democrats really are the same party as before the nonexistent party switch... /not-my-views


*Democratic* party. "Democrat Party" is a derogatory nickname intentionally used by Republicans to delegitimize their opponents. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrat_Party_(epithet)


If someone says Democrat party I know that I don't ever need to talk to them.


You are definitely correct that it is the Democratic Party, not the Democrat Party. But, that said, I can't figure out how "Democrat Party" was supposed to delegitimize...well, anything. Am I just missing something here? It doesn't seem derogatory to me. Incorrect, yes, but not derogatory.


Because it is used as a purposeful separation from the party and democracy by implying that, when used as an adjective, there is a distinction between being democratic and being a Democrat. It posits an implication that Democrats do not necessarily have any relation to democracy, but "Republican" has no convenient shorthand and retains its association with republican governance. It is an intentionally-one sided framework for American political discussion, and is quite famous in having a measurable change in reaction when tested in focus groups for this reason.


Because the right (claims to) love Democracy and the democratic process that our nation was founded upon, but they (openly) hate democrats. By saying "Democrat party" instead of "Democratic party" they can divorce the name from the system they (claim to) love while reinforcing association to people they hate while maintaining plausible deniability about their intentions. Also "Democrat party" just sounds stupider, grammatically, and that's a bonus for them.


"I love democracy. I love the Republic." - The GOP... I mean Chancellor Palpatine


You have to consider who uses the phrase "Democrat Party" and how it's being used. Apart from a few people who unwittingly get it wrong, it's used by right-wingers who have been told that their usage is wrong, but they continue to use it anyway. People like Rush Limbaugh use (ahem ... used) it. And Hannity, and Tucker Carlson. It's like "All Lives Matter". On face value it's inoffensive, but then you need to consider who is using the phrase and how they are using it.


A big part of it is just *calling people by a name they don’t want you to use*. Ever had a bully who did that? Found a nonsensical nickname and called you by it, and got all his friends to call you that too? It’s literally that.


Not just the Southern Strategy, but the fact that it's the same god-damned states then that are problems now. The same states that fought for the confederacy today are run by Republicans and today are racist and awful.


The Democrat party also split during the civil rights era and the racist half was wholeheartedly welcomed into the republican party.


They didn't join the Republican party until a couple decades later; first they formed the State's Rights Democratic Party after the 1948 convention and nominated Strom Thurmond who wouldn't join the Republicans until 1964.


He also filibustered the Civil Rights Act voting for I believe over 24 hours. And then yeah like you mentioned, Strom Thurmond joined the Republican's because more conservative Republicans from the south voted against the Civil Rights Act, and more northern liberal Democrats voted for the Civil Rights Act.


Democratic party


They just put their hands over their ears and shout LA LA LA LA LA IT'S A MYTH without offering a shred of evidence.


And ignoring the mountain of evidence (read: recorded history) against them.




One of our deep state operatives will be by soon, to...um...make sure you don't say such things any more. Have a nice day.


Some nuance to “the party switch”: there wasn’t so much a party switch as there was a solidifying of each party on their respective sides of the aisle. It’s just that the sides they solidified on are a significant departure from what they’re known most for before 1920. A lot of it is from the progressive wing of the GOP getting firmly shut out of the national GOP between 1910 and 1936 and the Dixiecrats getting firmly shut out of the national Democrats between 1936 and 1970.


Exactly. They didn't just trade hats one day. A lot of race and class issues were getting fought out over half a century which greatly affected political organization. Conservatives almost universally reject this reality. It's too much fun for them to say that slavery and Jim Crow were perpetrated by democrats.


The fact that some of the people in congress or the senate were alive to see the party switch is the crazier thing to me. Like this isn’t long ago history it happened 3 generations ago. It’s just like the civil right movement, These major changes are fresh as fuck and they like to act like people weren’t there to live it.


It makes me so frustrated, especially when talking to people like my uncle who love to act like racism doesn't exist today and is ancient history. Like, dude, you're in your 70s. You went to a segregated school as a kid. You were there. How is this ancient history?


