So James Dolan sent an email to his MSG employees to clarify his position on racism:
“I know how important this topic is to so many, and I do not want there to be any confusion about where I as an individual, or we as a company stand. So let me be clear: we vehemently condemn and reject racism against anyone, period.”
OK that’s a good start for Mr. Dolan. You might ask as a company, what is MSG doing to combat racism? Well:
“My point yesterday was about actions, and the importance of living your values,” Dolan’s Tuesday email continued. “At Madison Square Garden, we have worked hard to build an environment of inclusion and mutual respect and those are the values we try to live every day.
“Racism is born of ignorance and it’s up to each of us to understand the person working beside you is your equal without regard to color, or any of the other qualities that make us diverse. And any injustice to one person is an injustice to everyone.
“This is how we at MSG fight racism. We start with ourselves, and through our actions, we define who we are. That is how we can be an example to the wider world. That was the point of my message yesterday.
“I am proud of the environment you have created here. I know that this is a difficult time, and that we will always need to communicate with one another on hard issues. I will continue to do as much as I can to do as much as I can to help make our community even better. I know you will also.”
No. That’s not how you fight racism. That’s not at all how you fight racism. Dolan clears the lowest bar of anti-racism here with “the person working beside you is your equal without regard to color.” Sure I guess that’s the basic definition of racism so — hooray? From a historical context he’s met the 19th century bar for being woke.
“And any injustice to one person is an injustice to everyone.” Sure thing, but today we’re specifically talking about injustices to people of color. I understand that from some perspectives you could argue that he’s taking a stronger stance on racism, not limiting it to one type. But on the other hand, he’s specifically ignoring the message that black people bare the brunt of legal injustices — from citizens calling 911 on them for normal activities (jogging, being at the gym, etc.), to their unequal treatment by the law including police, prosecutors, judges, and juries. Of course you could add economic racism, with regards to schools, careers, upward mobility, red lining, bank loans, etc. All of this gets lost when you change the mantra from race specific to all of humanity.
Let’s clarify this point with an example. Imagine for a second that you have a family member with (God forbid) larynx cancer. So you decide to raise some money to bring awareness to larynx cancer. After some initial success, you go to your next potential donor and they remark “why are you only raising money for larynx cancer? Don’t we want to defeat all cancer? And why stop at cancer? You should tackle all illnesses!”
Strictly speaking the donor has a point. Raising money to defeat all illness is a much stronger goal. But by taking the stronger stance, your message has gotten diluted. If you raise money for all cancer or all illnesses, little to no money will be used for larynx cancer, because there are more popular things to use that money on. And now larynx cancer is again an afterthought, and the message you’re trying to convey is lost.
That’s exactly what Dolan is doing here. He’s obscuring the message that people of color are being oppressed. He’s lumping in the problems of the African American community with everyone else, so that the problems affecting black people are not as important as the ones we all suffer. People who generalize the message, taking the message from one group and applying it to the whole, are in essence diverting the original ideals and goals. Which means it is in opposition to that movement.
And Dolan continues: “This is how we at MSG fight racism. We start with ourselves, and through our actions, we define who we are.” The underlying theme is that racism can solved by everyone’s personal reflection, ignoring that there is a problem that needs to be tackled from a communal sense.
Now if you’re white, read that last line again, but this time imagine you’re not white. Imagine you’re a black person who has suffered numerous acts of racism in your lifetime. Does his solution seem to fix any of those racist incidents? “This is how we at MSG fight racism. We start with ourselves, and through our actions, we define who we are.”
By starting with an inner journey, could you stop the security guard from following you around in that store? By looking at yourself in the mirror, could you have prevented those taxis from speeding past you when you needed one? Would some self reflection have fixed that interaction with the person in your neighborhood who called the cops on you and your friends who were just hanging out in front of your house? Did the innocent victims of racist police brutality just fail to find their inner self?
People of color know that racism doesn’t get solved by people of color. They know they’re not at fault when people look at their darker skin and make nefarious assumptions. So how do Dolan’s words help them?
This begs the question — who is Dolan’s audience for this line? Surely it’s not black people. So then who? And why? Is it for white people to assuage their culpability? Is it so he can look in the mirror and say he has hired black people to prominent positions and declare he’s not a racist to himself by his own meager definition and not have to feel guilty about what is happening?
By failing to mention systematic racism directly and failing to take in to account the perspective of people of color, Dolan’s attempts at being woke instead reveals his racist convictions. Dolan doesn’t have to say anything blatantly racist, it’s clear from the subtext and the parts he omitted to specifically mention. For any person, these are disagreeable beliefs. But for an owner in a sport where 75% of the players are black, it’s straight up bad for business.
122 replies on “Dolan Clarifies His Racist Stance on Racism”
If only we could tee this up for Adam Silver and get him to agree.
Again, complicated issues you raise. Another perspective on the larynx cancer analogy — which is spot-on for the point you’re trying to prove — is that by limiting our focus to larynx cancer, the 1% can pay homage to the injustice of larnyx cancer by means of helping ensure we don’t broaden the question and the topic on the table to all illness — which would then include the economic status quo and their prerogatives.
Race has been used as a flashpoint to take these kind of economic issues off the table for decades now. In this iteration, the 1% “agrees” with the woke on the reality of racism and the woke leaves alone the economic arrangements that greatly benefit the 1%. The “agreement” costs the 1% next to nothing. In its earlier iterations, Republicans gained adherents to their efforts to enrich the 1% by appealing to the racist instincts of white working class types, so as to ensure that they didn’t economically band together with the black working class.
The end result all goes in one direction. Same song, different key.
Where this leaves Dolan is that — unsurprisingly — he’s too stupid to even utter the simple, utterly cost-free words of agreement with the immediate imperative of today that his fellow 1%ers are uttering. No one here should be surprised.
Things would be entirely different in 2020 if the big manufacturing plants didn’t move a bunch of black-held high-wage manufacturing jobs out of the cities from around 1980 to 1990. William Julius Wilson, while a bit old school at this point, is the go-to author on this topic.
Terrible response by Dolan, obviously.
