There are teachers in FCPS that are strongly opposed to the direction the board is going but dare not oppose it as it's been made clear to many of them that they will very likely lose their jobs if they do. They are required to spend valuable planning periods in their own indoctrination and then required to spend class time presenting social engineering propaganda to students - topics having no relation to the subjects they teach. Such a shame that a once great public school system has degenerated to such evil.
We are at the point where if the "good" do not stand up to the "evil", the evil will win. There isn't any more time to stand down, or protect ones jobs. They are growing, gaining more support in gov't and DOJ and big tech. If not now, there will only be more opposition and transgressions in the future as we stay silent to retain our jobs or avoid being called "racist". They are ascendant; we must resist. And it must be now.
Not homophobic. Anti pedophilia. Normalizing pedophiles is wrong. It endangers kids and the fact that you used homophobia as a crutch and a reason to make this "ok" just shows how stupid you are.
Using bigoted pedophilic tropes to attack homosexuals is disgusting and shows how hateful you are. What are you going to do when one of your kids comes out as gay? Call him/her a pedophile?
It's hard to take you seriously, but I'll assume you're genuinely ignorant to material exposed in this article - even though you could simply watch any of the embedded videos to learn that is does, in fact, promote pedophilia.
The mother in the videos read a specific passage from one of the books she was referencing, wherein one of the children characters says to the other:
"I can't wait to suck your dick, and I can't wait to have you inside of me. I sucked Gottlieb's dick, the real estate guy, and he sucked mine."
The "real estate guy" is clearly an adult, and the speaker is clearly a child. This clearly promotes pedophilia, and is clearly damaging to the psychosocial development of any child who is exposed to the normalization of such behavior, even if it is just a book. It's called "grooming," and that's what pedophiles do to children in order to eventually coerce them into a sexual relationship.
To argue that our opposition to the illegal, amoral, and damaging distribution of this material in our schools - even high schools, where the majority of students are minors, and none of whom are cognitively developed enough to handle the material without it forming a significant impression upon them - is somehow "homophobic" is as intellectually dishonest as it is deliberately misleading.
Speaking for myself, I find the homosexual imagery as promoted in the book, with detailed descriptions of sexual acts accompanied by even more detailed illustrations, is JUST as offensive and disgusting as the equivalent level of heterosexual imagery would be - at least, within the context of being made freely available to impressionable children.
No one here is arguing against anyone in the gay / LGBTQRSTUV+ community, and no one is saying you don't have a right to engage in whatever sexual activity you want with whomever you want, so long as said activity is between two consenting adults.
So please stop justifying the illegal, pedophilia-promoting smut to which our children are being exposed by deliberately derailing the argument with the tired and disingenuous trope you're peddling when you use the, "you are gay bashing homophobes!" lines.
"The scene people seem to be upset about, Evison said, involves an adult man recalling a sexual encounter he had with another fourth-grader when he was in fourth grade." That is 2 kids. Not a man and a kid. You guys either need to 1) read the book and stop taking things out of context, 2) go back to school and learn reading comprehension, 3) stop your bigotry, attacking all things "gay" as pedophilic.
"clearly damaging to the psychosocial development of any child who is exposed to the normalization of such behavior"
what are your qualifications to make such a determination?
"I find the homosexual imagery as promoted in the book, with detailed descriptions of sexual acts accompanied by even more detailed illustrations, is JUST as offensive and disgusting "
Yup, there's the bigotry. You know full well that there are other books in the school library that describe sexual acts between a male and a female. Ever read Shakespeare? Where's the outrage?
You're a genius, really. People are protesting a book, written by an adult, fantasizing about child sex, being offered freely to children. Yeah, nothing pedophilic there. 1) listen to people's concerns and stop taking things out of context. 2) go back to school and learn listening comprehension. 3) stop your bigotry in labeling genuine concerns as "homophobic".
Since you're the great defender of homophilia, the shining example of moral rectitude so busy scolding everyone here, show us what you're defending. You're good at trolling, spinning sophistic arguments, throwing around ugly labels and using inflammatory rhetoric. Is this what homosexuals are good for? You seem to know so much about it. Is this why we should be tolerant? So foul creatures like you can crawl out from under rocks to defend pedophilia and sow strife and discord? This is what you are? This is the best person you can be?
not quite: everyone here is for, FOR, natural law, which is precisely and, so, absolutely "against anyone in the [alphabet soup] community engag[ing] in whatever sexual activity you want with whomever you want, so long as activity is between two consenting adults"
we are definitely against any sexual or other activity against natural law
First, none "our kids" has come "out as [homosexual]." Precisely because we have brought them up to understand natural law. If you, Mike, need more help with understanding natural law now, just let us know.
You should change your name to Mike pedarist, as you obviously want this sort of sexualisation of children to suit your sick agenda of grooming . I hope that the fbi does it’s job and hunts you down, finds all the evidence that will most likely be on your computer, then charges and arrests you for the sick perverted threat that you are.
David you are projecting your own sick thoughts. Please seek help. Stay away from playgrounds. Maybe eat a bullet? Meanwhile, stop attacking homosexuals. Your bigotry and hatred is not the Christian way.
Typical reply from a pedophile projecting his depravity onto others. You’re the one with obvious sick desires. Your approval of these horrific books shows just how much you want that sort of sick propaganda to become normalised. You’re going to burn in hell for all eternity.
David, your hatred and bigotry is un-Christian. Lest you forget the 10 commandments. Love thy neighbor. The biggest homophobes are usually gay. Something you want to tell us, David? I support you.
You’re the one who obviously has hatred, but of regular people who don’t believe in pedophilia. Your continued defence of these sick and perverted individuals should be a signal to law enforcement to investigate your activities.
This term “phobia” is a baseless term used to describe someone that is scared of a homosexual or transsexual. We are not scared! We do not agree with the lifestyle you may live. You may not agree with our lifestyle but phobia is wrongfully used.
You really ought to check the verses before you cite them.
1 Tim 2:12 "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence"
2 Tim 2:12 "For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."
What are you implying? Are you making a sexist argument that people who use traditionally feminine screen names aren't allowed to offer opinions, based on your interpretation of the Bible? Are you allowed to do that? I ask because you're in the crowd trying to dismantle the very notion of gender. I mean, are you even a male? Gender is a social construct, after all.
Or are you commending Tracy for suffering your nastiness because God is going to keep her from falling into the pit you're in?
These books are nothing (what kids read books from libraries these days anyway?) compare to online porn. Why aren't parents out in the streets protesting online porn?
He might have been a classical liberal, something very healthy and practical, something that respected natural law, something much different from modern liberalism, which is sick and an attempt to pervert natural law.
I was part of PABBIS (Parents Against BadBooks In Schools) many years ago. I spoke before the board and witnessed the often shouted “book banners” rhetoric thrown at any parents who dare to speak out. We read excerpts, things got highly emotional. I can’t believe how much worse it is now. But I’m not surprised. If the LGBTQ+ Community wants to be accepted, they need to call off the perverted authors who feel completely justified sexualizing children. It’s really about the sex, right LGBTQ?? That’s what this nonsense says about you. Fix it please.
The school district should keep the books where they are. Girls and boys in middle school should be allowed to read books such as this. The infantilization of girls and boys who are in middle school or high school is wrong.
Until, we as parents, take the responsibility of our childrens education and development back from these spawns of satan things like this will just continue snowballing. End all gov education NOW.
People should not force their morality on other people. A girl or boy is 12 or older should be allowed to read books and obtain other content which allows them to become full members of society.