It's easier just to point out that democrats were conservatives at the time and Republicans were liberals, blows their little fucking minds


I said this to my MAGA parents and they literally said "...fake news." Seriously. I knew they were over the deep end at this point and there was no talking to them. I haven't even asked about their vax status because nothing I say will convince them about anything. (In fact we didn't talk for a year because I always refuted their MAGA bullshit and pissed them off.)


~~The first Republican president had friendly correspondence with Karl Marx for years during his presidency.~~ bullshit


Oh perfect opportunity for another Marx related fact: Karl Marx was pro civilian firearms ownership, he believed an armed proletariat was necessary to keep them in control. Ronald Raegen on the other hand supported and signed into law some of the most restrictive gun laws in the country while in office as California's governor.


And only beause black people wanted to exercise their 2A rights, too.


Yup, because the police wouldn't patrol Oakland so the black panthers did if I recall correctly.


I think it was because the police were brutalizing Oakland citizens and the Black Panthers started following the police around and citing law to them while exercising their right to bear arms when the police were trying to harass people.


bad ass, they need to do that today


As much as I'd love to see something like that happen today (and work), it's worthwhile to remember there's a reason it doesn't happen today. The government destroyed the Black Panther party. They were terrified of their children's breakfast program, spread lies about it within communities, infiltrated the organization, and killed important members. Not to mention that police have only gained power since then. If a black man in any state open carried behind a police officer and stated the actual law when they harass someone the cop would shoot them. Might not happen everytime, but it would end up happening


Absolutely agree. It's the only thing that ever kept cops in line and it was 100% legal.


I've always thought that if the left ever got serious about gun control, all we would need to do would be to get as many black people as possible to register as gun owners and, only in open-carry states, carry their guns on their hips while the shop the frozen food section of Wal-Mart. If enough racist white people see the black people with legal guns (you know, the way *they* do it, too), I am sure there would be a sudden push from the right to ban open-carry. Of course, given how shitty law enforcement is in this country, that would be a highly dangerous plan for any of the black people who carried their guns. But, still, I think it's a viable plan in theory.


There are actually several [black](https://hueypnewtongunclub.org) [gun](https://naaga.co) [clubs](https://blackgunownersassociation.org) heavily supporting open carry, of which many saw heavy membership growth after the election of the Chump, which continues to this day. My own stance on firearm ownership has shifted as well, most especially after the ridiculous miscarriage of justice toward the victims of that fascist, Kyle Rittenhouse.


Well, Republicans have started to restrict mail-in voting, a voting method Republicans used because Democrats in 2020 used mail-in ballots to vote and help guarantee major victories for the WH, Senate, and many other federal ballots. Republicans are salty because someone is using the same method of voting they do.


A nice theory but the history of massacres of black populations by white militias suggests that a legal remedy isn't how the white population will respond to an armed Black population. I'm specifically thinking of the Atlanta massacre of 1906, which intensified several-fold in terms of non-legal killings of Black citizens when the Black population started arming up in an attempt to defend itself. The yellow press of the time used it as a provocation to rile the white mob up even more; I could easily see our boy Tucker playing that role today. I think it's comforting to assume that an extra-judicial radially motivated militia couldn't happen today, but the way things are currently going, I don't think I'm there.


The black panthers were so fuckin badass


So I don't think that's actually true. From my own understanding, Marx regularly wrote in a newspaper that Lincoln regularly read. Marx sent a congratulatory letter to Lincoln, and received a response indirectly John Quincy Adams' grandson acknowledging Lincoln's letter. There wasn't any regular, direct contact between the two. However, there was defininitely influence of ideas between them.


Both parties where big tent. So you had New York dems who served Tammany hall and wall street, southern segregationists, populists etc.


They wave the confederate flag to remind the democrats of their past while having the same thought process of the democrats of the the past.