Some responses while leafing through the prior thread:
1. The police don’t just oppress people of color–they also oppress poor people in general, and there is a police brutality issue that cuts across race. 2. While there is a police brutality issue that cuts across race, it is way, way worse for people of color, especially Black people, and this is not an accident, given the history of race in America. 3. The racial identities of police officers are irrelevant, because the job forces you, as a precondition of employment, to systematically oppress racial minorities and the poor–diversifying will not fix the problem. All of these things can be true at once.
I’ve been out on the streets since Saturday in Chicago and it is absolutely craven what the CPD does here on a daily basis. I’ve been maced, tear gassed, and some of my friends have been flash-banged and hit point-blank with rubber bullets for the peaceful exercise of our 1A rights. The police do not make anyone safer and they never have. Someone was murdered right outside of my apartment in a gang-related shooting, and they sent four officers, while the rest in the area were protecting the local AT&T store from looting. They are brownshirts–an occupying force, a rogue arm of the state that mayors cannot even control (see DeBlasio and the NYPD, who could plausibly stage a coup given their manpower). They shouldn’t just be defunded, they should be abolished, and the money saved should be poured into poverty relief efforts.
Abolishing the police does not mean, say, that we stop investigating homicides. Communities investigated homicides long before Robert Peel founded the first police department. It means eliminating the police as an independent organization, and most importantly getting rid of on the ground patrols and reducing the prison population, at a minimum (though really we need prison abolition or a wholesale change to a Scandinavian-style prison…
https://twitter.com/wojespn/status/1268205549583241218?s=20
In other news, the Knicks were spared from the play-in for the 8 seed. Thank God. We were metaphysically guaranteed to Maurice N’Dour ourselves out of the lottery if we were included in the play-in.
Yeah, the fact that a couple of the MLPS police involved in this case were mixed race really doesn’t matter. Brutalizing people of color is something that COPS do. Not just white cops. Cops, period. People are protesting against cops. Not white cops.
I’m surprised stop and frisk hasn’t been mentioned more here so far. You can’t really say that NYPD is not a racist institution if you look at the history of stop and frisk and how it was used.
There’s a great two-part episode of the podcast “Reply All” where they talk about the history of CompStat, and how it revolutionized NYC policing, and then how it was abused, and how it led to mass arrests of people of color for no reason other than juicing up the state. The episode is called “The Crime Machine” and it’s a very interesting listen.
https://gimletmedia.com/shows/reply-all/o2hx34
good for you silky for being out there and participating – thank you…not everyone will get this wake up call…hopefully though enough people will become involved in change to move beyond where we are now…
NBA is coming back
Quick overview: The 16 current playoff teams plus New Orleans, Sacrament, San Antonio, Phoenix, and Washington will play 8 games to finalize playoff teams and seeds. 8 and 9 seeds will have a play-in game if they’re less than 4 games apart.
To Hubert’s point on the other thread, this is a website very comfortable with numbers. People really should from time to time pull up the FBI and state time series crime statistics. Crime has dropped monumentally in this country, in some degree to policing. Within those numbers, if you assume crime continuing on the 1980-1991 trend line for three more decades until now, and then compare that trend line with what actually happened, you will see tens of thousand of black lives saved and tens of thousands of black bodies not mistreated. If crime was even close now to what it was then, we wouldn’t have the luxury of even mentioning out loud something like the idea of abolishing the police.
So, ok, the community investigates the homicide and figures out who did it. Who arrests the killer? Do people think someone’s just going to text him, “Hey, looks like you killed Samantha Jones, can you please report to the DA’s office for processing?” And then he’s just going to report to the DA’s office for processing?
The police in many ways are a malign force to be sure, for many of the reasons people have said, and massive reforms are necessary. The idea of eliminating them is crazy.
It’s something libertarians, BernieBros, 2nd Amendmenters, anarchists, antifas, BLMs, the woke, and the unwoke should all be able to find some common ground on. The police/prison industrial complex protects the plutocracy, not the people.
I’m replying, so I guess I’m full of shit. I guess old habits die hard, and I keep reading this thing.
Anyway, I want to be sincere here: I humbly accept the fact that I can be wrong about everything that I say and think. I hope you can agree to the same. It’s a prerequisite to any discussion, and in my eyes, is sorely lacking these days, and yesterday was just terrible. I felt like the victim of the mob. But yes: I can be wrong about anything.
And yes, I believe we all carry some implicit racial bias. Studies show that even at the age of 6 months old we do, so of course I do. But when people posted “fuck you, racist white whatever” which is basically how I was treated- I don’t believe that was warranted. That’s a different kind of racist, no? You dole out that amount of vitriol for me? I hate the negative connotations of the term ‘social justice warrior’ because honestly it sounds like an awesome thing to be, but I understood that connotation at that moment. I also think that if you tried to relate, to understand my point of view, you might have understood that we were having an issue with the semantics of the idea that ‘America was founded on racism’- you said of course it was, the founders, people, economy, and so on were in large part influenced by slavery. My idea was that America was not created with a principle of slavery in mind. Maybe I’m wrong. But I do believe Jefferson meant his words, and that it took another few decades for some people to realize it applied to other people.
Los Angeles just announced their budget for the 2020 fiscal year and a whopping 54% of it is going to LAPD. It’s the only area of the budget that didn’t get a cut.
Fuck that.
That was a great pod JK, thanks for posting….
The Marshall Project is a great organization which puts out a lot of amazing stuff on all the topics in play right now….
https://www.themarshallproject.org/2020/06/03/from-michael-brown-to-george-floyd-what-we-ve-learned-about-policing?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sprout&utm_source=twitter
And at first I said, you know what, I ranted on the board, and I deserve it. Then I thought about the responses I got, such as
and
And a whole slew of others, and I realized that this is not a good-faith space to open up and share ideas. So whatever, I’m bitter. Serves me right. Maybe I am a fragile white boy, but I don’t consider myself capital-R Racist, and to call me that is insulting as hell.
Again, as E said yesterday: “They were racist, but they weren’t the principles on which the country was founded. “
Okay.
The United States’ Constitution allowed black people to be owned by another human being until 1865. You continue to spin falsehoods into your own personal comfort and find nothing racist about it. You do not admit you are wrong. You double down because it’s easier for your conscience to believe these lies that you cling to.
