I don’t understand PragerU… they put out all of this fascist propaganda, but they still have this video up on their YouTube channel that spells out in no uncertain terms that the cause of the civil war was slavery and the south’s want to defend a “morally repugnant institution”:
Historically, it was the democratic party pre 1960s that were the defenders of slavery. Lincoln was a Republican at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation, and the ideologies basically switched around the time of the Civil Rights Act.
I mean yes its a technicality but its also a pointless argument seeing as most political parties aren’t the same after 100+ years. Hell even in a span of 20 years, it is quite crazy to see progress since for a while the democrats basically avoided the whole lgbt topic entirely but now is one of its “pillars” for party ideals.
Exactly, just as conservatism has changed and gotten more extreme in the last 40ish years. My point though is that far too many people treat the political parties as constant throughout their history, and it’s worth pointing out that modern iterations of a given party are a stretch from even 20 years ago, almost to the point that they’re different parties entirely today.
The ideologies did not switch. The Republican party was more appealing to Protestants, was largely anti-union, etc many other things, but largely was the party of “individualism”. The Democratic Party has always been more interventionist- but started to ideologically evolve after FDR. Barry Goldwater and certain other Republicans opposed the 1964 Civil Rights because they argued it was federal overreach. This attracted some Democrats who just went with what ever party they saw as letting them keep being racist, as for actual politicians who switch IIRC Strom Thurmond was the only one(but I may be wrong). But a big part of the “switch”(Carter won in the south the first time, Bill Clinton won a few states in the South, Reagan won traditionally blue areas) is that anti-government interventionism(especially after Reagan) switched from being a more urban thing to a more rural thing. Thats not to suggest that a lot of Republicans didn’t pitch their policies in a way to appeal to voters(who may be racist), they did. But the ideologies of the parties didn’t swap. Republicans stayed more or less the same, Democrats evolved.
The problem is that social media companies have completely capitulated to fascists, with absolutely zero attempt to put up a fight.
Everyone knows, and I mean literally everyone, that if the rules were enforces fairly on social media then something like 60% of conservatives would have to be banned. They regularly say things that are openly racist, sexist, and incite violence on the reg.
But social media companies only care about money, and to make money they want as many people as possible to show up. So while they know these cesspools exist on their platforms where people say the most heinous shit imagineable, they tolerate it because it makes them money and avoids the big fascist rage party if they fairly enforced their rules.
They just sell content to education institutions, nothing more, nothing less. They don’t care what that content is for or against, only that someone finds it valuable. It’s not about being “fair and balanced”; it’s about playing both sides to make as much money as possible.
I mean their founder guy or whoever did a rant about how it’s ok for siblings to fuck and that inbreeding isn’t real, just to give you an idea of what kind of people they actually are…
I fucking knew it… Read the headline and came to the comments thinking “it’s definitely that shithole PragerU isn’t it…”
Conservatives LOVE projection and they use their victim complex as ammunition. “Libz own the colleges and indoctrinate our youth so it’s totally fine now to have our own propaganda university teaching real history!”
Yeah - they don’t seem to understand that there is a massive difference between “having biases” and “being biased.” It’s how they’ve excused the purposeful slant of FoxNews all these years.
Would simply changing conservative university to PragerU not be more context/more descriptive? I can’t even see it being called editorializing if it’s more accurate.
Do NOT call prageru a “university”.
Prager is to “University” as North Korean is to “Democratic People’s Republic”
I don’t understand PragerU… they put out all of this fascist propaganda, but they still have this video up on their YouTube channel that spells out in no uncertain terms that the cause of the civil war was slavery and the south’s want to defend a “morally repugnant institution”:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4
Is this just the one thing they keep out there to point at and say that they’re “fair and balanced”?
That’s the video they point at when they say the Democratic Party was the party of slavery.
They’re just hypocrites.