Oh they know the history; they just flip it on its head for propaganda purposes. It is very much the same as cherrypicking locations of liberal states with homeless people and degraded houses to say that liberal states are poor, even though by all metrics conservative states tend to be the poorest in the US and liberal states subsidise the conservative ones!


I find it better to use “liberal” and “conservative.” The conservatives wanted to keep slaves, but the liberals wanted to free the slaves. Then if they say it was republicans, why yes, the liberal Republicans wanted to free the slaves.


Personally I'd say progressives and conservatives. They're pretty much antithesis of one another.


I'd say more progressives and regressives.


That's a much better distinction -- neither party has much connection to it's founding iteration anymore. Case in point, Republicans used to be the "big government" party with Lincoln while Democrats were all about "state's rights". That has obviously switched almost completely.


And try even mentioning it and they’ll cry FAKE NEWS THAT ISNT WHAT HAPPENED. Despite having sources proving the parties switched platforms. Like you said. Not great at history.


I mean all you have to do is point out which party the former Confederate states vote for. With the exception of Virginia, they're all (fairly) reliable Republican states. Georgia was a bit of a fluke.


Rural Virginia is still super red and stuck on robert lees teat, dont count it as safely blue yet


That's every state though. Virginia is a safer blue than some of the rust-belt states.


They are too stupid to analyze data. I fucking hate it here. But hey, democrats of today love flying some confederate imagery, am I right?


Theyre aware of the party switch, just dont understand what it actually means. Youre right about crying fake news tho, better just trust the goatee with a podcast to get some truth.


I don't know, I know a conservative history teacher, they believe that the switch never happened and that the civil war was about states rights. You can believe anything if your political beliefs force you to be ignorant to justify them.


“A state’s right to what?” “Set their own laws!” “And which law was the one that was so important that their right to have it was worth secession and war?” *crickets*


Exactly how the conversation went.


So many threads with "in before someone says ThE pArTiEs SwItChEd!". They literally did you numbskulls. You're not the party of Lincoln, you're the party of Landon (who lost to Roosevelt).


I though Goldwater was the guy who started the whole "bring in the racists into the party"


Goldwater came at the very end of the party switch, the electoral map had already inverted and the racists were firmly in place. You should read about Strom Thurmond and the Dixiecrats. Thurmond and a number of other democrats who were opposed to integration left the party to create their own pro-segregation third-party. They won four states in the deep south in 1948, but failed miserably nation-wide. After the loss, they all either left politics completely or switched parties to become republicans. The states they won have been GOP strongholds ever since.


Roosevelt was a democrat who brought big government to the table. With it he created jobs across the country to help remedy the great depression.


I hate how they'll try to tell you the southern strategy never happened. I feel like if they told Lee Atwater that he'd smack them upside the head


They deny it because it's bad for their PR. Remember, they don't have any beliefs.


Conservatives: Republicans are the *real* patriots! Republicans: *flying confederate flags everywhere*


lol the “party of Lincoln” literally tried to start civil war 2 a few months ago.


That's why they always use the party name, and not the actual political alignment. But it would be even more accurate if the right side was just 'conservatives'


"Regressive" is a better codifier for their group's ideals.


Strom Thurmond died a republican, just like all the other racist dixiecrats.


Very good


Conservatives fall under one of two categories: the intentional liars, and the horrendously misinformed(who are also likely to be willfully misinformed). The former are aware of the party swap, and choose to lie about it. The latter are unaware that the party swap was a real thing, and don't care enough to be informed of the truth.


Here’s the thing: you don’t even need to know about the Southern Strategy for that to be an invalid argument. The political party is an organization and it’s values are reflective of who is in the party *now*. Obviously, groups tend to attract other like-minded individuals but the collective can evolve over time into something completely different. How many Democrats from 1860 are in the party today? None? Okay then. Of the two parties, which is courting white supremacist today and which group is more racially diverse?


That’s what kills me at their attempted “BUT DEMOCRATS WERE THE BAD GUYS” argument. Ok then, which side now actively has people that display confederate and nazi memorabilia/flags? Which side actively wants to scale back on women’s/LGBTQ rights? Which side actively fights separation of church and state? Which state fights every single attempt to make life better for all? Oh NOT the democrats? Wild.