You continue to absolve yourself of holding positions that have no basis in reality.
wet bandit…ain’t none of us perfect…i fuck something up daily…many days – multiple somethings…
it’s not an extreme all or nothing…most all of us are wired to hold tightly to our perceptions and beliefs…
i couldn’t imagine trying to function as a human while walking around questioning every thought and action we may have…it’s why our operating systems rely so heavily on our own personal experiences and belief systems…
at the end of the day – recognize none of us really know you that well…it may seem personal, but – it’s really not…
if someone says something about you that ain’t true, fuck it just ain’t true…on the other hand – the possibility that our thought trains can get derailed is very real…accepting feedback and self-evaluation/honesty are also very important…
Wetbandit – I had no problem with what you said and i think the reaction to it was disproportionate. I think saying that the founding of the America wasn’t only racist is a pretty unobjectionable statement.
And Jowles, I am looking forward to the Outlander spinoff where you go back in time to 1776 and found the world’s oldest democratic nation the right way.
Wetbandit, I agree with ptmilo yesterday. I love the passion in this space, and yesterday was certainly no exception, but things do tend to get a bit personal and vitriolic at times (and I’ve gotten swept up in it myself, for which I [mostly] apologize). I appreciated Jowles’ contextualizing that “you’re also a racist.” It’s an important point to remember when “You’re a racist!” is being bandied about.
I’m loving that we’re having this conversation, even if it is oh, say, 400 years late. It’s a good chance to listen, and to learn.
not to put thoughts in to wet bandit’s mind – but, my interpretation of his statement regarding the establishment of our country is that although racism existed, it wasn’t the primary impetus for the founding…
and yes – it sure does seem like the folks that put this shit all together long ago were genius and most likely motivated by financial gain and the desire to have more control of their own destinies…there is though a lot of beautiful ideology in that piece of paper those folks signed on…
And the reboot, wherein some time traveler from 2050 goes back to fix the shit I messed up.
That was an over the line comment from me yesterday, wetbandit, so apologies.
I’ve been having this same argument all day every day with people on Facebook, so I’m losing some patience with it. This isn’t the time to be complaining about how badly white people are being treated. I’m not trying to reduce your argument to that, but it’s that theme in general, which I see ALL DAY LONG on social media, that is pushing my buttons.
I was part of a long and excruciating thread yesterday on the Facebook page of a black friend of mine, in which a white woman made repeated “All Lives Matter” comments and denied her own privilege, and whined to no end about the “racism” that white people are suffering right now. It was jaw dropping to watch, it was like white fragility itself had gained sentience and was making idiotic Facebook posts.
So again, apologies, but the way you think and talk about this is offensive to a lot of people.
Wetbandit, I think the high-road/low-road conversation in the prior thread is good way to approach the issue of racism in the founding. While many of the philosophical ideas behind the Constitution are abstractly, in a vacuum divorced from their historical context, not inherently racist, their application at that time and many, many later times was very much racist. As Jowles said, the founders spoke of freedom and equality while simultaneous condoning race-based slavery.
However, that doesn’t mean that those same abstract ideas about freedom and equality can’t have non-racist applications now. It is possible to believe that those ideas have meaning and value while also being clear-eyed about they have been abused in the past and present to justify abhorrent behavior.
you all our sports folks, so i’m sure that you’re aware of vic fangio’s (broncos hc) comments today…his perception is that racism in the nfl doesn’t exist…of course the fact the nfl just recently wanted to address the rooney rule goes against that belief…
we need more people of that mindset though to voice their opinion, because they need to be engaged…if they’re keeping this shit to themselves in fear of recrimination – this stuff will never be addressed…
we can’t just blindly fire away when folks let that stuff out of their head…it won’t help…they’ll just bunker up and double-down like trump…
Back in March, wetbandit wrote this and posted it:
“Every major news network IS fake news. Every paper is either bankrupt or partisan. Democrats keep pushing the ‘all white people are racist’ crap. White liberals on twitter are the worst, I don’t even get it, everything is privilege, and the 1619 project is bullshit- our country is not founded on racism and slavery. It just isn’t.”
It’s what I think of every time I see his Dr. John Dorian avatar pop up. We’ve had some bad takes here at Knickerblogger over the years, but they were about trivial things like basketball, the New York Knicks, Clyde’s negativity, billiards, and horse breeding. But wetbandit’s rant that day was about a much bigger, much more serious topic, and it shocked me that an educated man—a doctor—could have this view.
ptmilo is right that wetbandit isn’t a troll, but a guy working through a complicated conversation that’s going on in his head. I apologize if I was part of the mob that was piling on. But yesterday’s lashing didn’t come out of nowhere. It was an extension of a discussion that started weeks ago, before the national guard set post up the street from my house, and actual shots were fired in the war on ignorance.
Highlighted the only thing I agree with–
I remember the feeling of revulsion from this post, and I haven’t let it go because he has dug his heels in so thoroughly.
What are you hoping to obtain by getting white people to all “confess,” and what do you envision happening if all white people do “confess”? Are there any policy ideas here, anything concrete? Is there anything tangible here?
There’s a whole lineup of CEOs, very well-compensated people and many quite powerful, coming on CNBC the last few days “confessing” the existence of systemic racism and privilege. And my response every time I see and hear it is “Big deal, talk is cheap, and now you’re off the hook.” The “confession” is no more than rhetorical cotton candy.
I’ve never really understood the process of conversing with people, insisting they confess something reductionist, and then getting frustrated or calling them names when they don’t.
What do white people hope to gain from denying that racism exists, and has existed since the inception of this nation?
How do you call for policy ideas when some people believe that the racial wealth gap is due to genetic or innate cultural inferiority? When they believe — which we saw yesterday from Eric Jr. Jr.’s main account — that we live in a post-racial society?
speaking of sense and sensibility – hope our very own trafficker in delectable sandwiches and such, mister grocer is doing well…
It’s a mindset that needs changing. It’s why people say “All Lives Matter” and don’t take systemic racism seriously. Is there a concrete POLICY goal attached to it? No. It’s a more humanistic goal. The goal is to make sure people of color are treated with respect, to get the more clueless members of society to acknowledge that the struggle for equality is real.
Donnie – I don’t disagree but Abraham Lincoln struggled pretty hard with the exact same question as Wetbandit. He did it better but if you go back and read his speeches he was not exactly Jowlesing in the 1850s.
Mike Honcho, agree 100%. Jowles, I can rest easy if the only disagreement we have is that you think “America was founded on slavery,” and I think “America was founded not for slavery, but with slavery, and thankfully we outgrew it” Maybe you’re uncomfortable with it, I get it.