Historically, it was the democratic party pre 1960s that were the defenders of slavery. Lincoln was a Republican at the time of the Emancipation Proclamation, and the ideologies basically switched around the time of the Civil Rights Act.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats
I mean yes its a technicality but its also a pointless argument seeing as most political parties aren’t the same after 100+ years. Hell even in a span of 20 years, it is quite crazy to see progress since for a while the democrats basically avoided the whole lgbt topic entirely but now is one of its “pillars” for party ideals.
Exactly, just as conservatism has changed and gotten more extreme in the last 40ish years. My point though is that far too many people treat the political parties as constant throughout their history, and it’s worth pointing out that modern iterations of a given party are a stretch from even 20 years ago, almost to the point that they’re different parties entirely today.
The ideologies did not switch. The Republican party was more appealing to Protestants, was largely anti-union, etc many other things, but largely was the party of “individualism”. The Democratic Party has always been more interventionist- but started to ideologically evolve after FDR. Barry Goldwater and certain other Republicans opposed the 1964 Civil Rights because they argued it was federal overreach. This attracted some Democrats who just went with what ever party they saw as letting them keep being racist, as for actual politicians who switch IIRC Strom Thurmond was the only one(but I may be wrong). But a big part of the “switch”(Carter won in the south the first time, Bill Clinton won a few states in the South, Reagan won traditionally blue areas) is that anti-government interventionism(especially after Reagan) switched from being a more urban thing to a more rural thing. Thats not to suggest that a lot of Republicans didn’t pitch their policies in a way to appeal to voters(who may be racist), they did. But the ideologies of the parties didn’t swap. Republicans stayed more or less the same, Democrats evolved.
“Did you know that Lincoln was a Republican?”
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
The problem is that social media companies have completely capitulated to fascists, with absolutely zero attempt to put up a fight.
Everyone knows, and I mean literally everyone, that if the rules were enforces fairly on social media then something like 60% of conservatives would have to be banned. They regularly say things that are openly racist, sexist, and incite violence on the reg.
But social media companies only care about money, and to make money they want as many people as possible to show up. So while they know these cesspools exist on their platforms where people say the most heinous shit imagineable, they tolerate it because it makes them money and avoids the big fascist rage party if they fairly enforced their rules.
Removed by mod
Right before the API changes I got a 1 week ban from reddit for “report abuse.”
I reported a post on r/Ukraine that SHOWED A BEHEADING. When I reported that shit it was a full on, uncensored beheading video.
Apparently that’s “report abuse” for some fucking reason. But the antisemites who sent me blatant racism? Not enough to bet them banned.
Removed by mod
They just sell content to education institutions, nothing more, nothing less. They don’t care what that content is for or against, only that someone finds it valuable. It’s not about being “fair and balanced”; it’s about playing both sides to make as much money as possible.
I mean their founder guy or whoever did a rant about how it’s ok for siblings to fuck and that inbreeding isn’t real, just to give you an idea of what kind of people they actually are…
Here is an alternative Piped link(s): https://piped.video/watch?v=pcy7qV-BGF4
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source, check me out at GitHub.
Damn, PragerU was a different place 8 years ago.
I fucking knew it… Read the headline and came to the comments thinking “it’s definitely that shithole PragerU isn’t it…”
Conservatives LOVE projection and they use their victim complex as ammunition. “Libz own the colleges and indoctrinate our youth so it’s totally fine now to have our own propaganda university teaching real history!”
I hate PragerU so much…
Yeah - they don’t seem to understand that there is a massive difference between “having biases” and “being biased.” It’s how they’ve excused the purposeful slant of FoxNews all these years.
the title is from he article— I didn’t pick it! (Rule 1)
Would simply changing
conservative universitytoPragerUnot be more context/more descriptive? I can’t even see it being called editorializing if it’s more accurate.Beat me to it lol. Recognized the art style immediately.
It’s a goddamn pasta sauce.
Shouldnt it be illegal for them to call themselves a university? Its kinda like if i would call my hypotetical tea shop a hospital