Top products from r/SubredditDrama

Fun facts:

> Even more revealing was their attachment to slavery. Among the enlistees in 1861, slightly more than one in ten owned slaves personally. This compared favorably to the Confederacy as a whole, in which one in every twenty white persons owned slaves. Yet more than one in every four volunteers that first year lived with parents who were slaveholders. Combining those soldiers who owned slaves with those soldiers who lived with slaveholding family members, the proportion rose to 36 percent. That contrasted starkly with the 24.9 percent, or one in every four households, that owned slaves in the South, based on the 1860 census. Thus, volunteers in 1861 were 42 percent more likely to own slaves themselves or to live with family members who owned slaves than the general population.

> The attachment to slavery, though, was even more powerful. One in every ten volunteers in 1861 did not own slaves themselves but lived in households headed by non family members who did. This figure, combined with the 36 percent who owned or whose family members owned slaves, indicated that almost one of every two 1861 recruits lived with slaveholders. Nor did the direct exposure stop there. Untold numbers of enlistees rented land from, sold crops to, or worked for slaveholders. In the final tabulation, the vast majority of the volunteers of 1861 had a direct connection to slavery. For slaveholder and nonslaveholder alike, slavery lay at the heart of the Confederate nation. The fact that their paper notes frequently depicted scenes of slaves demonstrated the institution's central role and symbolic value to the Confederacy.

> More than half the officers in 1861 owned slaves, and none of them lived with family members who were slaveholders. Their substantial median combined wealth ($5,600) and average combined wealth ($8,979) mirrored that high proportion of slave ownership. By comparison, only one in twelve enlisted men owned slaves, but when those who lived with family slave owners were included, the ratio exceeded one in three. That was 40 percent above the tally for all households in the Old South. With the inclusion of those who resided in nonfamily slaveholding households, the direct exposure to bondage among enlisted personnel was four of every nine. Enlisted men owned less wealth, with combined levels of $1,125 for the median and $7,079 for the average, but those numbers indicated a fairly comfortable standard of living. Proportionately, far more officers were likely to be professionals in civil life, and their age difference, about four years older than enlisted men, reflected their greater accumulated wealth.

Source

Get something like this: http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B000638D32?pc_redir=1395342496&robot_redir=1

It's a good workhorse knife and is basically the same thing they use in professional kitchens. Then get a paring knife and you're pretty much set. Oh yeah, then a serrated knife for bread.

Then watch Alton browns good eats episode where he talks about knife skills.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Last-King-Lydia-Leach/dp/0857899171

Dno his book does have a nice cover, seems genuine. Plus writers love attention and have a lot of time, it might be his first successful publishing and he could have been waiting near his book to see if someone would pick it up. Heck he could even write a little scene about doing that for some column or whatever: carefully judging what kind of persons attract his book cover and talking about whatever.

http://www.amazon.com/Cookin-Coolio-Star-Meals-Price/dp/1439117616

My brother got it for Christmas, it's got some really interesting sounding recipes and it's pretty funny too

They've been extremely successful with this strategy. There's such a huge Byzantine network of contractors and subcontractors you're never going to find out where your clothes are being made. And that's deliberate. They even sometimes put the logos on at a different factory so the workers won't know who the clothes go to. I'd recommend reading Naomi Klein's No Logo if anyone wants to find out more about this type of thing.

Not really huge. An 8 inch chef's knife is about all you need. It doesn't even have to be super expensive. A relatively cheap Victorinox will suit you just fine, assuming you're not in the food business.

Edit: Heh, I see someone else recommended you the exact same knife about an hour ago. Oh well, it still stands. You really don't need super expensive knives.

>http://www.amazon.com/Vandor-52348-Darth-Shaped-Embossing/dp/B004LE78A6/

Close, I want one that's like the actual helmet and opens up like the helmet actually did. And a peltier in it. And sound effects.

That seems like an overreaction. They cost $7.99 with free shipping.

http://www.amazon.com/Vandor-52348-Darth-Shaped-Embossing/dp/B004LE78A6/

There have been several discussions on that subject, it is generally held (by liberal economists) to be about 30x median IIRC, after which it might makes sense to have very aggressive taxation (i.e. near confiscatory levels).