Donnie, what part of that did you disagree with? I admit, that I have outgrown parts of that rant: “Every major news network IS fake news I still think this! CNN/FOXN are tabloids at this point, I can only listen to NPR, read WSJ/BBC for straight facts. Every [major] paper is either bankrupt or partisan You disagree?. Democrats keep pushing the ‘all white people are racist’ crap I do think identity politics is being pushed to our detriment- per conversation above, I meant whatever I said about capital-R Racist. We have racial biases- every person and race does, and we must work on it, so I do disagree with my statement here. White liberals on twitter are the worst, I don’t even get it, everything is privilege, Yes, I do think there is too much emphasis on white privilege and less of an emphasis on helping people in need- I want less of the ‘feel bad you’re treated better!’ and more ‘how can we get together to make them treated better’ and the 1619 project is bullshit- our country is not founded on racism and slavery. It just isn’t. I have come around on this a bit, see above, but my distinction here is nuanced- the country was not founded IN ORDER TO have slavery and racism, but it was a major part, was global, and is detestable, and a civil war was fought a few decades later to eradicate it- the only time I am aware of this happening in history’ I hope that helps.
Sounds like the answer is “no,” then.
How do you call for policy ideas? You think about what the problem is and how it might be solved through policy and if you think a policy will help solve the problem you’re concerned about, you advocate for the policy. But that’s hard work, though. Better to just perform outrage.
You mentioned the wealth gap. There is a wealth gap. Here’s an idea: Take the median wealth of a white person in the US and compare it to the median wealth of a black person. (I haven’t looked at the data in awhile, but the difference is something like $100,000. That might be household data, so adjust accordingly.) Assume, even though it’s not true, that the entire difference is the result of our history of Jim Crow, slavery, redlining, all of it. Go to the US treasury and appropriate to every black adult (or household), that sum. You can either do it in a one-time payment, or apply an appropriate discount rate to it and make it a monthly annuity.
There, we’ve rectified the wealth gap. Do you want to rectify the wealth gap, or do you want to force confessions from white people about why the wealth gap is what it is?
Fine, and we do encourage them to do that. We have all manner of public health and education initiatives, including anti-racism initiatives, in this country and we never expect from them that every last one of the 330 million citizens in the country is going to respond to the initiative. If the hope is that some random cracker down in Alabama is never again going to tweet something racist, well — that’s never going to happen. Pre-twitter, he would have just ineffectually verbal diarrhea-d on the barstool or the rusted-out car on his front lawn and no one ever would have known. That should be kept in mind. The existence of Twitter and a voice for everyone is distorting a lot of reality.
I’m uncomfortable with it because it’s diametrically opposed to the truth. I can tell that you have no factual understanding of racial history in America. You have feelings, but they are not backed up by evidence. You do not address the pervasive, irreversible outcomes of the Jim Crow era. You do not address the segregation of the U.S. Military until 1948. You do not address widespread federal housing discrimination during the postwar housing boom. You do not address the Southern Strategy. And you do not address how all of these issues, and so many more, led to perhaps the most destructive set of policies against people of color in modern America, the mass incarceration of black men.
You keep saying, “It just wasn’t.” But you do not have a shred of evidence in your favor.
“Black household, you can have a $100,000 lump sum payment as payback for the labor stolen from your likely ancestors and for the wealth our policies and practices got in the way of you amassing …. or you can comfortably rest assured that no white person will ever deny their privilege on Facebook again.”
Here’s guessing the first choice would be quite a bit more popular.
Huh? What is this fantasy you’ve cooked up? A world in which reparations are finally made by the American government to black citizens, but the pervasive legacy of racism were still not acknowledged as real by a vast majority of white people?
If a doctor insists that a growth on a patient’s body is cancer, but the patient rejects the diagnosis, how do you expect a treatment to proceed?
The reparations payment is the acknowledgment. Once the wealth gap is fixed by the payment, it’s conceding that the wealth gap was caused by racism/slavery/Jim Crow. That’s the whole point of making the payment. At that point, who gives a shit who says what on Twitter about it? Conversely, if everyone “acknowledges” on Facebook and Twitter that slavery/Crow/redlining, etc. helped cause the gap, but no money flows to fix it, who gives a shit about the “acknowledgment”?
Landlord: “You’re late on your rent payment the last three months, you owe me $15,000.”
Tenant: “Oh, don’t worry, I acknowledge that. We good?”
Doesn’t really work.
“You still haven’t addressed…”
I’m not sure what you want me to address. Do you want me to address every single racist policy, law, and act in a 2000 character space? I agree that there was and is a tremendous amount of racism and racist policy that has left a legacy on the black community. You’re acting like an essay grader that only allowed a one page response and wasn’t happy with a summary of the facts.
What is our disagreement here, I need clarification. That I will not concede that racism is a pillar that America is based on, so we can hopefully continue to move past it, but that I agree there is a tremendous amount of racism and racist history that affects the black community?
This is a remarkable spin on the 3/5 clause. Technically it also “allowed” black people to own white people for the same time. In 1850 there were 180 former slaves who became black slave owners, and that was just in South Carolina.
I used allow in quotes because it didn’t actually permit anything, it simply dealt with how to count a slave for population purposes.
And wetbandit is the one operating in a false reality?
Bill Simmons podcast on the protests is probably the single worst thing he’s ever done and that’s counting his animated ESPN show
@D-Red is it just his usual combination of confidence and bad takes together with a very poorly chosen topic or is it actively awful?
QED
There is a positive to public figures admitting that systemic racism exists: it moves the Overton Window. I’m a firm believer that most changes happen because public opinion allows it. Gay Marriage wasn’t going to happen in the 70s or 80s or 90s, not because of any legal hurdles, but due to lack of public support.
I think politicians are essentially spineless, if not individually then collectively. They rarely will do the right thing if their voters don’t support it. The more people that say systematic racism exists and needs to be addressed, the more regular people will begin to think that way. Which in turn makes it easier to actually to make legislative changes.
Is it the DeRay Mckesson one or the one with Russillo?
I can’t make it through two.
The Overton window is really having a moment these days.