The other day the commenters in conservative memes were saying it’s the democrats who openly march with the Nazis. I could not fathom how they got to that line of thought.


I’ve been to several protests/rallies for human rights and have never ONCE seen confederate or Nazi propaganda on our side of the protest. These people are beyond delusion.


Right. Which is why an avowed Nazi ran as the Republican rep for Congress.


So when Trump defended White Supremacists and the people marching with them as “fine people” do they think he was defending Democrats or something? So fucking dumb. They never think about how stupid their arguments are when applied to real life circumstances.


"Yes. Democrats were the bad guys. In 19whatever. Who are the bad guys today?"


“Yeah, I know Lincoln was a Republican who freed the slaves. What have ya done for us lately?”


Let's not give too much credit to a party that's made its mission to compromise with the fucks you're talking about.




They never point out that the Democrats currently support affirmative action, black lives matter, critical race theory, and pretty much everything else when it comes to Black and African-American issues.


I think this meme is created by a, "the left are the real fascists," type liar/grifter. Clearly all the events in the meme are rooted in right wing ideologies. Its the projection of shitty right wing authoritarianism onto the left. I bet you could find a bunch of PragerU, Ben Shapiro, and others with videos defending stealing land from native Americans, or agreeing with Japanese Internment. The rhetoric of the right: they will both defend atrocities committed by America, but also use those same atrocities to attack the left.


Would I vote for any Republican today? No. Would I have voted for Lincoln? Definitely. Republicans today would HATE Lincoln. They pretend not to, because he is a historical hero, but we all know they would be financially and morally supporting John Wilkes Boothe


Ugh, I've seen a few videos on Lincoln on YouTube and there always seems to be people that hate Lincoln in the comments. So anti-Lincoln sentiment is still there among southern conservatives.


Living Democrats condemn all of this shit. Republicans ought to know this with all their bitching about blm and Antifa.


It's a bit telling that the bad things about Democrats are all 100+ years old, and all the good things Republicans brag about are 80+ years old.


Like when they try to use Lincoln. "We do things for black people, Lincoln freed the slaves, and he was a republican." "You mean the last time your party did a good thing for black people wasn't even in the last century?"


They are also super proud that the first 23 Black Congressmen were all Republicans. Yet their total number of black Republican Congressmen is somewhere around 35, including those 23.


Holy shit


Japanese internment isn’t that old yet. Bill Clinton (and Biden) did some fucked up hard on crime stuff in the 90s and Nixon actually had some policies I agree with and would be seen as unrepublican now.


>Nixon actually had some policies I agree with and would be seen as unrepublican now. The EPA, Clean Water Act, Title IX, and Roe to name a few. Edit: Correction. He hated Roe.


Dirty little secret: conservatives in the late 60’s - early 70’s were all about abortion rights until they made the conscious effort to get in bed with the Southern evangelical lunatics beginning in the early 80’s (culminating in the 1994 takeover of Congress with Gingrich as Speaker) - which explains how the South ended up solidly red. Fucking ghouls, all of them.


Throw in more self-determination for Native Americans, the Clean Air Act, created OSHA, wanted more support for poor Americans, and reached out to China. When he lost to JFK in his 1960 presidential run, it was his job as Vice President to tally the electoral college votes to certify his own loss, not only did he do so without a fuss, but when Hawaii had problems counting its electoral college votes, Nixon offered to just give them all to JFK, rather than worry about how much he lost by. I'd take Nixon over Trump in a heartbeat.


>I'd take Nixon over Trump in a heartbeat. Be careful what you wish for. You get the war on drugs and his linking of anti-war leftists and black civil rights leaders with drugs like heroin and marijuana, sabotage on the Great Society policies, Pinochet in power resulting in a fascist and deadly takeover of Chile and the economy collapsing, courting with racist conservative segregationists, pro-apartheid sympathies in South Africa, Vietnam War and the bombing of Cambodia, and the support of the anti-communist dictatorship in Uruguay. Edit: Don't forget Watergate.


