🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@rspfau

Did you mean this for the OP?

@antares

@tatzelbrumm Ya know, even personally knowing Biden, im not 100% suer if he beleives his BS or not... Even the stuff he does intentionally sometimes i think he compartmentalizes in his head and still doesnt entierly recognize he is doing it.

Were you aware that JFK's Nephew (his brother's son) Is currently running against Biden for the Democrat nomination for President of the USA?

#USPol

@malwaretech While I myself would never charge for social media service... to be honest, I'd buy into that... well not for twitter. But if it was a responsibly managed social media network that you had to pay to join and actually had everyone on it... yea id pay.

The way i see it someone always needs to pay. Which means they either steal your data, show ads, or rely on donations (which is a fancy way of saying being liked and popular). If paying meant that my data wasnt stolen, there were no ads, popularity wasnt the top concern... AND has the advantage of preventing spam and bots, something even the fediverse cant do..... hell yea sign me up.

@ambihelical

And yes, I too care a lot more about the fact that he is still currently a raging racist, than the fact that he used to be a raging racist.

He is still pulling the same racist shit where he exploits minorities for his own benefit then spins a web of lies to make it sound like his racism was actually out of loving father like sheppard mentality of him doing what is best for the black race, even if they dont know whats good for them, daddy Biden does... after all, if you dont vote for daddy biden "you ain't black" (as he himself as said... not the only time he ever used the word ain't was when talking to black people which apparently he felt he had to speak incorrect english to them if they were to be able to follow along or something).

@kryptec @unabomber

@ambihelical

What do you mean "it didnt" ... it literally did.

Bussing was enacted and segregation broken. White and black kids went to schools now based not on their race but which school was closer as it should be)...

Now the reason people sometimes claim it failed, incorrectly, is because white people just moved to address this. White and blacks started to move closer to the good schools to try to game the system. The rich wound up at good schools again, the poor at poor schools again. People sometimes use that to claim it failed.

In reality it succeeded.. because while the it may not have managed to get the the rich and the poor to mix, that was never the goal. The goal was to force the black and the white to mix, which is exactly what this did. First they were mixed because the districts overlapped... then they mixed because both black and whites who could afford to move both moved to rich districts. Causeing equal oppertunity by skin color and ultimately mixed race schools.

The issue now was that while it had its intended goal of mixing the races, now we have mixed race rich kids seperate from mixed race black kids. Thankfully (sarcastic) since society cares more about your race than your income this meant people actually cared about the abysmal school conditions for poor (white kids) so now white people actually were forced to care enough to start wanting to see previously all-black schools get funding.

Fast forward a bit more time and the busing worked twice over... first to get whites and blacks to mix, then again by getting funding to the now mixed schools.

We have the hindsight of history and can see quite clear it had the intended result, because its history now.

@kryptec @unabomber

@Kaetchi

Yea the contingent election thing is something people have worried about for a while but hasnt come to pass in a very long time.

While I tend to agree with most of the older rules that move away from a popular vote, like the electorial college, this is one scenario i do think needs fixing. Should a contingent election ever happen at the moment it is virtually a garunteed win for the GOP and will be into the forseeable future. For this reason I think it needs to be addressed so should it ever happen we have a more fair representation.

@cyrilpedia

@ambihelical

Regardless of anything my original point is true.

Biden was a central pro-segregation figure for most of the start of his career. Regardless of anything he said he actively voted against all efforts to desegregate at the time and never once proposed or voted for a single bill (that I know of or can find when researching) that was an attempt at desegregation.

He was a desegregationists based on his actions... very clearly so, and a well known central figure in the opposition to desegregation.... full stop

@kryptec @unabomber

@ambihelical

> A lot here, so I’ll point out a few things. Picking up a black kid isn’t disruptive, it’s what happens at the school after that. Which is they encounter a subset of hostile racist white kids.
>
> I think we do agree on the racism. His poorly chosen words * I think * meant that he thought there will be more fights and disruptions or outright and significant violence because of that racism. I don’t know of course. This may be hateful racism, or it may be ignorance, but I prefer to give him some benefit of the doubt and think he was more ignorant than hateful.

Sounds like we mostly agree... either he was racist, or other people were racist. So he decided as a nation we should intentionally continue to carry out clearly racist policies because if we dont racist people might get mad and act out.