Wetbandit….. Continue living your righteous life saving lives without regard to anything but their degree of illness. Pay no attention to the thought police and virtue signalers. You are one of the few that makes a positive impact on humanity in general on a day to day basis. Sleep well when you rest your head at night after having tangible positive effects on stranger’s lives on a daily basis.
Everyone stipulates the Founders were imperfect humans who were not able to live up to the high standards which they espoused. Every clear thinking person stipulates that. They were however political geniuses. The documents they came up with were close to perfection. Their application hasn’t been. Strive to improve the application of these documents .
There is such a deep, fundamental philosophical divide in this country I see no other solution than a partition of the country.
And you do not address how the founding principles of our country gave us the power to fix all this, and everything we’re talking about right now, and everything in the future that we haven’t thought about yet.
And that’s, you know, the whole argument. Except for maybe strat and the Karen who JK was talking to, for once we have unanimity on an issue: systematic racism is present and needs to be destroyed.
But even when we all agree, someone needs to find something to divide us. Now it’s not enough that everyone admits racism pervaded the fabric of our country and its institutions. Now you want to take an ally to your cause and shame him into being an enemy bc he doesn’t go far enough in his agreement.
This shit is unbelievable. This is why we are failing the oppressed citizens of our country who need us to agree with each other so we can pass a law and an ammendment that will fix this. The best thing you can do right now is build a 2/3 majority. And that means letting some things go sometimes.
You were pedantic in the last thread about the intentional fallacy — which did not exist in the late 18th century, but chattel slavery did — and you’re being pedantic now. You had no response to my allegation of ahistorical textualism — an interpretation divorced from historical context, wholly separate from the brutal fact of institutional slavery, in which 90% of all black people in America as late as 1860 were in bondage — and you have none now.
25 of the 55 delegates at the Second Constitutional Convention owned slaves. The idea that you would claim that aCkYShaLLy, black people could theoretically own whites simply because the word “slavery” never appears in the Constitution? A debate club stunt, nothing more.
Furthermore, the Three-Fifths Compromise was a solution for representational government. It had absolutely nothing to do with the legality of slavery. It was an appeasement measure to ensure the formation of the federal government. I honestly have no idea what you’re talking about anymore.
***There is such a deep, fundamental philosophical divide in this country I see no other solution than a partition of the country.***
Okay, Che.
(If we partition, all I know is that I hope your side gets the Knicks)
What? What are you talking about? How does the passage of the 13th Amendment in 1865 support wetbandit’s claim that the country was not, in fact, founded in 1787 on racist grounds?
What part of the founding principles of the United States’ Constitution gave its citizens the power to end slavery? Are you serious with this shit?
Obama on msnbc right now…talking on this topic
“Once the wealth gap is fixed by the payment,….”
Ha Ha Ha ha…..you over estimate the investing wizardry of the American public. Let’s just say you took 4 trillion and wrote a check to 40,000,000 random Americans of 100,000. How many of those people in the lower 30% of the socioeconomic strata would be busto in 18 months.
I’m not sure if I could think of a better way to light money on fire.
You know you’re doing things right when the board’s resident fascist-loving scumbag is stooping for you.
“Obama on msnbc right now…talking on this topic”
He had his turn at the wheel controlling the justice department for 8 years with absolute control of the Congress for 2 of the 8. How’d that work out as to criminal justice reform?
“fascist-loving scumbag”
Aren’t we the articulate one….. any citations?
Definition of fascism
1often capitalized : a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition
Bunker Bitch is finished.
He should spend the next few months inspecting the bunker. He’s good at that.
I’m not sure if I could think of a better way to light money on fire.
Buy energy junk bonds
And the worst part of it all is that it isn’t in service of any reform or policy, but instead so he and similar-mindeds don’t have to get frustrated at the Facebook conversations they have with white people or the things white people tweet.
We want to help black people; they want to have nice, self-validating Twitter feeds. I’m perfectly comfortable with where we are on the matter.
“He had his turn at the wheel controlling the justice department for 8 years with absolute control of the Congress for 2 of the 8. How’d that work out as to criminal justice reform?”
I dunno…I just said he was on tv talking…but if you really are interested here ya go:
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/criminal-justice-reform
after you take donnie’s braziole out of yer tushy…take a read…
The whole thing? Georgia or Virginia could have voted that slavery was illegal in their states the day the Constitution was ratified.
sophistry at its finest, I’m done with this
It ain’t about me not getting frustrated with various “All Lives Matter” spouting Karens across the internet. It’s about shooting down “All Lives Matter” as the ignorant pile of tripe that it is. Granted that is a teeny tiny bit of civic activity, but that’s not all I’m planning to do and not all my family is planning to do.
And seriously fuck any of you who have your panties in a twist about “wokeness” or think any of this is about self-validation. It’s not and furthermore I don’t give a shit what you think. I see people saying dumb shit, I’mma call it out.
It’s not sophistry, it’s an answer to the question you posed. You’re acting as if the Constitution somehow mandated slavery, when it did no such thing. It compromised with slavery, nothing more. It made a somewhat bitter peace with slavery, no more. It took less than 90 years for that peace to become untenable and at that point — bye, bye slavery. There were people born at the founding that compromised with slavery who were alive at the time the country went to war to end slavery — that’s how quickly it happened.
Moreover, it’s a bit of a bizarre argument to say the nation was founded on racism and slavery just because we happened to break free of England in 1787 instead of like 1907. Slavery was in the territory that became the United States. It didn’t start because the United States was formed. We could have stayed part of England then, but we didn’t. Since we decided to break free when we decided to break free, slavery had to be compromised with. There was no choice.
And again — far better to work for something tangible for black people in lieu of spending so much time working for pristine Twitter feeds and message boards. You think black people actually give a shit about what white people say to each other about white privilege on Facebook? That seems a bit narcissistic and patronizing. Do you sit around monitoring what black people say to each other on Facebook about white people?
Some do, I know this for a fact. And honestly, the thread I’m referring to was not white people talking to white people. It was a white woman patronizingly “All Lives Matter”-ing a black friend of mine. My friend is a very patient and kind person, and she was losing her shit with frustration.
You think black folks aren’t sick to fucking death of white fragility? Think again.