You are one sick puppy! And I’m not sure if you can grasp this In between your fantasies of 5 year olds. But, you did hear the part where a 4 year old boy goes down on a man? If this is your idea of age appropriate? You truly are a sick pedo! I hear the Little Rascals are on… grab you lube and hurry you can still catch it. The further Left the world slides the sicker it gets! Till you end up with sick fucks like Edwin! Who thinks 12 year olds become full members of society by learning about pedos! Keep your kids clear of Edwins!
Yeah, you're a pedo, so you can fuck right off. You're arguing for something that is both immoral and illegal.
Kids don't become "full members of society" by learning how to give other men blowjobs. That material is used to groom kids into non-consensual, pedophilic relationships and as the article points out, it's clearly violating the law. If the board had the law and morality on their side, they wouldn't have scurried away like the rats they are.
The point of the book in question is not normalize pedophilia among Girls and boys bit for Girls and boys to be aware of some things which occur in society. If Girls and boys are treated in an infantile manner, then they wouldn't know better.
Pornography isn't sex education. It's a supra-natural fantasy world that has proven, detrimental effects on the physical development of young people's brains and powerful addictive effects on both kids and adults (similar to that of cocaine). Various state & federal governments around the world ban or restrict porn to people under 18 because of this proven science. So spare me your ignorant argument about exposure and "knowing better." You, and the FPCS, obviously lack the intellect to know how to teach expose children to adult concepts in a responsible - or even a legal - way.
You want people to know better, then let them read about religion, civics, and history. This might shock you, but thousands of years of human civilization have been built without each new generation of kids needing to watch or read about perversions that pedos or pedo sympathizers like you want them to think is just a normal part of society.
Students in high school and middle schools should not subject to infantilization. Students in middle and high schools should be allowed to read controversial material, such as books containing sexual matter. Girls and boys who are 13 and older should not be treated as children who are 12 or younger. Those girls and boys already know about this stuff so supposedly protecting them from this subject matter is really a 'feel good policy' which treats them as less than who they are.
You're a predator. CHILDREN have no desire for sexual approval unless they're conditioned to. There's a special place in hell for trash such as yourself.
With that egregious perspective, you can ONLY be one of the following:
1. A full-fledged, practicing pedophile.
2. A pedophile aspirant attempting to justify the behavior in which you hunger to engage.
3. A mentally handicapped adult with a serious pathological issue.
4. A childless idiot who has bought the leftist narrative hook, line, and sinker.
5. A child yourself.
Unless you are the 5th option, you know how wrong you are given the context of the material within the article, but you simply refuse to acknowledge the truth that such activities and / or descriptions thereof have long lasting consequences for children who are exposed to it. You simply cannot win this argument with the "evidence" you (don't) have to support your position.
This is why this book, and types like it, should not be in schools. Let parents decide what level of exposure their children should have, not schools (AKA government).
Then why are you so willing for our children to be exposed to material that normalized pedophilia? It isn't discussing pedophilia as the disease that it is, nor is it intended to stir up a healthy debate. It is pure pornography without any educational, artistic, or otherwise intrinsic value. How do you not see that?!
Are you insane?!? What, now schools should be allowed to train rapists, pedophiles, and distribute obscene literature? You are sick and I pray you don’t have children!!!
I'm not a perv. Girls and boys should be allowed to form their own version of morality. They should also be allowed to form their own opinions and their own viewpoints of life. Treating girls and boys in an infantilzing manner is not good for them. It stunts their development. The best thing to do is to allow girls and boys to read what they want and to obtain content that they want. FCPS is not in the wrong here.
That is what he is desiring ! He absolutely gets off on the corruption and grooming of kids. And he says kids want to read this stuff? No Pedo! They want to play outside and when they are comfortable with their own sexuality. At an older age. And decide to experiment with others in their age group! Then and only then should they consider it! This Pedo tries to normalize deviance in adults! Not the kids! A 10 year old boy isn’t looking for books on how to blow an old pedi! Edwin, You sick fuck!
Girls and boys who are in middle school should be allowed to read books which allows them literary access to uncomfortable truths of society. The point of the book in question is about this literary viewpoint on this uncomfortable societal truth. I'm against pedophilia but if Girls and boys don't know about pedophilia, then they would more susceptible to pedophiles, which is a problem in the first place.
Infantilization means treating a person like a child. Treating a person who is 13-17 years old like a younger child is Infantilization. Middle schoolers who are in 8th grade and in high school should be allowed to read controversial material.
Says a so-called "Youth Advocate". Children are not adults. They are treated as a child because they ARE. Should they vote too? Drive?? I hear the advocates want to lower the age of consent for sexual acts. I think you are on very thin ice.
Do you also support unequal application of the law? Because regardless of your "morality", or lack thereof, it's still ILLEGAL to make these obscene materials available to minors - THAT INCLUDES THE MAJORITY OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.
Do you also selectively decide whether the objective science on a given subject is revelant? Because the body of evidence is abundantly clear that exposing children - even high school kids - to the kind of illegal smut this board has condoned causes extensive, long term damage to his or her psychosocial development, and almost ALWAYS presents later in life as a pattern of abusive behavior towards themselves and others.
If you'd ever experienced the trauma of childhood sexual abuse, then you wouldn't be so flippant about the kind of material which grooms children to accept it as a valid experience. You disgust me.
Asra, we met at the meeting I was in the red and blue striped shirt. One point of correction, there was a small child in the audience. The first father that spoke had his daughter with him seat at the back of the auditorium, she was maybe seven. He covered her ears when the reading started and the left when the pictures came out. Ms. Cohen probably only saw them as they were leaving if she saw them at all.
But Dan, She is only one year away from being able to explore her sexuality by reading these' books' or something similar! I hope that father was against this filth in the children's library.
Ms. Langton appears to be wearing a wedding ring and yet stands alone to protect her children against an evil regime. If you're wondering why everything is falling apart, it's because cowardly men keep sending their women in to fight the battles they themselves should be fighting. The books are disgraceful, no doubt, but the weak-willed men who hide from the fighting are equally as disgraceful. There is so much dishonor in our nation...
These are the same parents that give their kids cell phones in elementary school with access to the entire internet but they've made progress by getting these books banned, makes perfect sense. If parents only knew what their precious angels had access to online, I'm sure teachers and the school would be all for cell phones being banned from school where is that type of "courage" and "bravery"?
I’m an FCPS parent. I just bought both books for the purpose of discovering the context of the quoted passages. Assuming they were taken out of context by a bunch of self righteous pearl-clutchers, which the acclaim surrounding the books, the rhetoric of your post, and your opposition to critical race theory strongly suggest, I’m going to let my kids (high schoolers) read them if they want. Just because a book depicts a thing doesn’t mean the writer is promoting that thing.
So you're going to expose your kids to hard core child porn to prove a point? What point that is remains a mystery. I don't think you're actually a parent. If so, you deserve a visit from CPS.
You are also a person with an IQ of 60 or so, if you really think that books written about pedophilic homosexual relationships aren't promoting pedophilia and homosexuality. Apart from that...yeah...you admit to purposefully sharing hardcore obscene material with minors, so methinks you should be rotting in a jail cell and no where near anyone under the age of 18.
Critical Race Theory is MARXIST GARBAGE! Only evil racists would ever support such crap.
Marxist ideology is based on - surprise - Marx & Engels, who were both:
- Incredibly racist
- Openly antisemitic
- German Nationalists
Oh, wait, where have we seen that again? Right: That's the definition of the NAZIS or Nationsl SOCIALISTS.
Hitler was a huge fan of Marx. The conflict between the Nazis and the KPD were not about ideology, merely about predominance - like the fight between the Russian Mensheviks and Bolsheviks.
