Lenin did not kill millions of people, and with the other communists you are probably including embellished deaths from famines that china was notorious for suffering from. And to say all NRA members should be killed is wrong BUT, I would argue, is qualitatively different than saying all NAACP members should be killed. Also the fact the man is Hispanic is irrelevant whereas with the NAACP race becomes relevant.

@Tolstoy, is my writing painful to read? If so, I dearly apologize, but if not, I'll kindly ask you to let me continue criticizing that which is.

@Stressed, I fully agree that this man is horrible, I never argued that point. I just feel like you're being racist and closed-minded when say things like "why is this liberal not under arrest" and "the hate this hispanic man was just pouring out of his mouth." There are going to be evil nuts on either side of the spectrum, and bitching and moaning about what one insignificant asshole thinks is your way of avoiding the bigger picture and the points of view who actually disagree with you. Grow up.

@Semck, oh wow, that's embarrassing.

For the record, I'm not a liberal and I'm not defending Mr. Cobarruvius. Stressedlines is also, however, wrong to call for the killing of the entire HR staff of every company that has ever hired an illegal immigrant. That would be thousands of people.

"As a libertarian, you will be forever personally responsible in putin's [sic] eyes for everything that any bad that [sic] any conservative-leaning person has said or done, no matter how bad it may be."

>:D

">:D [sic]"

">:D [sic]" [sic]

not all NAACP members are black, try again. There are even white NAACP members. It is simply an organization that advanced 'colored people'

So, since it is not a race based organization, (or is it? They have white directors in some regions)

Socrates, please, their policy forced that starvation, so they are responsible.

Even if it is only HALF true, it still trumps anything anyone done.

jamie, laws need to be ENFORCED, and I was justpulling that out of there, since GOP tends to allow corporations to profit from the use of illegals, but then waves this "close the border' flag They are as big as hypocrites as the Dems are, just they sing a different song.

Felony crimes= execution. It will fix the problem fast, I promise...lol Start throwing dead bodies out there, and the rest will get in step fast.

however, I am just shooting from the hip also, as I know that it is a slippery slope, and not possible, but the status quo sucks.

I didn't say all members were black but it's still qualitatively different...

I disagree, without communism Russia and china would be less developed with more deaths from famines etc (Russia's life expectancy has dropped since they stopped being communist btw). And more people have died due to capitalism and imperialism, by a long distance...

And it's been shown that the death penalty doesn't decrease crime rates, and for at least half a millennia leading thinkers have thought the death penalty to not only be immoral but actually to encourage crime...

Socrates, you said "whereas with the NAACP race becomes relevant" You certainly did imply that it was race based by that statement. Asking to kill 4.3 million Americans (his words, NOT mine) regardless of race, relgion or any other criteria, is dead wrong.

i have been to Russia a number of times, probably moer than everyone on this board together unless they are Russia, and I wont disagree with that statement. Russia has had some improvements (their people get to see the rest of the world) but other things are worse.

their health care is better believe it or not, but the substance abuse is WAY worse,and especially amongst their men.

They have a huge gender gap situation there, as the men are dying at a younger age due to substance abuse, which has allowed them to also create a very bad problem of the men not having to act like men They have their pick of women there, and it is a shitty time right now for Russian women.

Show me your stats and sources, unbiased ones,that say IMperialism/capitalism killed more than Communism.

And, still, I am here defending my beliefs, when people refuse to throw this man under the bus for his comments.

The organisation being about race, it of course follows that a white man wanting to kill them all should be thought of a racist implicitly if we get more evidence BECAUSE the movement is about "coloureds". And I said it is awful what he said but wanting to kill some people because of their support and evil influence I qualitatively different to wanting to kill everyone because they're fighting for equality, but I digress.

So you agree communism has helped/when around had some important thing better?

Add the totals of most wars, of most starvation, many diseases etc, I don't expect you to accept this but it is true! not to mention many crimes, and by inductive thinking many gun tragedies...

Stressed, it's estimated that about 70 million Native Americans died when the Europeans began colonizing. Completely ignoring all of the Europeans that died as well, all of the other colonization around the world, and numerous other deaths due to capitalism and imperialism, the number is still higher.

"Asking to kill 4.3 million Americans (his words, NOT mine) regardless of race, relgion or any other criteria, is dead wrong."
Actually, those are your words, but yes, you are completely correct. This man is terrible and his actions are unjustifiable, but the fact is that he's not the only one who says such things.

"You certainly did imply that it was race based by that statement."
Of course it's race based, it's the NAACP. That doesn't mean that every member of the organization is black.

"Stressed, it's estimated that about 70 million Native Americans died when the Europeans began colonizing."

Um, source please?

