For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

If you have a problem with Delirious, you’re the fucking problem .

Parkins is fine when he's the shallow, weed smoking gambler he is at heart. That's what he is. Trying to score points by saying "the right side of history" is worse than pandering. It's stupid. History has no "right' side. We are in this post WW2 and Civil Rights Era. It does not mean that every action in the name of "Civil Rights" will be judged as a good idea ten years down the road. Doesn't anyone doubt that Kaep could do something that makes him look like an phony sell out in that time frame?

The other part about history is that it does not care about morality. It cares about power, and those in charge write it. If the Nazis won World War 2 does that mean that their racial policies have been proven "right by history"?

Many modern Leftists - particularly SJWs - don't see their thoughts as political. In fact, if you asked someone like Parkins, he would probably agree with you that sports radio is not the place for politics. That's because he doesn't view his brand of politics to be debatable, and therefore he doesn't see it as political talk. He, and many others, have become so self-righteous in the era of Donald Trump that their political views are exempt from the rules of avoiding political discussions because what they are stating is just true. He is merely relaying facts to the listener, not espousing political opinions. Consider also that he is surrounded by people who have the exact same viewpoint, and it becomes pretty clear how someone could create an internal narrative that every sane person on Earth agrees with his views and therefore he is free to broadcast them whenever and wherever without the typical restraints on political talk that most people have to adhere to.

I still remember the first time I heard Bernsie say "the right side of history". Pittmike and I thought, oh boy.

i don't exactly know what's going on with this post but i love it.

Parkins is fine when he's the shallow, weed smoking gambler he is at heart. That's what he is. Trying to score points by saying "the right side of history" is worse than pandering. It's stupid. History has no "right' side.

Im comfortable saying people who tried to deny basic civil rights to people based on their skin color were on the wrong side.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

Im comfortable saying people who tried to deny basic civil rights to people based on their skin color were on the wrong side.

I am not a legal expert, how many times do I have to say it?

It's too early to judge if Hitler was on the wrong side of history.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

If he won he would have been on the "right side." Hitler bad. Insightful.

No he wouldn’t have. Stalin won that war as well and he’s not really looked upon fondly either. I get your beef with that type of verbiage but you’re taking it to a ridiculous extreme.

No he wouldn’t have. Stalin won that war as well and he’s not really looked upon fondly either. I get your beef with that type of verbiage but you’re taking it to a ridiculous extreme.

No he wouldn’t have. Stalin won that war as well and he’s not really looked upon fondly either. I get your beef with that type of verbiage but you’re taking it to a ridiculous extreme.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

He would rule the world. How would that not be on the "right side of history"? History is written by the winners. The phrase "right side of history" is just arrogant nonsense designed to proclaim one's self the moral victor of an argument.

For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.

You are missing the point. Try reading the entire post instead of making this into another racism is bad discussion. Do you think history is guaranteed to continue on the same trajectory? And do you think that some of the actions taken by social justice types today might be seen as counter productive in the future?

We have no idea of knowing. Saying this will certainly be judged well by history is something that some long forgotten Summarian priest said before his next human sacrifice as well.

He would rule the world. How would that not be on the "right side of history"? History is written by the winners. The phrase "right side of history" is just arrogant nonsense designed to proclaim one's self the moral victor of an argument.

This completely misses the point.

Do you believe that history is a long slow arc toward justice?

He would rule the world.

No.

Yep.

I think it's more of a religious belief that in the end righteousness always wins out. I wish that were true. Even a cursory glance at history shows us it is not.

No he wouldn't, and no he didn't.

I think it's more of a religious belief that in the end righteousness always wins out. I wish that were true. Even a cursory glance at history shows us it is not.

If the point is that history is written by winners or we dont know how history will look back, he should say that. To say "history has no right side" is incorrect.

No, it is correct. History doesn't have a "right side." The "right side" is determined by the winners.

Huh?