Hitler and Stalin allied for a reason.
Anyone promoting CRT is basically a Nazi.
Yes, BLM is not just spreading hatred against white people, but also against Jews.
The entire idea of identity politics is vile and despicable.
No, we should stop calling it "Critical Race Theory", as it is NOT a "theory". It's Marxist GARBAGE of the highest order!
It has ZERO connection with reality. It has only one goal: divide people through a completely false narrative, like all of Marxism.
Nothing any Marxist ever said was even remotely true or worth hearing.
CRT is pathologically stupid.
To even suggest that it is "history" shows that you have no knowledge of history and that you are willing to push ideological nonsense, even though you must know that it is nothing but lies.
The ONLY thing that is special, about white people and slavery, is that white people were the FIRST in world history to LEGALLY BAN SLAVERY.
Slavery has been practiced throughout human history and obviously in pre-historic times.
All the slaves of the transatlantic trade were purchased by Europeans on pre-existing slave markets operated by black Africans and Arab Muslims:
"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…" ~ King Gezo, king of Dahomey (known today as Benin).
Slavery is incredibly stupid and destructive. Not a single culture that practiced slavery ever became wealthy through slavery.
Slaves can only be made to do extremely simple, unproductive jobs, the kind that are easily replaced with machines. This is why the emergence of Capitalism was also the strongest force to abolish slavery, as menial labor was no longer useful, while businesses needed more and more engaged, motivated, educated employees.
Critical Race Theory isn't Marxist! Marx wrote about class. He was a white German; he had no experience with racism. Where critical legal theorists saw laws as primarily reflecting and sustaining class interests, critical race theorists argued that laws construct and maintain a racial power hierarchy. Jim Crow, Black Codes, etc prove CRT is American history.
Don't pull a muscle patting yourself on the back for white people banning slavery. You don't punch your wife in the face then ask for credit when you give her an ice pack.
Southerners seceded from the Union for 1 reason: Slavery was tremendously lucrative. "By the start of the [Civil] war, the South was producing 75 percent of the world’s cotton and creating more millionaires per capita in the Mississippi River valley than anywhere in the nation."
Eli Whitney's cotton gin grew the demand for enslaved labor as it increased the need for land cultivation and mill workers. Capitalism always needs cheap labor to build your Nike shoes, build your iphones, process your food, etc.
"Don't pull a muscle patting yourself on the back for white people banning slavery"
Oh, right, we should just have kept doing what ALL OF HUMANITY had been doing throughout history!
If you have even a shred of intellectual honesty, you have to admit the fact that white people were the FIRST IN HUMAN HISTORY to legally ban slavery AND push for the end of slavery, worldwide!
It always was practiced in Africa, as blacks enslaved other blacks and Arab Muslims enslaved blacks and white Europeans.
The Arab trans-Sahara and African East Coast trade lasted for far longer and took far more slaves than the Transatlatic trade.
Europeans did not even enter the interior of Africa until about 1830, by which time slavery had been legally abolished by the UK. They bought ALL their slaves on pre-existing slave markets!
"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…" ~ King Gezo, king of Dahomey (known today as Benin).
So white people did nothing black people did not already do to each other!
"Southerners seceded from the Union for 1 reason"
Bullshit - they WANTED to secede for multiple reasons, but apparently, the complexity of the issue totally exceeds your level of comprehension. Otherwise you would have gone through the numerous issues that devided the North and the South. Slavery was just ONE of them.
"Slavery was tremendously lucrative"
Again, you demonstrate catastrophic ignorance - slavery is hyper un-productive!!!
Slaves were expensive to acquire - the cost of a slave in good health was about the cost of a middle-class car, in modern terms. He had to be guarded, supervised, educated, housed, fed and kept healthy, which all represented a huge cost.
And yet, they only could perform menial tasks of very low value, such as picking cotton.
Read Frederick Douglass, "My bondage and my freedom" - he was born into slavery, taught himself to read and write, escaped to the North and became a wealthy, respected man and a major voice for the abolition movement.
The first person who helped him after he reached the North - another freed slave who operated his own little farm. Douglass observed that this black former slave was better off than 90% of all the slave owners in the South!
According to this man who had FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE, the only people to profit from slavery were those who owned thousands of slaves and operated huge farms.
But even their profit is relative - if they had invested the same capital into factories with free, paid labor, they could easily have earned 20 to 30x more!
Picking cotton was SUPER EASY to do with modern machinery!
The South LOST the war although their military leadership was far better, simply because the North was economically so much stronger!
Why do you think the abolition of slavery coincided with the beginning of industrialization?
What they needed were more and more highly qualified and motivated workers - and even better, engineers, scientists etc.
Who earns the most, today? Those who have the highest paid workforce, of course!
In Switzerland, we have the highest wages on the planet - almost 30% of our GDP stems from INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION! Financial services represent only 4% of our GDP. We are, however, the most innovative country on the planet!
Swiss workers are, on average, 2x more productive than workers in the best countries in the EU (Netherlands, Germany, France) and the US. 50x more productive than in India.
Yes, you'd need 50 Indian "slaves" to earn as much profit as from ONE Swiss worker, who is paid an average of $7'000 per month.
Your entire belief system about economics is wrong.
If slavery was so productive, why weren't Egypt, Ancient India, Ancient Rome, various African kingdoms etc. as wealthy as modern countries?
Because SLAVERY IS NOT PRODUCTIVE!!!
Here's another problem for your assumptions:
- when slavery was abolished, former slaves were offered the possibility of traveling back to Africa; they would have had the entire trip paid and they would have been given large farms in Africa; the country they were to be returned to was Liberia.
Only 0.5% accepted the offer.
That means that THEY DID NOT FEEL SO OPPRESSED IN THE US!!!
Their expectation about Africa was WORSE than what they faced every day in America.
Critical race theory (CRT) was officially organized in 1989, at the first annual Workshop on Critical Race Theory, though its intellectual origins go back much farther, to the 1960s and ’70s. Its immediate precursor was the critical legal studies (CLS) movement, which dedicated itself to examining how the law and legal institutions serve the interests of the wealthy and powerful at the expense of the poor and marginalized. (CLS, an offshoot of Marxist-oriented critical theory, may also be viewed as a radicalization of early 20th-century legal realism, a school of legal philosophy according to which judicial decision making, especially at the appellate level, is influenced as much by nonlegal—political or ideological—factors as by precedent and principles of legal reasoning.)
Interesting, I didn't know that CRT talked about how America ended slavery, ended monarchy and "divine right" rule, how it defeated Naziism, defeated imperialism, defeated communism, invented the idea of the "rule of law," established international laws to secure human rights and then built the institutions like Nuremberg to enforce that law, how it codified the very notions of "inalienable rights" coming from God and not government, how it demolished all existing notions of class and how it created a safe place for nasty turds like you not to be imprisoned for talking stupid nonsense.
If you think that I'm "confused", then you are completely ignorant 🙄
Grotesquely ignroant.
As you obviously don't know anything about Marx & Engels, let me introduce you to some facts:
Evidence of Marx's Antisemitism
In the unpublished private correspondence with Engels, Marx Marx frequently derided his political foes and his friend’s Jewish backgrounds, even when the specific context of the exchanges did not deal with Jewish issues.
When on holiday in Ramsgate in 1879, Marx reported to Engels that the resort contained “many Jews and fleas.”
Marx referred to Ferdinand Johann Gottlieb Lassal as a “Jewish n***er.”
Marx Sr. borrowed much of his money from Mr. Bamberger and his son, referred to them in a derogatory fashion as “Jew Bamberger” or “little Jew Bamberger.”