Either way we agree his actions were intentionally choosen by him because he knew they were racist and he thought intentionally supporting this racism would be the best thing for the country.. he was just being pragmatic.

Ok sure then, we agree, maybe he wasnt a racist, maybe he was, but we both agree 100% he supported the racists agenda, and did so specifically because it was racist.

> But I don’t agree that he didn’t grow. Nor do I think he was ever hateful in whatever bias he did have.

I mean, im sure the people who kept blacks as slave didnt all do it out of hate either.. they were just pragmatic because they knew those blacks were subhuman and not capable of self-determination, so im sure they were the good guys and totally loving and caring father figures as slave owners... guess what, as I said before, just because your evil and racist because you'
ve convinced yourself it is the best thing for society and in no way out of hate... that still makes you an evil racist.

Just to be clear, when you do evil things, just because you can weave an elaborate tale as to how you can incorrectly reason that the thing isnt evil, doesnt somehow make what you did less evil. Supporting racism becuase you think its what is best for the blacks doesnt make you less racist.

@kryptec @unabomber

@trinsec

> He doesn't want it court-ordered, but also doesn't want to stop desegregation looks like:
>
> "It is difficult for two reasons. First, we want to stop court-ordered busing, but at the same time not undo the basic ruling in Brown."

When he says he doesnt want it court ordered, he isnt talking about forcing a black kid who doesnt want to go to a white school to go. He is talking about ordering schools to pick up black children who are within the radius to go to the school.... in other words "I love desegregation its great, so long as school principles can choose to desegregate if they want and as long as courts wont force a school to accept or pick up a black student, then yea I support it".... come on now, if you dont support **requiring** schools to let in black people, and to pick them up on your bus... then doesnt it sound a little silly to say he isnt against desegregation? Seriously, you cant see the political double speak here?

> Nor do we want to prevent the alternative things that can be done to end segregation.

Soooo... he wants to desegregate, he is just against forcing all-white schools to allow black people to go to the school by requiring them to pick them up on their busses?

What!?

It doesnt even make sense.., but ok those alternatives.... I mean none exist I know of... Like what other alternatives to desegregation is there?

> It is a failure for several reasons. First, it is a failure because it does not achieve its purpose.

More nonsense... it didnt achieve its purpose? The purpose was to allow blacks to go to white schools if they wanted... Sounds like it exactly achieved its purpose.

> It has resulted in dismantling many good black schools as well as white schools. It has not generally benefited black or white students.

No, it hasnt.. and again nonsensical racist mumbojumbo... How does bussing a black kid to the white school "dismantle" the school Either it was a shithole and all the blackkids wanted out, in which case the school was shit and should be dismantled. Or it was a great school so the kids/parents would be happy to keep their kids in it.

What he really meant to say is "While black kids could now go to my expensive well funded white kid school, that might mean my white kid winds up at a shitty black school. I dont want that for my kid so im gonna pretend im not racist and try to stop this"

I am kinda shocked you bought the whole "mixing white and black kids in the same school is the same thing as dismantling the school" and are selling that as a reasonable perspective.

> It has not generally benefited black or white students.

You think this is a reasonable statement. To say that letting a black kid choose if they want to go to the white-only school or black-only school should not be allowed by the courts because it wont

benefit anyone? Can you really say that with a straight face.

> With the resources given (those links and articles) I cannot determine what his actual proposed solution would've been. But he did mention:
>
> ... I think pushing busing in a way in which it goes beyond the constitutional mandates is like throwing a bus through the civil rights window. I think it has repercussions that are extensive in terms of the ultimate objective of seeing that we get integrated neighborhoods, of seeing that we eventually eliminate job discrimination, of seeing that we change housing patterns, of seeing alteration of the tax structure.

Not sure that is even a hint of a solution for desegregating schools in that statement.

Remember its important to note busing means "Forcing the school to pick up black kids that are nearby and giving them the same resources (access to transportation to school) the white kids have in their area"... really important to keep that in mind when we see the word "bussing" as it was an intentionally manipulative term Biden and his supporters used at the time.

So he is saying what exactly here..."Letting black kids have exactly the same access to educational resources as whites by being allowed to take the same bus and attend the same school is wrong, and i will not support that..." then he goes on to list why basically saying how there is still racism in workplaces and neighboorhoods.