That's a rough estimate that I've heard repeatedly. I'll look for a source. Do you have better numbers?

There is no way to prove 70 million, because nobody knows how many were here.

I know you are probably including South and Central America though, right? I only have studied North American numbers, so I will be honest, I would have to look into the rest but would make for an interesting read I thik, as it is not somethign I have ever read about.

So I wont disagree with the #, but thank you for giving me something to dig into.

I know in the case of North America, it is hard to figure out, because diseases often raced ahead of actual contact between a tribe and a European scout party/pioneer.

So, I guess if we go back 500 years (since Columbus was 1492) I guess you amy be right, but since communism only had effecton Russia for about 80, and they lost 10s of millions (not to mention wars) I shoudl pro rate it?

ghug,

It depends what you mean. A very large number of Native Americans did die from disease, both immediately before Europeans arrived and, in larger numbers, after Europeans arrived, because they had no immunity to European disease. Tragic as this was, it is obviously absurd to call it any kind of genocide or murder.

(An exception would be if some of it was deliberate. It is controversial whether the Spanish did engage in some deliberate smallpox poisoning. There is no direct evidence that they did).

As for actual numbers killed, though, whether by displacement or direct violence or otherwise, it was certainly far, far short of 70 million. We have relatively poor records in the deep past, of course, but consider that the entire US population in the 1780s was about 3 million, and ask yourself just how they might have managed to kill an order of magnitude more people than themselves (yes, they had guns, but no, the massacres, terrible as they were, did not reach that level).

As history progresses, we do have progressively better records, and there is nothing in the 19th century to support getting to those numbers after starting so far from them at its beginning.

It's not like those deaths happened continuously over 500 years. I don't know how true this is, but I was taught in history class that the population had shrunk by 90% in 1700, which would suggest a very substantial loss of life over about 100 years. Can we just agree that they're both terrible and blame power-hungry rulers rather than their political systems?

Note that my numbers above did focus on NA, but the numbers weren't different in order of magnitude in SA. And yes, the 3 million number was in the 1700s, and there had been settlers for 300 years by then, but the numbers of settlers fell off sharply the farther back you go in time. While the killing surely continued the whole time, there just are not the numbers to support 70 million dead of actual conflict or social upheaval (other than disease).

As I say, these are very hard numbers to pin down with much certainty. The best estimates I've seen are in the 5 million range.

" but I was taught in history class that the population had shrunk by 90% in 1700"

Probably true, but mostly due to disease.

"Can we just agree that they're both terrible and blame power-hungry rulers rather than their political systems? "

Both what? The point is that some political systems lead to power-hungry and despotic rulers as the night follows the day.

Ghug, again, I am not going to argue the #s morethan required, but I did say "Mass Murderers" I know that diseases did a # on the Natives, but I cant find any estimates that put the north american native #s over 70 million at any point.

Native Americans always had low birth rates, mostly due to lack of calcium and other minerals. It was said, native american mothers nursed their children for 3 or 4 years at a time, so less chance for pregnancy, since women do not usually ovulate when nursing.

semck, we're talking about an ideology killing people here, so I don't really think that it's unfair to count disease as part of such a death toll. Given that, the number can easily reach 70 million, given that estimates of original population range from 50 to 150 million.

Alright sure, Communism, like any governmentaly system, implemented in a way that gives too much power to a leader can very easily lead to corrupt governments. I still see no reason why that had any relevance to the original conversation.

@SL. I hope you were joking about supporting killing NAACP members. I think the slant is less severe than you believe. I think the guy is an idiot. rather or not he deserves to lose his job depends on how serious he was being. He should apologize and if there is enough discontent he should simply step down.

supporting? I am not sure how you mean. If you think i saidI supported it, you misunderstood me, or I made myself impossible to understand. Either way, I dont support killing of anyone who is part of any political block. It would be against everythign I think ourconstitution stands for.

I hope that clears it up exactly for you.

I have yet to hear one single comment from Semck or Stressedlines condemning the legions of rightwingers who threaten political opponents and/or wish violence on their opponents (Obama in particular) on a daily basis in the United States. But I'm glad this is suddenly an issue when a Democrat (allegedly) does it. Usually I hear Semck & Racecard here brey about 'free speech'. Glad to see that's out the window as soon as your NRA thugs are the target.

And as is typical of Racecard, he has to paint this as a race issue, because he's the poster boy for continuous whining about how he's a victim because he's white.

"Meanwhile, good luck getting him to admit that Stalin even did anything bad, much less take responsibility in any way for those horrors or those of any other communists."

You say this and in the next breath do exactly what I do except the subject is your heroic white European colonists. But disputing those who throw out casualty victims based on flimsy evidence is ok in one stance, horrible in the next. You're a joke.

*casualty victim numbers