Marx and Engels referred to a gentleman named Spielman as “Jew Spielmann".
In his private correspondence, he was sensitive to being reminded of his Jewish heritage and being the son of a convert.
There were extensive irrelevant ethnic slurs and gratuitous hostility towards the Jews in the correspondence letters between Marx and Engels.
This was so well known throughout academia then even until the mid-1960s One of the world's leading commenters on Marx, Shlomo Avineri, even stated: "Karl Marx was an inveterate antisemite is today considered a commonplace which is hardly ever questioned."
No one has managed to locate even the briefest comment by Marx on the beginnings of the Jewish socialist movement in Eastern Europe, although Russian-Jewish socialists were among the first to seriously read and advocate Marx’s main work, "Das Kapital".
Marx never protested against the large and unprecedented wave of pogroms (1881-1882) in Imperial Russia even once, despite his usual habit of condemning the persecution and exploitation of the weak.
Marx noted the emergence of even the most obscure socialist groups with great interest and commenting on them extensively but showed incredible indifference and no commentary on the beginnings of the Jewish working-class movement.
In "Das Kapital", he asserts the genesis of the industrial Capitalist was because of Jews and Lombards engaging in "usury" by citing a passage from an author with the pseudonym "Daniel Hardcastle". Making the false equivalence of "jews = usury"
In his “Theories of Surplus Value,” he praises Luther’s indictment of usury by claiming Luther “has really caught the character of old-fashioned usury, and that of capital as a whole.”
In 1845, in "The Holy Family" Marx claimed that in his articles in the Deutsch-Franzosische Jahrbucher he had "proved that the task of abolishing the essence of Jewry is in truth the task of abolishing Jewry in civil society, abolishing the inhumanity of today's practice in life, the summit of which is the money system." (for the exact quote, see the 1845 publication on p.148 of "The Holy Family")
In "The Holy Family", written with Friedrich Engels, Marx argues that the most pressing imperative is to transcend “the Jewishness of bourgeois society, the inhumanity of present existence, which finds its highest embodiment in the system of money.” [note: the emphasis was in the origial]
In his “Theories of Surplus Value,” he praises Luther’s indictment of usury. Luther “has really caught the character of old-fashioned usury, and that of capital as a whole.”
The two big published essays of his that are rife with anti-Semitic tropes are "On The Jewish Question" and "The Russian Loan" (Most Marxists deny "The Russian Loan" was written by Marx even though it was provided by Elanor Marx along with all his lost private correspondence and published in the New York Daily Tribune Jan 4, 1856)
It's based on the Frankfurt School, which was founded by Marxists who realized that Communism was a failure, so they thought that they first had to change culture to make people accept their Marxist ideology.
They developed the Critical Theory, Queer Theory etc.
Gothix just brilliantly exposed the Marxist ideology behind CRT, BLM etc.
This is also confirmed by the far-left professor Derrick Jensen - in this video of one of his lectures, he explains to his students that pedophilia is closely related to communist "anarchy" and Queer Theory:
You are entirely too defensive. My intent was to say that the God that I know will bless her. I don't know if Mrs Nomani is atheist, Buddhist, animist, Baptist, mohammedan or...and furthermore I don't care--she is a wonderful and brave person for fighting the lib/lefty/"progressive"/moral relativist/subjectivist/humanist/secularist/Democrat pigs.
Ok. Thanks and hugs! Salam to you (meaning Peace)! I am a Muslim - Mohameddan is an old, obsolete, and incorrect terminology. Muslims don’t worship Mohammed (peace be upon him) but they worship God.
The term "mohammedan" has been used forever, almost, at least, and identifies the adherents very well, because while your "allah" is somewhere out there, for you at least, you do not identify yourselves as "allahists" while we do, indeed, identify ourselves with our Holy God as Christians, adorers of Jesus Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, one God.
And we don't know and don't care where the term "muslim,' or "moslem," or...come from.
You, personally, may not worship mohammed, but apparently there is extensive and active worship by mohammedans of mohammed's ex nihilo, but "divinely inspired [ha, ha, ha]" dictates about how to treat girls and women, among other perversions of human nature, of natural law. There are far more perversions in mohammedanism, but we will not list them here.
Did mohammed sleep with the prepubescent Fatima? Or not? Do present day middle aged mohammedans marry child brides, as the pathetic ignorant mohammedan afghani immigrants showing up here in the US demonstrate?
You show with this simplistic, easy, response that you can only resort with insults as a response to our sincere challenge, but cannot answer any of our specific points regarding our very sincere inquiries about the nonsense of the "foundation" of mohammedanism but specifically the apparent pedophiliac mohammed and his use, or misuse really, as we describe mohammed's use, or misuse as civilized folks would say, of the prepubescent Fatima.
Apparently you have no way of attempting to defend mohammed's pedophiliac sickness. Yes?
There are teachers in FCPS that are strongly opposed to the direction the board is going but dare not oppose it as it's been made clear to many of them that they will very likely lose their jobs if they do. They are required to spend valuable planning periods in their own indoctrination and then required to spend class time presenting social engineering propaganda to students - topics having no relation to the subjects they teach. Such a shame that a once great public school system has degenerated to such evil.
We are at the point where if the "good" do not stand up to the "evil", the evil will win. There isn't any more time to stand down, or protect ones jobs. They are growing, gaining more support in gov't and DOJ and big tech. If not now, there will only be more opposition and transgressions in the future as we stay silent to retain our jobs or avoid being called "racist". They are ascendant; we must resist. And it must be now.
That's a lot of words just to say that you are homophobic.
Not homophobic. Anti pedophilia. Normalizing pedophiles is wrong. It endangers kids and the fact that you used homophobia as a crutch and a reason to make this "ok" just shows how stupid you are.
Using bigoted pedophilic tropes to attack homosexuals is disgusting and shows how hateful you are. What are you going to do when one of your kids comes out as gay? Call him/her a pedophile?
It's hard to take you seriously, but I'll assume you're genuinely ignorant to material exposed in this article - even though you could simply watch any of the embedded videos to learn that is does, in fact, promote pedophilia.
The mother in the videos read a specific passage from one of the books she was referencing, wherein one of the children characters says to the other:
"I can't wait to suck your dick, and I can't wait to have you inside of me. I sucked Gottlieb's dick, the real estate guy, and he sucked mine."
The "real estate guy" is clearly an adult, and the speaker is clearly a child. This clearly promotes pedophilia, and is clearly damaging to the psychosocial development of any child who is exposed to the normalization of such behavior, even if it is just a book. It's called "grooming," and that's what pedophiles do to children in order to eventually coerce them into a sexual relationship.
To argue that our opposition to the illegal, amoral, and damaging distribution of this material in our schools - even high schools, where the majority of students are minors, and none of whom are cognitively developed enough to handle the material without it forming a significant impression upon them - is somehow "homophobic" is as intellectually dishonest as it is deliberately misleading.
Speaking for myself, I find the homosexual imagery as promoted in the book, with detailed descriptions of sexual acts accompanied by even more detailed illustrations, is JUST as offensive and disgusting as the equivalent level of heterosexual imagery would be - at least, within the context of being made freely available to impressionable children.
No one here is arguing against anyone in the gay / LGBTQRSTUV+ community, and no one is saying you don't have a right to engage in whatever sexual activity you want with whomever you want, so long as said activity is between two consenting adults.
So please stop justifying the illegal, pedophilia-promoting smut to which our children are being exposed by deliberately derailing the argument with the tired and disingenuous trope you're peddling when you use the, "you are gay bashing homophobes!" lines.
