Reported for openly blatant and unapologetic racism.What? You can never "end" racism - racial biases are observed even among babies. It would take some borderline evolutionary shift to remove the concept from human nature.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/sci...0563/Babies-show-racial-bias-study-finds.html
And I'm confused. Do you just want to end white racism like the post suggests or all racism like the title suggests? What about the scores of black on black tribal violence in Africa? Racial nationalism in Korea, China and Japan? What about Anti-Semitism in the Arab world? All of these areas currently have far more casual acceptance of racial exclusion than probably any first world western country. Honestly, its far easier to reduce these levels of hatred than the hatreds in Europe.
Why do you insist on "One thing" too? Such a major societal change would require a huge cultural shift. I honestly think that OTL is about as hardcore as you can reasonably get on racism, as a result of the Nazi Holocaust. It's such a civilisation defining event that I can't really think of anything bigger that would influence people away from racial hatreds.
Reported for openly blatant and unapologetic racism.
Uh ... how?
I don't believe race has any biological foundation, I have mixed ancestry, I am politically centrist, hate the far-right ... I fall under no definition of the term.
How is your mixed ancestry relevant in any way? You're clearly far right if you take issue with my OP - needlessly bringing biological determinism and clear racism into the discussion.Uh ... how?
I don't believe race has any biological foundation, I have mixed ancestry, I am politically centrist, hate the far-right ... I fall under no definition of the term.
Uh ... how?
I don't believe race has any biological foundation, I have mixed ancestry, I am politically centrist, hate the far-right ... I fall under no definition of the term.
I'm just curious, who wins in 1988 and 1992 in your scenario?No Vietnam War
We would get more and stronger civil rights acts and the economy is stronger. MLK and RFJ don't die. LBJ runs and wins in 1968 and pushes universal healthcare and more social programs. Hebert Humphrey wins in 1972 but dies because of cancer.
Reagan beats Muskie in 1976 but loses in 1980 to Robert Kennedy who also wins 1984. Reagan doesn't get anything accomplished with a democratic congress.
Basically, you need African Americans as a whole to be economically equal to whites. More spending to social programs along with no drug war or Reaganomics which is discredited.
Also, have peace in the Middle East
A moderate Rockefeller republicanI'm just curious, who wins in 1988 and 1992 in your scenario?
This is scary.Reported for openly blatant and unapologetic racism.
A significant portion from the same poster too.This is scary.
![]()
Dude joins site, lasts one day, and yet generates 32 likes?!?! Ouch.
Will say a lot of his posts were some amazing satirical humour.A significant portion from the same poster too.