Nixon over Trump? Trump was a self centered moron who bumbled his way through four years like a toddler. Nixon was a cold blooded criminal, whip smart and lacking almost any sense of morality. Also, Nixon had Kissinger, one of the smartest war criminals in the history of this country, as his guiding star. When people opposed Trump, he called them anti American. When people opposed Nixon, he called them anti American and destroyed them root and stem. Nixon didn’t just have a fragile ego like Trump; he was clever and wicked enough to hurt people.


>When people opposed Trump, he called them anti American. When people opposed Nixon, he called them anti American and destroyed them root and stem. Don't forget he had COINTELPRO with Hoover surveying and infiltrating and taking down anti-war leftists and black civil rights leaders, sometimes by inflicting violence as a result.


And how many of those are on these lists? I didn't say that nothing good has come from Republicans in 80 years, just that it doesn't make it on to these kinds of lists.


Who led the Lily White Movement to cull Black Republicans post-Civil War? Republicans. Who started the War on Drugs to counter anti-war leftists and black activists? Republicans. Who gave money to death squads in Latin America and brought crack to the streets? Republicans. Who sabotaged the New Deal Policies and Great Society Policies along with Conservative Southern Democrats? Republicans. Who courted southern conservative racists as part of a strategy to win new voters? Republicans. Who passed anti-union laws? Republicans. Who passed causing the US housing market to collapse and deregulated Wall Street that caused the Great Recession? Republicans. Who started the wars in the Middle East? Republicans. Who supports anti-LGBT laws and voting restrictions? Republicans. Who started the 2nd Red Scare and Lavender Scare? Republicans. Who supported fascist governments in South America? Republicans. Which party do the KKK and white supremacists today now supports? Republicans. Same gotcha.


Not really your point is relevent to today and their point is about the conservative democrats of past. So your argument is the winner and their argument is stupid and/or evil.


I mean, to play it fair.


The problem with some of the statements is that plenty of Republicans would say "what's wrong with this?"


That's true. The original meme is clearly meant to be aimed at Democrats, to make someone who doesn't know much about either party's history question whether it really supports what they think it does.


The forign wars bit always gets me considering how hard they cried over the current democrat in office pulling out of Afghanistan.


TIL the Bushes were Democrats.


They are also probably eventually label all the people in the republican party that didn't go along with Trump democrats aswell.


They already call them RINOs (Republicans in name only).


You mean all this time the democrats could have been calling right wing democrats Dinos? Like literally dinosaurs?


That has always been a thing. DINO is a common saying for right leaning Democrats.


They should also know Trump was a Democrat most of his life. At one point supporting the Clintons. 😝


Trump was a Democrat because he was in New York and the state and city are democratic. He doesn’t have any political loyalties or ideology other than narcissism.


Oh, and the Progressive’s anti war protesting falling on deaf ears during the Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations.


We should be supporting *domestic* wars!


So does this make the confederate flag a Democrat flag?


See, all those Confederate flags at trump rallies are really democRAT baby eating antifuh demons!!!


They're not the sharpest knives in the drawer.


They’re a spoon pretending to be a knife.


I tried posting the question of how do they claim to he the party of Lincoln and then worship the confederate flag? And... immediately pernma-banned. "Who are cowardly snowflakes who don't understand history? REPUBLICANS!"


The mods of that sub are either total psychopathic fascists or the biggest snow flakes the world has ever seen. Or both.


And just completely stupid. Don't forget just because they can't count to three doesn't mean they can't be three things!


**Southern Strategy** *In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans. As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South who had traditionally supported the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party. It also helped to push the Republican Party much more to the right.*


"Who loves foreign wars?" "Democrats!" "Who started the two most recent disastrous wars?" "uh wait hold on a sec"


I got banned from this sub for posting a sarcastic comment. I then got a warning for harassment after i replied to the ban saying they obviously weren't in to free speech. Snowflakes.