In the book Lawnboy
"The scene people seem to be upset about, Evison said, involves an adult man recalling a sexual encounter he had with another fourth-grader when he was in fourth grade." That is 2 kids. Not a man and a kid. You guys either need to 1) read the book and stop taking things out of context, 2) go back to school and learn reading comprehension, 3) stop your bigotry, attacking all things "gay" as pedophilic.
"clearly damaging to the psychosocial development of any child who is exposed to the normalization of such behavior"
what are your qualifications to make such a determination?
"I find the homosexual imagery as promoted in the book, with detailed descriptions of sexual acts accompanied by even more detailed illustrations, is JUST as offensive and disgusting "
Yup, there's the bigotry. You know full well that there are other books in the school library that describe sexual acts between a male and a female. Ever read Shakespeare? Where's the outrage?
You're a genius, really. People are protesting a book, written by an adult, fantasizing about child sex, being offered freely to children. Yeah, nothing pedophilic there. 1) listen to people's concerns and stop taking things out of context. 2) go back to school and learn listening comprehension. 3) stop your bigotry in labeling genuine concerns as "homophobic".
Since you're the great defender of homophilia, the shining example of moral rectitude so busy scolding everyone here, show us what you're defending. You're good at trolling, spinning sophistic arguments, throwing around ugly labels and using inflammatory rhetoric. Is this what homosexuals are good for? You seem to know so much about it. Is this why we should be tolerant? So foul creatures like you can crawl out from under rocks to defend pedophilia and sow strife and discord? This is what you are? This is the best person you can be?
not quite: everyone here is for, FOR, natural law, which is precisely and, so, absolutely "against anyone in the [alphabet soup] community engag[ing] in whatever sexual activity you want with whomever you want, so long as activity is between two consenting adults"
we are definitely against any sexual or other activity against natural law
First, none "our kids" has come "out as [homosexual]." Precisely because we have brought them up to understand natural law. If you, Mike, need more help with understanding natural law now, just let us know.
You should change your name to Mike pedarist, as you obviously want this sort of sexualisation of children to suit your sick agenda of grooming . I hope that the fbi does it’s job and hunts you down, finds all the evidence that will most likely be on your computer, then charges and arrests you for the sick perverted threat that you are.
David you are projecting your own sick thoughts. Please seek help. Stay away from playgrounds. Maybe eat a bullet? Meanwhile, stop attacking homosexuals. Your bigotry and hatred is not the Christian way.
Typical reply from a pedophile projecting his depravity onto others. You’re the one with obvious sick desires. Your approval of these horrific books shows just how much you want that sort of sick propaganda to become normalised. You’re going to burn in hell for all eternity.
David, your hatred and bigotry is un-Christian. Lest you forget the 10 commandments. Love thy neighbor. The biggest homophobes are usually gay. Something you want to tell us, David? I support you.
You’re the one who obviously has hatred, but of regular people who don’t believe in pedophilia. Your continued defence of these sick and perverted individuals should be a signal to law enforcement to investigate your activities.
Funny, the 10 commandments in my Bible don't include "love thy neighbor." Have you even cracked the cover on this book you claim to know?
This term “phobia” is a baseless term used to describe someone that is scared of a homosexual or transsexual. We are not scared! We do not agree with the lifestyle you may live. You may not agree with our lifestyle but phobia is wrongfully used.
You are no Christian.
Tracy, who made you the Christianity gatekeeper? Read: Timothy 2:12
You really ought to check the verses before you cite them.
1 Tim 2:12 "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence"
2 Tim 2:12 "For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day."
What are you implying? Are you making a sexist argument that people who use traditionally feminine screen names aren't allowed to offer opinions, based on your interpretation of the Bible? Are you allowed to do that? I ask because you're in the crowd trying to dismantle the very notion of gender. I mean, are you even a male? Gender is a social construct, after all.
Or are you commending Tracy for suffering your nastiness because God is going to keep her from falling into the pit you're in?
"eat a bullet"??? Ah, there's the bleeding-heart, tolerant, liberal mindset shining through! Just let you talk long enough and the hate spills out.
These books are nothing (what kids read books from libraries these days anyway?) compare to online porn. Why aren't parents out in the streets protesting online porn?
Name calling is the retort of the dimwitted. You're good at trolling. Too bad your brain is good for little else.
Liberals will destroy America.
Abraham Lincoln was a liberal.
He might have been a classical liberal, something very healthy and practical, something that respected natural law, something much different from modern liberalism, which is sick and an attempt to pervert natural law.
🤦🏼♀️ He was a Republican
🤦🏼♀️ He was a Republican
Cool story
I was part of PABBIS (Parents Against BadBooks In Schools) many years ago. I spoke before the board and witnessed the often shouted “book banners” rhetoric thrown at any parents who dare to speak out. We read excerpts, things got highly emotional. I can’t believe how much worse it is now. But I’m not surprised. If the LGBTQ+ Community wants to be accepted, they need to call off the perverted authors who feel completely justified sexualizing children. It’s really about the sex, right LGBTQ?? That’s what this nonsense says about you. Fix it please.
It doesn't stop there brother. What about the government? Even members of Congress having sex with children. Like that guy from Florida.
yes, "What about the government"
yes, what about "Even members of Congress having sex with children"
yes, 'that guy from Florida'
Mike, put up or shut up
don't keep showing yourself as a simple jack ass
These books are nothing compared to what kids see online. Why aren't there nationwide protests to ban online porn?
Completely unacceptable. Imprison the sick monsters!
Many great leaders banned books and locked up people with opposing views. Amen!
The school district should keep the books where they are. Girls and boys in middle school should be allowed to read books such as this. The infantilization of girls and boys who are in middle school or high school is wrong.
Ah, a FPCS board member, aka a pedophile, joins the chat.
Until, we as parents, take the responsibility of our childrens education and development back from these spawns of satan things like this will just continue snowballing. End all gov education NOW.
People should not force their morality on other people. A girl or boy is 12 or older should be allowed to read books and obtain other content which allows them to become full members of society.
You are one sick puppy! And I’m not sure if you can grasp this In between your fantasies of 5 year olds. But, you did hear the part where a 4 year old boy goes down on a man? If this is your idea of age appropriate? You truly are a sick pedo! I hear the Little Rascals are on… grab you lube and hurry you can still catch it. The further Left the world slides the sicker it gets! Till you end up with sick fucks like Edwin! Who thinks 12 year olds become full members of society by learning about pedos! Keep your kids clear of Edwins!
Yeah, you're a pedo, so you can fuck right off. You're arguing for something that is both immoral and illegal.
Kids don't become "full members of society" by learning how to give other men blowjobs. That material is used to groom kids into non-consensual, pedophilic relationships and as the article points out, it's clearly violating the law. If the board had the law and morality on their side, they wouldn't have scurried away like the rats they are.
The point of the book in question is not normalize pedophilia among Girls and boys bit for Girls and boys to be aware of some things which occur in society. If Girls and boys are treated in an infantile manner, then they wouldn't know better.
Pornography isn't sex education. It's a supra-natural fantasy world that has proven, detrimental effects on the physical development of young people's brains and powerful addictive effects on both kids and adults (similar to that of cocaine). Various state & federal governments around the world ban or restrict porn to people under 18 because of this proven science. So spare me your ignorant argument about exposure and "knowing better." You, and the FPCS, obviously lack the intellect to know how to teach expose children to adult concepts in a responsible - or even a legal - way.
You want people to know better, then let them read about religion, civics, and history. This might shock you, but thousands of years of human civilization have been built without each new generation of kids needing to watch or read about perversions that pedos or pedo sympathizers like you want them to think is just a normal part of society.