Don’t pretend like you’re interested in citations. A few weeks back you wanted ‘citations’ when some posters here were calling Trump a racist. Here are the Trump quotes I posted in response:
And another:
Not to mention the anti-semitic stuff:
Bob got his receipts and just.. never responded. Ignored them like they didn’t exist. Which kinda annoyed me because I wanted to see how he could contort himself to explain away the quotations. I’m giving him a 2nd chance.
I identified you as a concern troll yesterday, yet here I am feeding you.
Bunker Bitch thinks coming out of the bunker and waving an upside down Bible around will get the rubes all horny to vote for him again.
Back to the bunker, Bunker Bitch. You got five months left. Tick tock motherfucker.
Then it’s a different situation because a black person was an active participant. The call here is for white people to confess their privilege, or not deny their privilege to other white people in places like Facebook. You think black people sit around in their lives actually giving a shit about something that trivial? Do you monitor what black people are saying to each other about white people?
Hold up, let me ask my fiancée… Yup, black people do give a shit about that.
You would’ve already known that if you had asked a black person that question before posting it on knickerblogger.net. Would’ve saved you some embarrassment.
Aren’t we the articulate one….. any citations?
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/America_First_(policy)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3QXrQDTDYo
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Trump_tariffs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaqEsVT5kMM
I mean, I know you’re going to dismiss all of this, because you’re a fascist too.
““He had his turn at the wheel controlling the justice department for 8 years with absolute control of the Congress for 2 of the 8. How’d that work out as to criminal justice reform?”
I dunno…I just said he was on tv talking…but if you really are interested here ya go:
https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/issues/criminal-justice-reform
after you take donnie’s braziole out of yer tushy…take a read…”
Obama’s press releases are very nice. However if you are interested in the facts you can look at the Bureau of Prisions statistics:
Cliff notes:
Federal prison population INCREASED the first 5 years of the Obama administration 2009-10, 11,12 &13. Then it decreased during 2014-15 & 16
The total decrease in Federal Prison population was greater for the 3 years of Trump than the 8 years of Obama. Facts are damn nasty things!
https://www.bop.gov/about/statistics/population_statistics.jsp
Mad Dog Mattis just came out denouncing Bunker Bitch as a threat to the republic. He’s part of the Radical Left™ I guess. The current SecDef doesn’t seem to be a big fan of Bunker Bitch either.
Everybody’s turning on Bunker Bitch! Even Pat Robertson and Fucker Carlson think he cocked this up pretty bad.
i missed that…the whole thing looked weird (if ever a human moved around like he has a stick up his ass – it’s bunker don)…the visuals he puts out are nowhere near as terrible as the audio – but, they’re not good…
it was so odd seeing him distanced, in his own little bubble as he moved from the white house to the church…him clutching at the bible was cringe worthy…fitting that he had it upside down/backwards…a lot like his leadership…
finally…
bobneptune:
“The total decrease in Federal Prison population was greater for the 3 years of Trump than the 8 years of Obama. Facts are damn nasty things!”
Facts are facts…I guess some are nasty like the bile you spew…statistics and data can be twisted and presented in many ways to support whatever position it is you want to support….oh wait…I am sure you are all ready to provide the “facts” as to how the Donnie was able to magically reduce the Federal prison population in just three years….get the F*ck outta here…
“Aren’t we the articulate one….. any citations?
Definition of fascism
a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/America_First_(policy)
and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3QXrQDTDYo
severe economic and social regimentation
https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Trump_tariffs
and forcible suppression of opposition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VaqEsVT5kMM
I mean, I know you’re going to dismiss all of this, because you’re a fascist too.”
I need to be sure I have this straight:
If you believe the US government should negotiate trade deals beneficial to ….um….. America, that’s FACISM.
If you believe you might have to employ tariffs to achieve the ends in part one as a negotiating tool you are a FASCIST.
If you say that looters might get shot while being apprehended (which is factually true) that makes you a FASCIST?
Good aregument Mate!
haha, remember when bob defended the child separation policy
“Facts are facts…I guess some are nasty like the bile you spew…statistics and data can be twisted and presented in many ways to support whatever position it is you want to support”
+1 argument….
For God’s sake don’t sully up an opinion with those bilious facts….. you guys make some pretty incredible “arguments”
and if you can’t pound the facts….. pound the table…….
mark
Go pound your mom
Bob’s still ducking the racist Trump quotes. Very weak.
haha, remember when bob defended the child separation policy
I am happy to debate any issue.
Do I think it is wise to give a “get out of jail free card” to those who violate federal law because the bring a child with them….no.
You will have to be a little more specific as to which “racist” quote (in context plz) to which you refer,
One of the more “intellectual” comments of the day by a table pounder…….
I’ll ask my black brother in law, niece and nephew at the next family Zoom call. Pretty sure I know the answer.
I know you saw all of the quotes I posted upthread and I know you’re asking this in bad faith, but here it is, anyway.
There Bob. If you want more context, read the book the quotes are from (Trumped!). I also included Trump admitting to Playboy that he likely said all the racist quotes attributed to him in case you were thinking of playing the fake news card.
Start accepting reality.
A black-thought clairvoyant? Very impressive, Mr. E.
Should’ve asked them before posting your question to the board.
Bob, do you think Bunker Bitch was really “inspecting” the bunker, or do you think that’s just a pathetic cover story?
now that everyone is zooming, teaming and broadcasting from their home – does anyone else like to look on folks shelves and at their walls to see what they got going on…
somehow i seem to have missed that national memo about installing cube shelving in my home…
geo:
now that everyone is zooming, teaming and broadcasting from their home – does anyone else like to look on folks shelves and at their walls to see what they got going on…
somehow i seem to have missed that national memo about installing cube shelving in my home…
heck yeah…top 5 items:
1. Wedding photos
2. Vacation photos
3. Books that likely have never been read
4. cool zoom stock backgrounds…i prefer the lego land one for my background
5. white wall
““I hate black guys counting my money. … I hate it,” Trump told John R. O’Donnell, the former president of Trump Plaza Hotel & Casino, according O’Donnell’s account in his 1991 book “Trumped!” “The only guys I want counting my money are short guys that wear yarmulkes all day.”
Trump, according to O’Donnell, went on to say, “‘Laziness is a trait in blacks. It really is, I believe that.”
In an interview with Playboy in 1999, Trump remarked that “[t]he stuff O’Donnell wrote about me is probably true. The guy’s a f—-g loser.”