Again amazed you dont see the idiocy in this sort of backpeddling... so integrating schools doesnt help with racism int he workplace, therefore you dont support that solution... ok so does he also oppose integrating whites and blacks int he workd place because doing so wont solve the problem of segragation in our schools... The logic is at best a thin veil to hide some pretty clear racism.

The more quotes you dig up the more it shows he was motivated by racism and just polticking some responses that make it sounds like he isnt an asshole.. thats it.. and its pretty transparent.

> I did encounter an opinion piece from 2020 of somebody who describes this busing issue like I kind of suspected is the case going on:
https://medium.com/view-from-space/school-integration-and-joe-biden-1f58fe4a1eb3

I will give it a read. But a quick scan notices not a single source linked in the post other than the congressional transcript itself... a bit worried how valuable it might be. But ill read and form an opinion.

Keep in mind I went to school and grew up during the 80s when biden was still a central figure head on the topic and where I was actually living the issue (as a small child). So, I dont really need a recap without cited sources on something i was alive through and a part of. But I will read it all the same later today.

> You may or may not agree with it, but I found him wording this issue in such a way that aligns with how I feel about it after reading the aforementioned articles.

You are always welcome to disagree, no matter how wrong or how obvious it is that you are wrong you may be, you are still welcome to do so :)

> I have to disengage now as real life is calling me. My resources are depleted at this point anyway.

No worries, hope you have a great rest of your day.

@unabomber

@12thRITS Still one of my favorite memes :)

@isucceed

I think that sums it up well enough.. two sides intentionally avoiding hearing anything that disagrees with their biases, desperately appalled at the other side for not caring about facts... it would be comical if it wasnt so sad.

@olives Lucky for you (and me) there are more than two choices each year. So thankfully neither of us will need to vote for Biden or Trump.

@ambihelical

Yes I know what Biden said... but with all politicians they say what will make both sides happy, not what their actions reflect. So lets look at bidens position step by step and see if, like you say, it reflects as someone who is not racist or bias, and is looking out for everyopne, shall we... because what you just described sounds like well worded nonsense to me the second i consider it for even a moment.

Before I address your quotes lets start with biden... so he doesnt want his kids to grow up in a "racial jungle"... can you define what you think Biden meant by a "racial jungle" that seems to match what you said about his views on segregation? Like your saying busing is "disruptive", so clearly when he said "racial jungle" he didnt mean he was against the mixing of races... but against..... disruption? Disruption == racial jungle? What, his wording in no way makes sense with what he claims his poisition is? This phrasing alone is enough to see his words are hollow and makes no sense and that it was purely racially motivated.

But hey, even though out of the gate nothing adds up lets go further an analyze his claimed position...

> He was saying that busing was disruptive to both black and white students, as well as disruptive to the all-black schools and all-white schools themselves.

Bussing is literally the act of a black person getting on a bus and getting taken to the closest white school rather than the black school they were segregated into.

So clearly he opposed this... but its cause its "disruptive" not because of anything related to race? Ok... so if not race related what is disruptive about the bus that picks up exclusively white kids for the exclusivly white school to pick up a black kid? Why isnt it disruptive when they pick up the white kids from even farther away (which is sometimes the case)? Like his argument wasnt that we should outlaw bussing beyond a certain distance, he is perfectly fine with all the long-haul bus rides to pick up the white kids to keep segregation alive... but now apprently letting farther away white kids go to the black kids school, and the closer black kids go to the white kids school, apparently THAT is disruptive?

See why this isnt adding up. apparently the only thing really special here is that the kids are black, other than that there is nothing more disruptive about picking up a black kid then there is about picking up a white kid.

> Most of that is because of racism, but that racism was the racism of the white people attending and having children at the formerly all-white schools.

Ok so sounds like we agree, what he meant by disruptive is "Having black kids at all white schools will piss off the white people and will become disruptive"... basically what he was saying is white people get upset when they are told they cant segregate black people, so lets keep segregation alive so we dont create disruption....

> Right or wrong, Biden was being pragmatic, this "solution" did not seem be a good one.

Pragmatic and racist is still racist. "White people are racist and therefore making racist illegal will be disruptive, therefore I will oppose any laws that tries to end segregation"... pragmatic or not it is racist, and it is wrong... being pragmatic about your racism doesnt give you a pass to your racism.

@kryptec @unabomber