This should be in the /r/therightcantmeme.




[Nearly 50% of Trump Supporters in Iowa Think Japanese Internment Camps Were a Good Idea](https://www.mic.com/articles/130476/nearly-50-of-trump-supporters-in-iowa-think-japanese-internment-camps-were-a-good-idea)


Leftists: America should be held accountable for wrongdoing of the past Conservatives: NO IT HAPPENED A LONG TIME AGO IT DOESN'T MATTER! Also conservatives: Democrats should be held accountable for wrongdoing of the past


Conservatives love trying to make it about the party instead of the ideology.


This why it’s always funny to respond when they ask “who was pushing to keep slavery/who founded the kkk/etc.” with “conservatives.”


Love to hear the people who supported Trump think they're NOT normalizing pedophilia 😄


And incest, by the way he talks about his daughter 🤢🤢🤢


"Loves foreign wars" the Bushs started the war in Afghanistan and Biden ended it.


Normalizing pedophiles..... as they fully supported Roy Moore even after everything came out


Matt Gaetz, still in office, the list goes on.


Conservatives blaming Democrats for everything without acknowledging it was Conservative Democrats is cute.


I mean, they apparently don't know about the (this is a oversimplification) basically name swap of the two parties in the late 1800s, so I'm gonna say no


Funny they named most things that happened before the party swap. Wonder why that would be.


Who continues to fly literal confederate flags to this day, symbol of the first thing on this list? Not Democrats


OK, true thing, true thing, true thing, true thing, complex subject, what 70 years are we talking about, and zing WTF pedos out of nowhere!


Woah man, I would never insult the Skaven by lumping them in with Trumpers!


There’s Roy Moore in Alabama, that Republican in Missouri who was raping his daughters, trump, Gaetz, the rest of the Tallahassee republicans, the Minnesota GOP, trump friend Robert Kraft. No one in Hilary/Barack/Biden’s circle seems to be getting arrested for sex crimes. But they’re the pedophiles. Got it.


Wait until they hear about party realignment!


In the late 1800s the Republicans freaked out when a black man rose to prominence in the Texas GOP. The party started the Lily White Movement which was an anti-Bpack movement dedicated to White Supremacist ideology, forcing that Black man out of power in the party and ensuring White people would be the dominant power in the GOP from then on. Whenever they say this shit just respond with those 4 words; GOP Liliy White Movement. Shut them the fuck up.


Apparently the Whigs, Jeffersonian Democrats, Democratic-Republicans, and Republicans weren't all parties in power during the 20 year period of the trail of tears. E: not that these MAGAts really care about the US's genocide of American Indians.




So disingenuous. Most of those can be debunked by asking "When did this happen? Before or after 1965?" The parties basically completed a 180 in political alignment between the Civil War and the Civil Rights Act, culminating with the flight o the Southern Democrats to the Republican Party. The Democrats of the 19th century were the conservatives. As for foreign wars: both sides love them, but the Republicans have proven more hawkish over the last half century. Reagan was a big nuclear saber rattler, and both Iraq wars and the Afghanistan war were started by Bushes. And "normalizing pedophiles"? Seriously, \[Citation needed\]. Neither side is doing that.


It’s really telling that the closer you get to the present day, the more farcical and made up that accusations are…


It's the political version of r/onejoke. All they have are willful ignorance and mindless parroting.


I also want to add that if you aren’t a conservative, then you’re not aloud to comment or post and it’ll get removed. I mean, party of freedom of speech, am I right?


No Republican ever voted to start or continue a war in a foreign country. Yes, of course. All republicans are staunchly anti-war. Yep, uh huh, uh huh.


First two were conservative “Democrats”. Japanese internment was horrible, but was heavily endorsed by conservatives. Foreign wars - Are you serious? You can blame Raeganomics for the poor, and then we have the pedophiles which is just the chefs kiss of irony


Who ignores the party flip? Modern day conservatives!!