That certainly qualifiers as some bigoted shit. I’ve said about a billion times he is a detestable person. That doesn’t mean I don’t agree on policy as to China, NATO, Trade, Foreign wars, the economy, etc.
I’m not looking for St Francis of Assisi to be President…. I want someone who has what I consider the best ideas and will stick to them. I know all about his failings
luv ya pepa 🙂
ugh, watching tucker carlson to see what the current “strategy” is…it’s hard, it’s painful…
they always sell fear, and lots of it…very very interesting to see what images they choose to use…a whole bunch of black folks doing wrong, sounding: extreme…
he’s building and developing these extreme arguments…all protesters equal looters…white apologists are weak…
okay, 10 minutes in…i’m gonna damage my tv soon, i just can’t watch anymore…god is that one hateful, evil motherfucker…where’s dexter when you need him…
hmmmmm, maybe satan has some sound policies for running hell…
“Bob, do you think Bunker Bitch was really “inspecting” the bunker, or do you think that’s just a pathetic cover story?”
I have no idea. I DO know the secret service doesn’t ask the president when they believe he is in jeopardy. Case in point during the 9/11 attacks Bush was in Louisiana (I think) and Cheney was in the White House. The secret service told him it was time to go to the bunker and he refused. They picked him up and carried him to the elevator.
>geo:
luv ya pepa 🙂
ditto….btw…have you done any of those “happy hour” zoom calls where everyone is drinking booze and you have some uncomfortable conversations or show off your pets? it is pretty funny to see people slowly get inebriated and fumble for things to say…
So you think MAYBE he was really “inspecting” the bunker.
Fucking hilarious
“So you think MAYBE he was really “inspecting” the bunker.
Fucking hilarious”
As I said…. I have no idea…..
no man, i haven’t even hooked up the webcam, i kind of want to just to see if i can effectively set up the lighting, the background and myself to look all professional and and shit…
a lot of good folks in the company…i work in operations, so by and large a lot of “just the facts ma’am” kind of folks on meeting calls…
i never forget when it first hit home that you can’t really be “yourself” at work…they pretty much get g or pg rated geo all the time…
i know i blah blah blah all day long here, i’m actually a pretty private person on most occasions, trust of others isn’t really in my nature, particularly strangers…it’s just my personality can be a little hard to contain at times 🙂
oh…it is definitely like that in my company…i work at a large consulting firm…totally cannot let loose…which is why it is interesting on those calls because once the booze kicks in…some folks start to lose their shit…
I was not being pedantic at all. I was making a distinction that may have seemed pedantic but was, in fact, very powerful.
It doesn’t matter what an author believes. What matters is what they produce. They produced ten inalienable rights and the ability to add or remove any of them when civil discourse can create an agreement of 2/3 of the people. That is the foundation of our country. Everything else is fat. We have the power to create a law that deals with the kind of brutality that we want to abolish. Bc let’s be honest, those guys might get away with murder.
If we came together and created a law that dealt with dereliction of duty by a policeman that led to wrongful death, gave it a 20 year mandatory sentence, and made officers afraid of committing, maybe we can make some progress. Maybe people would feel that they don’t have to yell in the streets bc somebody heard them and exercised the power that we all have when we can agree.
It was intentionally set high at 2/3 bc it demands compromise and civil discourse. That is literally all it takes to permanently address any problem we see. That’s the foundation. You cannot get it done by banding together with the people who agree with you. It will never work.
But y’all have decided you’d rather end the experiment than have civil discourse. Everyone on the other side is too stupid for you to talk to. So partition it will be.
You guys can have the country that has no budget for police. I’m sure that will work out great.
No budget for police? Maybe some of the Bernie-est hippies on the left might advocate for that but not me. LA just tried to pass a budget that has deep cuts to every item except LAPD, resulting in 54% of the entire budget going to that already bloated organization.
Fuck that shit. That’s gross.
denied to all black people, as affirmed in Dred Scott v. Sandford
a civil war erupts and kills a million Americans before
after fighting the bloodiest war in American history and literally beating the slave-owning states into submission
Okay, so we’re finally agreeing that the country was founded as a slave-owning state. Thanks for finishing up this conversation. Great job. You really made your point. Thanks a bunch.
You almost made it to the finish line, but you ended up agreeing with me by accident.
Again, those “ten inalienable rights” were never granted to black Americans. The federal government was created as a slave-enabling state.
A civil war was fought to end the institution. Now go read a fucking book.
No one ever disagreed with that.
IN THIS VERY THREAD
Fuck off, gaslighting troll.
It was founded with some slave owning states. Other states absolutely didn’t want slavery. The common motivation for rebelling was dislike of the British and their taxes, not let’s preserve slavery. And remember, the first document that governed the new republic was the articles of the confederation, not the constitution.
I mean, it’s a pretty weak argument in favor of the founding fathers founding document that they left the possibility of voting out slavery open. Too bad we had to go to war over it to get rid of it. They also left the possibility of woman’s suffrage open for voting, and it just took 150 years to get that done! Wow, what a blueprint! What ideals! Nevermind the batshit design of the electoral college.
Maybe I’m too demanding, but it seems like if they cared about establishing a genuine democracy they would have done that, just like if we cared about having a genuine democracy today we wouldn’t disenfranchise felons or those without IDs, or make some attempt to improve voter participation, or get money and special interests out of politics.
Are we really grading the founding fathers on this much of a curve because they were born in the 18th century? Exactly why isn’t their document garbage? The first and fourth amendments are nice, but any document that leaves slavery on the table is not a blueprint for anything.
It’s not as if everyone agreed that it was alright either. Slavery was de jure abolished in England in 1772 and abolished in France in 1794, and we’re applauding the founding fathers for leaving things like slavery up to a vote?
The best explanation for why the constitution is the way it is is this: The founding fathers were not interested in having a democracy–they were interested in constructing a government that worked for white property owners. Not much has changed.
Pretty much the only mainstream American political figure worth his salt from that time is Thomas Paine.
Not even close. Free blacks were covered by the Bill of Rights and possessed of the inalienable rights set out in the constitution.
Fuck you, know nothing. You know what I meant and you got caught.
This: that the country was founded as a slave-owning state.
… is completely different than your previous formulation, which was that the country was founded *on* racism/slavery. Everyone, with I guess the possible exception of one person and even that isn’t clear, agreed that slavery was in place when the country was founded. Who the fuck would deny that?