Students in high school and middle schools should not subject to infantilization. Students in middle and high schools should be allowed to read controversial material, such as books containing sexual matter. Girls and boys who are 13 and older should not be treated as children who are 12 or younger. Those girls and boys already know about this stuff so supposedly protecting them from this subject matter is really a 'feel good policy' which treats them as less than who they are.
Edwin you do not deserve to breathe the same as we.
You're a predator. CHILDREN have no desire for sexual approval unless they're conditioned to. There's a special place in hell for trash such as yourself.
With that egregious perspective, you can ONLY be one of the following:
1. A full-fledged, practicing pedophile.
2. A pedophile aspirant attempting to justify the behavior in which you hunger to engage.
3. A mentally handicapped adult with a serious pathological issue.
4. A childless idiot who has bought the leftist narrative hook, line, and sinker.
5. A child yourself.
Unless you are the 5th option, you know how wrong you are given the context of the material within the article, but you simply refuse to acknowledge the truth that such activities and / or descriptions thereof have long lasting consequences for children who are exposed to it. You simply cannot win this argument with the "evidence" you (don't) have to support your position.
You will, one day, be held accountable before God for your thoughts and actions
The U.S. was meant and is meant to be have a government which is separate from that of religion. I'm not a pedophile and I'm against pedophilia.
This is why this book, and types like it, should not be in schools. Let parents decide what level of exposure their children should have, not schools (AKA government).
Then why are you so willing for our children to be exposed to material that normalized pedophilia? It isn't discussing pedophilia as the disease that it is, nor is it intended to stir up a healthy debate. It is pure pornography without any educational, artistic, or otherwise intrinsic value. How do you not see that?!
You’re clearly not, you’re defending it. You’re lucky I don’t know where you live, pedo, because I’d LOVE to have a little “chat” with you.
Keep your fantasies to yourself you sick person.
ANYONE who thinks that sexualizing children is ok should be hung from the neck until dead. Period. You're a demented piece of trash.
Are you insane?!? What, now schools should be allowed to train rapists, pedophiles, and distribute obscene literature? You are sick and I pray you don’t have children!!!
Sounds like you are talking about the Catholic church.
You and the church
Are you a perv?
I'm not a perv. Girls and boys should be allowed to form their own version of morality. They should also be allowed to form their own opinions and their own viewpoints of life. Treating girls and boys in an infantilzing manner is not good for them. It stunts their development. The best thing to do is to allow girls and boys to read what they want and to obtain content that they want. FCPS is not in the wrong here.
So no boundaries at all for the kiddies? Is that what you’re implying?
That is what he is desiring ! He absolutely gets off on the corruption and grooming of kids. And he says kids want to read this stuff? No Pedo! They want to play outside and when they are comfortable with their own sexuality. At an older age. And decide to experiment with others in their age group! Then and only then should they consider it! This Pedo tries to normalize deviance in adults! Not the kids! A 10 year old boy isn’t looking for books on how to blow an old pedi! Edwin, You sick fuck!
Girls and boys who are in middle school should be allowed to read books which allows them literary access to uncomfortable truths of society. The point of the book in question is about this literary viewpoint on this uncomfortable societal truth. I'm against pedophilia but if Girls and boys don't know about pedophilia, then they would more susceptible to pedophiles, which is a problem in the first place.
You reapeat the same BS over and over and yes, you are unquestionably a pedophile! Your argument is well known as one used by pedophiles!
Absolutely revolting and incredibly stupid.
Obviously your go to word is "infantilizing". Pretty weak stance. When do the books on bestiality come out??
Infantilization means treating a person like a child. Treating a person who is 13-17 years old like a younger child is Infantilization. Middle schoolers who are in 8th grade and in high school should be allowed to read controversial material.
Says a so-called "Youth Advocate". Children are not adults. They are treated as a child because they ARE. Should they vote too? Drive?? I hear the advocates want to lower the age of consent for sexual acts. I think you are on very thin ice.
Tracy
Children do drive! You get your license at 16. Are you mentally ill?
What are books? You mean like TV shows but its just words on papers?
Disgusting.
Do you also support unequal application of the law? Because regardless of your "morality", or lack thereof, it's still ILLEGAL to make these obscene materials available to minors - THAT INCLUDES THE MAJORITY OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.
Do you also selectively decide whether the objective science on a given subject is revelant? Because the body of evidence is abundantly clear that exposing children - even high school kids - to the kind of illegal smut this board has condoned causes extensive, long term damage to his or her psychosocial development, and almost ALWAYS presents later in life as a pattern of abusive behavior towards themselves and others.
If you'd ever experienced the trauma of childhood sexual abuse, then you wouldn't be so flippant about the kind of material which grooms children to accept it as a valid experience. You disgust me.
Asra, we met at the meeting I was in the red and blue striped shirt. One point of correction, there was a small child in the audience. The first father that spoke had his daughter with him seat at the back of the auditorium, she was maybe seven. He covered her ears when the reading started and the left when the pictures came out. Ms. Cohen probably only saw them as they were leaving if she saw them at all.
But Dan, She is only one year away from being able to explore her sexuality by reading these' books' or something similar! I hope that father was against this filth in the children's library.
The books are only available in High School libraries. That's not an issue unless she is Doogie Howser and skipped several grades.
These books are at the combined MS and HS sites.
Considering the content of his speech when he had spoken previously I highly doubt it.
Ms. Langton appears to be wearing a wedding ring and yet stands alone to protect her children against an evil regime. If you're wondering why everything is falling apart, it's because cowardly men keep sending their women in to fight the battles they themselves should be fighting. The books are disgraceful, no doubt, but the weak-willed men who hide from the fighting are equally as disgraceful. There is so much dishonor in our nation...
These are the same parents that give their kids cell phones in elementary school with access to the entire internet but they've made progress by getting these books banned, makes perfect sense. If parents only knew what their precious angels had access to online, I'm sure teachers and the school would be all for cell phones being banned from school where is that type of "courage" and "bravery"?
And you know this because..?
I’m an FCPS parent. I just bought both books for the purpose of discovering the context of the quoted passages. Assuming they were taken out of context by a bunch of self righteous pearl-clutchers, which the acclaim surrounding the books, the rhetoric of your post, and your opposition to critical race theory strongly suggest, I’m going to let my kids (high schoolers) read them if they want. Just because a book depicts a thing doesn’t mean the writer is promoting that thing.
So you're going to expose your kids to hard core child porn to prove a point? What point that is remains a mystery. I don't think you're actually a parent. If so, you deserve a visit from CPS.
What is hard core?
You're not that ignorant.
Matt Gaetz told me this isn't hard core and he has the real stuff.
Sure he does, sport. You can keep making excuses for pedophiles without me.
You sure do know a lot about pedophiles. I bet your internet search history is something.
"pornography that features detailed depictions of sexual organs or sexual acts"
I Googled it. You should try it some time.
please don't show your studidity so flagrantly
You are also a person with an IQ of 60 or so, if you really think that books written about pedophilic homosexual relationships aren't promoting pedophilia and homosexuality. Apart from that...yeah...you admit to purposefully sharing hardcore obscene material with minors, so methinks you should be rotting in a jail cell and no where near anyone under the age of 18.
You will, one day, stand before God with your thoughts and actions and be held accountable to them
No you’re not.
"your opposition to critical race theory"
Critical Race Theory is MARXIST GARBAGE! Only evil racists would ever support such crap.
Marxist ideology is based on - surprise - Marx & Engels, who were both:
- Incredibly racist
- Openly antisemitic
- German Nationalists
Oh, wait, where have we seen that again? Right: That's the definition of the NAZIS or Nationsl SOCIALISTS.
