It’s been a stereotype for at least the last 50 years. Why has this never changed? Why has organized labor not had a substantial effect for such an essential part of the workforce?
It’s been a stereotype for at least the last 50 years. Why has this never changed? Why has organized labor not had a substantial effect for such an essential part of the workforce?
If you want to fight, you have to be prepared to lose.
It was no accident that Rosa Parks chose that particular seat on that particular day. Everyone that came before her had lost that same battle. Black folks (and the white folks who supported them) were thrown in jail for violating segregationist laws. But with each battle, knowledge and support was gained.
There’s a line in the recent Fallout series that really sticks out to me. A “do good” congresswoman is trying to get an audience with the president. She is roughly shoved aside by security. Our hero helps her up and she says to him, “Fighting the good fight is mostly a series of humiliations”.
I think about that a lot. It’s exactly like that, because fighting the good fight mostly happens when you are alone and outnumbered. Otherwise, you’re just in an echo chamber.
So, apparently you don’t care how many people suffer and die so you can claim a moral victory.
If that’s not the voice of privilege I don’t know what it.
And I don’t want to fight. I’d much rather find an acceptable compromise and be able to make gains afterwards [like Frederick Douglas did when he backed Lincoln over the Abolition candidate.]
If you feel the need to be a martyr, go ahead. Don’t drag other people down with you.
There is no final victory. Ever. Not even an imaginary moral victory.
There is only and has only ever been the fight.
It’s human nature.
Case in point: The tone of your comment above is combative and accusatory, rather than friendly or neutral. Why?
If you want to fight, you have to be prepared to lose.
Your words.
You are the one with the idea that it has to be a fight.
Like I said, it’s better to compromise and take small victories instead of push for a heroic resolution.
And, unless you feel like answering the question I posed* before, don’t bother to answer.
*I asked why we should do as Frederick Douglas did, supporting imperfect candidates who might be persuaded in the future, over ‘perfect’ candidates with no chance of winning?
Let’s review:
AND yet…it all led to the Civil War. Which was necessary to stop the selling human beings for profit.
So, yes, if you look at the relationship between the two political entities involved, a compromise was reached. But that compromise was worthless in preventing violence.
Violence was always inevitable. It started with violence toward Africans - kidnapping and slavery. The only way to end it was more violence - a bloody, vicious civil war. This is the human condition.
More blither-blather.
You’ve gone from saying “If you want to fight, you have to be prepared to lose,” tp saying “Violence was always inevitable.”
I guess you can always win an argument if you get to change your terms from minute to minute.
It was mildly amusing, but I’m done watching you chase your own tail.
deleted by creator