You moved the goalposts on Hubert (and me) and you got caught. And then you blamed me. Your initial claim about what the country was founded on was a lie. Go fuck yourself.
And you’re also completely wrong about the Dred Scott decision. You’re a poorly educated fool. No one gives a shit how outraged you are. Fuck off.
So the Fourteenth Amendment was for what purpose? And regardless, what percentage of blacks in America were free in 1787?
Nothing but a troll.
“The question is simply this: Can a negro, whose ancestors were imported into this country, and sold as slaves, become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all of the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied by that instrument to the citizen?
We think … that [black people] are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word “citizens” in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time [of America’s founding] considered as a subordinate and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.”
—Dred Scott, 60 U.S. at 403–05.
Not at all. They were interested in having states be separately governed as much as possible. That accounts for the electoral college. You have to win states to be president, rather than win the popular vote.
You should probably know the answers to these things better before you go all theorizing and shit, but the 14th Amendment wasn’t put in place because free blacks didn’t have things like first and fourth amendment rights before then. The Dred Scott case concerned the rights of a slave who got free and was then recaptured. The issue in front of the court was whether his escape to free soil had made him free for good. All the other bullshit Taney wrote — which was seen as dreadful almost from the day he wrote it — was essentially dicta. The case did not remotely “affirm” than no black person in the United States had constitutional rights and that they never had had them. Whoever sold you that sold you defective merchandise.
People like Hubert and I actually agree with you far more than we disagree and as he said already, it’s extremely weird that you continue to intentionally alienate potential allies just because they won’t fully agree with a small, essentially irrelevant tidbit of fanaticism you insist upon. But alienate away, I guess. Jacobins and Girondins and all.
It’s been awhile since I looked at this, but there was actually a state supreme court decision sometime in around the 1830s in Louisiana, I think, that decided the Dred Scott issue the other way. Slave escaped to somewhere in Europe, came back to slave territory, sued seeking his (maybe her) freedom, was deemed free forever. I’ve always thought of the justice who wrote it as something of a hero.
We think … that [black people] are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word “citizens” in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States.
“The founding fathers were not interested in having a democracy–they were interested in constructing a government that worked for white property owners. Not much has changed.”
Hmmmm…. I’m pretty sure they were interested in a republic where there were impediments to the concentration of power and the tyranny of the mob. They completely foresaw etatists like yourselves and dropped in land mines like the electoral college and checks and balances to thwart you. Their prescience was God-like.
That is why you hate them so……they saw you coming…….
And for the record slavery wasn’t abolished in British possessions until 1833. Women weren’t given the vote in England til 1928
I’m sure if you put the Founding Fathers in a time machine and brought them to 2020 they’d be super impressed with Donald fucking Trump and his plans to use the US military against American citizens. They’d be like “yup, this is totally what we had in mind.”
a). improve voter participation – yay
b). get money and special interests out of politics – woo hoo
c). disenfranchise felons or those without IDs – when it comes to voting, oh hell no, disenfranchise away
my civic thought is – two years of some sort of service prior to having a vote…can you even imagine how much shit we could get down in this country with millions serving the greater good at a relatively low salary cost…like delivering food to the elderly – of which one day in the not so distant future will most likely serve me well…yes, everyone should serve – let’s just not make it retroactive, that’s all…you know, a going forward kind of thing…sort of a tax on the young…
seems fair enough to me…
has it been decided yet if strat is getting voted off the island…
“I’m sure if you put the Founding Fathers in a time machine and brought them to 2020 they’d be super impressed with Donald fucking Trump and his plans to use the US military against American citizens. They’d be like “yup, this is totally what we had in mind.”
Ha Ha Ha Ha…. you guys really aren’t very smart, are you?
FYI the Insurrection Act was signed into law by one of the Founders named Thomas Jefferson in 1807….. so I’m guessing he thought it was OK, huh??? looooolllll
Jefferson was the first to invoke it. In more modern history it was used by Woodrow Wilson, FDR (your two statist heros), Kennedy, Eisenhower, LBJ and Bush.
It was used in 1943, 1962, 1967, 1968, 1968, 1968 and 1992 precisely to quell out of control riots in Detroit, Ole Miss University, Detroit, Washington, DC, Baltimore, Chicago and Los Angeles.
Any more smart assed questions history boy…. you guys should really sue the people that taught you American History.
““I’m sure if you put the Founding Fathers in a time machine and brought them to 2020 they’d be super impressed with Donald fucking Trump and his plans to use the US military against American citizens. They’d be like “yup, this is totally what we had in mind.”
I might as well channel President Obama and make this a “teachable moment” just in case you think I cherry picked Jefferson.
Look up Sam Adam’s reaction to Shay’s Rebellion and Washington’s reaction to the Whiskey Rebellion if you think any of the founder had any problem with using state/federal power to maintain order.
Generally speaking the only thing that concerned the founders more that an all powerful executive was the tyranny of the mob.
Jowles, you’re not making your point, man. E is right. No one is disagreeing with the thing that you’re pounding on. You’re “in this very thread” quote actually doesn’t make the point you think it makes. You might be a little too angry to see clearly on this.
People are saying that the fact that slavery was present and allowed for at the time of our country’s founding does not mean that racism is a core value that we founded this country on. The fact that POC needed to fight for their rights is a terrible mark on our history and a testament to the prevailing culture of racism that we need to abolish. But it is not the foundation. The foundation is what made them believe if they fought, they could attain.
And we’re not saying it to be pedantic. We’re saying it bc we want to focus on what *are* truly the founding principles, bc we can use them right now to do something.
^ and I can bring proof for this:
Imagine if Dr King believed, wrongly, that the Constitution didn’t apply to him. Imagine if the writers of those documents had said “these inalienable rights don’t apply to the slaves we hold and their descendants.” This is why it’s the text that matters, not whether or not the author held a slave when he wrote it. It ain’t pedantic.
I actually understated the time in which the bitter compromise with slavery lasted before it became finally untenable and was blown up. It wasn’t 90 years, it was 73 — 1787 to 1860. That’s the historical blink of an eye. It’s a shorter period than the time between the end of World War 2 and today. If the Constitution had been ratified the day WWII ended, we’d now be in the third year of the Civil War.