Hitler was a huge fan of Marx. The conflict between the Nazis and the KPD were not about ideology, merely about predominance - like the fight between the Russian Mensheviks and Bolsheviks.
Hitler and Stalin allied for a reason.
Anyone promoting CRT is basically a Nazi.
Yes, BLM is not just spreading hatred against white people, but also against Jews.
The entire idea of identity politics is vile and despicable.
We should stop calling it Critical Race Theory and start calling it what it is.
American history.
No, we should stop calling it "Critical Race Theory", as it is NOT a "theory". It's Marxist GARBAGE of the highest order!
It has ZERO connection with reality. It has only one goal: divide people through a completely false narrative, like all of Marxism.
Nothing any Marxist ever said was even remotely true or worth hearing.
CRT is pathologically stupid.
To even suggest that it is "history" shows that you have no knowledge of history and that you are willing to push ideological nonsense, even though you must know that it is nothing but lies.
The ONLY thing that is special, about white people and slavery, is that white people were the FIRST in world history to LEGALLY BAN SLAVERY.
Slavery has been practiced throughout human history and obviously in pre-historic times.
All the slaves of the transatlantic trade were purchased by Europeans on pre-existing slave markets operated by black Africans and Arab Muslims:
"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…" ~ King Gezo, king of Dahomey (known today as Benin).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/9chapter2.shtml
Slavery is incredibly stupid and destructive. Not a single culture that practiced slavery ever became wealthy through slavery.
Slaves can only be made to do extremely simple, unproductive jobs, the kind that are easily replaced with machines. This is why the emergence of Capitalism was also the strongest force to abolish slavery, as menial labor was no longer useful, while businesses needed more and more engaged, motivated, educated employees.
Critical Race Theory isn't Marxist! Marx wrote about class. He was a white German; he had no experience with racism. Where critical legal theorists saw laws as primarily reflecting and sustaining class interests, critical race theorists argued that laws construct and maintain a racial power hierarchy. Jim Crow, Black Codes, etc prove CRT is American history.
Don't pull a muscle patting yourself on the back for white people banning slavery. You don't punch your wife in the face then ask for credit when you give her an ice pack.
Southerners seceded from the Union for 1 reason: Slavery was tremendously lucrative. "By the start of the [Civil] war, the South was producing 75 percent of the world’s cotton and creating more millionaires per capita in the Mississippi River valley than anywhere in the nation."
Eli Whitney's cotton gin grew the demand for enslaved labor as it increased the need for land cultivation and mill workers. Capitalism always needs cheap labor to build your Nike shoes, build your iphones, process your food, etc.
"Don't pull a muscle patting yourself on the back for white people banning slavery"
Oh, right, we should just have kept doing what ALL OF HUMANITY had been doing throughout history!
If you have even a shred of intellectual honesty, you have to admit the fact that white people were the FIRST IN HUMAN HISTORY to legally ban slavery AND push for the end of slavery, worldwide!
It always was practiced in Africa, as blacks enslaved other blacks and Arab Muslims enslaved blacks and white Europeans.
The Arab trans-Sahara and African East Coast trade lasted for far longer and took far more slaves than the Transatlatic trade.
Europeans did not even enter the interior of Africa until about 1830, by which time slavery had been legally abolished by the UK. They bought ALL their slaves on pre-existing slave markets!
"The slave trade is the ruling principle of my people. It is the source and the glory of their wealth…the mother lulls the child to sleep with notes of triumph over an enemy reduced to slavery…" ~ King Gezo, king of Dahomey (known today as Benin).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/africa/features/storyofafrica/9chapter2.shtml
So white people did nothing black people did not already do to each other!
"Southerners seceded from the Union for 1 reason"
Bullshit - they WANTED to secede for multiple reasons, but apparently, the complexity of the issue totally exceeds your level of comprehension. Otherwise you would have gone through the numerous issues that devided the North and the South. Slavery was just ONE of them.
"Slavery was tremendously lucrative"
Again, you demonstrate catastrophic ignorance - slavery is hyper un-productive!!!
Slaves were expensive to acquire - the cost of a slave in good health was about the cost of a middle-class car, in modern terms. He had to be guarded, supervised, educated, housed, fed and kept healthy, which all represented a huge cost.
And yet, they only could perform menial tasks of very low value, such as picking cotton.
Read Frederick Douglass, "My bondage and my freedom" - he was born into slavery, taught himself to read and write, escaped to the North and became a wealthy, respected man and a major voice for the abolition movement.
The first person who helped him after he reached the North - another freed slave who operated his own little farm. Douglass observed that this black former slave was better off than 90% of all the slave owners in the South!
According to this man who had FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE, the only people to profit from slavery were those who owned thousands of slaves and operated huge farms.
But even their profit is relative - if they had invested the same capital into factories with free, paid labor, they could easily have earned 20 to 30x more!
Picking cotton was SUPER EASY to do with modern machinery!
The South LOST the war although their military leadership was far better, simply because the North was economically so much stronger!
Why do you think the abolition of slavery coincided with the beginning of industrialization?
What they needed were more and more highly qualified and motivated workers - and even better, engineers, scientists etc.
Who earns the most, today? Those who have the highest paid workforce, of course!
In Switzerland, we have the highest wages on the planet - almost 30% of our GDP stems from INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION! Financial services represent only 4% of our GDP. We are, however, the most innovative country on the planet!
Swiss workers are, on average, 2x more productive than workers in the best countries in the EU (Netherlands, Germany, France) and the US. 50x more productive than in India.
Yes, you'd need 50 Indian "slaves" to earn as much profit as from ONE Swiss worker, who is paid an average of $7'000 per month.
Your entire belief system about economics is wrong.
If slavery was so productive, why weren't Egypt, Ancient India, Ancient Rome, various African kingdoms etc. as wealthy as modern countries?
Because SLAVERY IS NOT PRODUCTIVE!!!
Here's another problem for your assumptions:
- when slavery was abolished, former slaves were offered the possibility of traveling back to Africa; they would have had the entire trip paid and they would have been given large farms in Africa; the country they were to be returned to was Liberia.
Only 0.5% accepted the offer.
That means that THEY DID NOT FEEL SO OPPRESSED IN THE US!!!
Their expectation about Africa was WORSE than what they faced every day in America.
That's a simple fact.
When you have no f*king clue what you are talking about, have the decency to STFU!
Critical Race Theory is 100% MARXIST, you fool! 100%!
Straight from Encyclopedia Britannica:
https://www.britannica.com/topic/critical-race-theory
Critical race theory (CRT) was officially organized in 1989, at the first annual Workshop on Critical Race Theory, though its intellectual origins go back much farther, to the 1960s and ’70s. Its immediate precursor was the critical legal studies (CLS) movement, which dedicated itself to examining how the law and legal institutions serve the interests of the wealthy and powerful at the expense of the poor and marginalized. (CLS, an offshoot of Marxist-oriented critical theory, may also be viewed as a radicalization of early 20th-century legal realism, a school of legal philosophy according to which judicial decision making, especially at the appellate level, is influenced as much by nonlegal—political or ideological—factors as by precedent and principles of legal reasoning.)
Interesting, I didn't know that CRT talked about how America ended slavery, ended monarchy and "divine right" rule, how it defeated Naziism, defeated imperialism, defeated communism, invented the idea of the "rule of law," established international laws to secure human rights and then built the institutions like Nuremberg to enforce that law, how it codified the very notions of "inalienable rights" coming from God and not government, how it demolished all existing notions of class and how it created a safe place for nasty turds like you not to be imprisoned for talking stupid nonsense.
In that case, let me say: "I LOVE CRT!!!"
