“We will not stop calling out and fighting back against extremist, so-called leaders who try to prevent our children from learning our true and full history,” the vice president said in Florida.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
222 points

“They attempt to legitimize these unnecessary debates with a proposal that most recently came in of a politically motivated roundtable,” Harris said in her afternoon speech at the 20th Women’s Missionary Society of the African Methodist Episcopal Church Quadrennial Convention in Orlando. “Well, I’m here in Florida, and I will tell you there is no roundtable, no lecture, no invitation we will accept to debate an undeniable fact. There were no redeeming qualities of slavery.”

Makes sense to me.

permalink
report
reply
97 points

Honestly debating these people is completely pointless and should be seen as such. They’re not going to argue in good faith and they will just continue to create statements that are inarguable due to confounded bullshit. Word salad after preposterous nonsense.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

That’s exactly what they would do.

“Ok KAMALA are you really going to say that learning a new skill isn’t beneficial? Are you going to lie to the Great Patriots™©® of America and say that being given housing and food in exchange for labor is no beneficial? Are you actually saying that being exposed to our Great Christian Culture™©® is not beneficial!? Well now the True Patriots™©® can see you for what you are, a liar!”

Every mouth breather, slobbenly, Trump sucker would be sent to the ICU for a heart attack caused by sheer bliss from the massive “win” they just had…

It’s so gross…

permalink
report
parent
reply
-72 points

I respectfully disagree, I think something like this is worth a debate. That is really the only venue that you would switch someone’s mind who is in the middle of the road for who to vote for in 2024 in the US. Everything with these politicians is said from a safe zone in an echo chamber of their respective parties, they need to be to talking directly to each other and hash it out in front of everyone.

permalink
report
parent
reply
94 points

No one is “middle of the road” on slavery. Either you’re completely and entirely against it, or you’re a piece of shit.

permalink
report
parent
reply
39 points

I disagree: anybody that is “in the middle of road” and is holding that “slaves benefited from slavery” is anything other than racist drivel — is lying to you. They are not “in the middle of the road”; instead they are racist assholes that hoping for, at best, an excuse and more likely are just enjoying wasting your time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

There is absolutely nothing to debate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
36 points

These debates aren’t about what’s said but about who “wins” and the person who “won” is dependent on what media outlet is covering it. If you’re so middle of the road that you don’t know who to pick, you’re going to watch a debate?

permalink
report
parent
reply
25 points

Who is still on the fence about whether slavery was beneficial to the slaves? Who would that debate be for?

permalink
report
parent
reply
17 points
*
Deleted by creator
permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

We already had the debate over whether or not slavery was good. It happened between 1860 and 1865 and the “wasn’t good” side won.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

FYI I upvoted you.

I get your intended idea, but in this case, what is there to debate about slavery = bad?

Anyone “on the fence” about that is just a bit too far gone for common sense, let alone words/a debate to reach.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

The “middle of the road” position is that slavery was a centuries-long atrocity. Anyone who thinks otherwise he is too far gone to be worth trying to persuade of anything.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

If your mind is in the middle of the road about slavery benefiting the slaves, you should volunteer to be a slave, just to clear that up for you.

Couple of years on a prison chain gang ought to do it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

That’s how slavery in America was first abolished, right? Well, nvm that it wasn’t really considering the prison industrial complex.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

if you aren’t sure that slavery was a bad thing, it’s pretty clear what side you’re on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

I’m a lefty that does appreciate debate in certain contexts, which seems to be somewhat unpopular nowadays. There would be no benefit in having a debate here except maybe in a very, very, very, very, very, very contextual, academic forum of a thought experiment (and I’m highly skeptical of even that, as you would have to presuppose some truly monstrous things).
Desantis is not going to be in that forum. He’s going to platform KKK rhetoric used as a justification for slavery for nearly a century after its abolition. His staffers are quite literally Nazis. The ethics of chattel slavery are very clear cut, similarly to how the ethics of sexual abuse are clear cut: for all but an infinitesimal section of people, the only people advocating for them are monstrous, disgusting bigots.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

After that should there be a debate about whether slaughtering babies and raping women might not be pure evil?

That would be a bit redundant since they should be covered as part of the ‘debate’ about whether slavery was beneficial.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

There’s nothing to debate.

And when one party is playing by no rules, there’s no discussion.

Is anyone really undecided about this topic, still?

If so there are far better ways to reach them than pretending both viewpoints are legitimate. You really have to get to the crux of the issue and people have to really grok what life is like if you’re not white, cis, het, etc.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-9 points

Debate is a game for perverts

permalink
report
parent
reply
60 points

Can we step back for a second and just soak up the fact that it’s 2023 and some presidential candidates still want to debate the benefits of owning humans?

I know MLK Jr said

The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice

But man, that arc seems so long that a flat earther would deny there’s a curve at all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
15 points

A white racist piece of shit wants to debate the vice president who is a black woman. I sure thought we had made progress over the last 50 years, but of course we haven’t.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

It’s depressing as shit. I’m with you on previously thinking that we were making progress.

I detest that this is still happening, and I loathe the people who are still doing it. It might be judgemental, but at least I judge people based on their actions against others instead of what they look like.

permalink
report
parent
reply

She kinda has a point… debating him just legitimizes his views.

permalink
report
parent
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 11K

    Posts

  • 315K

    Comments