I think you're confused. 😟
Both Marx & Engels were German nationalists, but it's particularly obvious in Engels' numerous articles published in the Rheinische Zeitung.
This article here provides a great summary with all the references:
http://jonjayray.com/engels.html
Before anyone claims that such antisemitic garbage as "The Jewish Question" was not written by Marx, it's available from the web site "Marxists":
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/jewish-question/
Marx & Engels were incredibly racist:
https://www.dailysignal.com/2017/05/10/ugly-racism-karl-marx/
Here is an article about Marx's antisemitism from a Jewish source:
https://www.jewishpress.com/sections/features/features-on-jewish-world/karl-marx-a-self-hating-jew/2019/05/08/
I'm as far from "confused" as possible!
If you think that I'm "confused", then you are completely ignorant 🙄
Grotesquely ignroant.
As you obviously don't know anything about Marx & Engels, let me introduce you to some facts:
Evidence of Marx's Antisemitism
In the unpublished private correspondence with Engels, Marx Marx frequently derided his political foes and his friend’s Jewish backgrounds, even when the specific context of the exchanges did not deal with Jewish issues.
When on holiday in Ramsgate in 1879, Marx reported to Engels that the resort contained “many Jews and fleas.”
Marx referred to Ferdinand Johann Gottlieb Lassal as a “Jewish n***er.”
Marx Sr. borrowed much of his money from Mr. Bamberger and his son, referred to them in a derogatory fashion as “Jew Bamberger” or “little Jew Bamberger.”
Marx and Engels referred to a gentleman named Spielman as “Jew Spielmann".
In his private correspondence, he was sensitive to being reminded of his Jewish heritage and being the son of a convert.
There were extensive irrelevant ethnic slurs and gratuitous hostility towards the Jews in the correspondence letters between Marx and Engels.
This was so well known throughout academia then even until the mid-1960s One of the world's leading commenters on Marx, Shlomo Avineri, even stated: "Karl Marx was an inveterate antisemite is today considered a commonplace which is hardly ever questioned."
No one has managed to locate even the briefest comment by Marx on the beginnings of the Jewish socialist movement in Eastern Europe, although Russian-Jewish socialists were among the first to seriously read and advocate Marx’s main work, "Das Kapital".
Marx never protested against the large and unprecedented wave of pogroms (1881-1882) in Imperial Russia even once, despite his usual habit of condemning the persecution and exploitation of the weak.
Marx noted the emergence of even the most obscure socialist groups with great interest and commenting on them extensively but showed incredible indifference and no commentary on the beginnings of the Jewish working-class movement.
In "Das Kapital", he asserts the genesis of the industrial Capitalist was because of Jews and Lombards engaging in "usury" by citing a passage from an author with the pseudonym "Daniel Hardcastle". Making the false equivalence of "jews = usury"
In his “Theories of Surplus Value,” he praises Luther’s indictment of usury by claiming Luther “has really caught the character of old-fashioned usury, and that of capital as a whole.”
In 1845, in "The Holy Family" Marx claimed that in his articles in the Deutsch-Franzosische Jahrbucher he had "proved that the task of abolishing the essence of Jewry is in truth the task of abolishing Jewry in civil society, abolishing the inhumanity of today's practice in life, the summit of which is the money system." (for the exact quote, see the 1845 publication on p.148 of "The Holy Family")
In "The Holy Family", written with Friedrich Engels, Marx argues that the most pressing imperative is to transcend “the Jewishness of bourgeois society, the inhumanity of present existence, which finds its highest embodiment in the system of money.” [note: the emphasis was in the origial]
In his “Theories of Surplus Value,” he praises Luther’s indictment of usury. Luther “has really caught the character of old-fashioned usury, and that of capital as a whole.”
The two big published essays of his that are rife with anti-Semitic tropes are "On The Jewish Question" and "The Russian Loan" (Most Marxists deny "The Russian Loan" was written by Marx even though it was provided by Elanor Marx along with all his lost private correspondence and published in the New York Daily Tribune Jan 4, 1856)
I appreciate your wanting to educate others. I agree with what you're sharing. What I haven't seen how crt is Marxist.
Seriously?
CRT is 100% Marxist!
It's based on the Frankfurt School, which was founded by Marxists who realized that Communism was a failure, so they thought that they first had to change culture to make people accept their Marxist ideology.
They developed the Critical Theory, Queer Theory etc.
Gothix just brilliantly exposed the Marxist ideology behind CRT, BLM etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMIAWd7GBBg
She points out how modern communists follow EXACTLY the script outlined in:
“The Naked Communist” 45 goals, by Cleon Skousen, 1958.
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/naked-communist45-goals-destroy-united-states-america-waghelstein
Pedophilia is an integral part of Cultural Marxism - many famous communists are or were openly pedophile, e.g. Foucault:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/french-philosopher-michel-foucault-abused-boys-in-tunisia-6t5sj7jvw
This is also confirmed by the far-left professor Derrick Jensen - in this video of one of his lectures, he explains to his students that pedophilia is closely related to communist "anarchy" and Queer Theory:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mipq8FjTXrw
So yes, there's absolutely no question about the fact that CRT is 100% a Marxist tool and it serves to destroy western society.
My question is: how in the world could you NOT know that CRT is a Marxist tool? It's entirely based on lies, as all of Marxism.
Liza, you are a sad case, and your kids will suffer.
Huh?
“The illustrations include fellatio, sex toys, masturbation and violent nudity,”
What is "violent" nudity, exactly?
Thank you for standing up to these insufferable tyrants.
Our Holy God will bless you, Mrs Nomani. We thank you.
It’s her God too. They are both the same.
You are entirely too defensive. My intent was to say that the God that I know will bless her. I don't know if Mrs Nomani is atheist, Buddhist, animist, Baptist, mohammedan or...and furthermore I don't care--she is a wonderful and brave person for fighting the lib/lefty/"progressive"/moral relativist/subjectivist/humanist/secularist/Democrat pigs.
We're glad you asked.
Ok. Thanks and hugs! Salam to you (meaning Peace)! I am a Muslim - Mohameddan is an old, obsolete, and incorrect terminology. Muslims don’t worship Mohammed (peace be upon him) but they worship God.
The term "mohammedan" has been used forever, almost, at least, and identifies the adherents very well, because while your "allah" is somewhere out there, for you at least, you do not identify yourselves as "allahists" while we do, indeed, identify ourselves with our Holy God as Christians, adorers of Jesus Christ, the second person of the Holy Trinity, one God.
And we don't know and don't care where the term "muslim,' or "moslem," or...come from.
You, personally, may not worship mohammed, but apparently there is extensive and active worship by mohammedans of mohammed's ex nihilo, but "divinely inspired [ha, ha, ha]" dictates about how to treat girls and women, among other perversions of human nature, of natural law. There are far more perversions in mohammedanism, but we will not list them here.
Did mohammed sleep with the prepubescent Fatima? Or not? Do present day middle aged mohammedans marry child brides, as the pathetic ignorant mohammedan afghani immigrants showing up here in the US demonstrate?
Happy to help. Anytime, really.
You are as ignorant as the people you protest here.
You show with this simplistic, easy, response that you can only resort with insults as a response to our sincere challenge, but cannot answer any of our specific points regarding our very sincere inquiries about the nonsense of the "foundation" of mohammedanism but specifically the apparent pedophiliac mohammed and his use, or misuse really, as we describe mohammed's use, or misuse as civilized folks would say, of the prepubescent Fatima.
Apparently you have no way of attempting to defend mohammed's pedophiliac sickness. Yes?
Try, please try.
Pleased to help. Just anytime. Really.