Honestly read Capital in the Twenty First Century for both a very good (liberal) treatment of minimum wage, and executive pay. It is quite probably the (liberal) economic book of the decade, no joke.

What are these grave and dire consequences beyond the possibility of an STD, which she could have gotten from any single person? I don't see what you're talking about here at all beyond some weird Puritan idea that the number of partners you've had determines your character or "purity" (LOL)

Do people honestly think that sex makes women dirty or something? Is it 1726? Where am I?

I honestly don't get the obsession with numbers when it comes to sex partners. If someone's careful, what does it matter? No unwanted pregnancy, no STDs, and it seems to me you pretty much win the lottery with an experienced partner.

edit: ITT, a lot of dudes who apparently want to catch a unicorn with a pure virgin maiden or something (protip: pegasi like sluts better, and a pegasus can FLY. Which would YOU prefer?)

Have you read this book? It's really good

Alright so https://www.amazon.com/Seagate-IronWolf-7200RPM-Internal-3-5-Inch/dp/B07H241VK4/ref=mp_s_a_1_4?keywords=seagate+10tb&qid=1573928479&sr=8-4

Assuming he does not need an external NAS and can fit it in his computer, he will need maybe 7 or 8 of those drives (extra for parity if using RAID)

It's a lot.

Here are some links for the product in the above comment for different countries:

Amazon Smile Link: No Logo


|Country|Link|
|:-----------|:------------|
|UK|amazon.co.uk|
|Spain|amazon.es|
|France|amazon.fr|
|Germany|amazon.de|
|Japan|amazon.co.jp|
|Canada|amazon.ca|
|Italy|amazon.it|
|China|amazon.cn|




This bot is currently in testing so let me know what you think by voting (or commenting). The thread for feature requests can be found here.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1481227041

Some good reviews on this one

plug for a good book about the modern history of veiling

Yup. Five seconds on Google, and I found the exact cutter set

Edit: Oh god.....the more I look at them, the more I want a set for myself. And I'm a grown man.

Good book on the subject

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229

I don't think you realize how many things can be treated as felonies, including much of that drug use you're referencing. Kids exchange pills pretty regularly. People you knew didn't score adderall in college?

It all just gets pled down to misdemeanors, because almost nothing goes to trial. Its the whole basis of the modern justice system. They throw all the scariest charges at you they can so you plea to a lesser offense.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00I6JAV38/ref=redir_mdp_mobile/192-5422921-2478223

Non-mobile: http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00I6JAV38/ref=redir_mdp_mobile/192-5422921-2478223

^That's ^why ^I'm ^here, ^I ^don't ^judge ^you. ^PM ^/u/xl0 ^if ^I'm ^causing ^any ^trouble. ^WUT?

Maybe the star of this fine book:

https://www.amazon.com/Taken-T-Rex-Dinosaur-Erotica-Christie-ebook/dp/B00FI9JFFO

Semen should, it contains protein. As for urine I don't know.

Also check this out: http://www.amazon.com/Natural-Harvest-collection-semen-based-recipes/dp/1481227041

You've never heard of Natural Harvest?

This should get you going. Once you have finished reading that, read my posts again.

Wait... Are you this Tim Leach?

There's a book that talks about that double standard called "The Purity Myth". It's a relatively quick read.

Three then...

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229

http://www.amazon.com/Taken-T-Rex-Dinosaur-Erotica-Christie-ebook/dp/B00FI9JFFO

The editor of the National Review wrote a book call Liberal Fascism. The comparison doesn't get more explicit than that.

> US Prisons require you to be sent there by a jury of your peers

How many hundreds of thousands of black people have faced all or nearly-all white juries in the South, and continue to do so?

https://www.amazon.com/New-Jim-Crow-Incarceration-Colorblindness/dp/1595586431

The US has prosecutors and DAs looking out for their re-election, the gulag system had a commissar. In the end, even though there is somewhat more due process in the US, by sheer numbers America is outdoing the old Soviet Union. It's not even close.

Yeah I just found this one for 8 bucks on Amazon. And actually I was sort of wrong, OP is using this kit where you just cut the bread out and don't have squished edges. I like the squashy ones better.

People also make the argument that socialists are Nazi's. I think the book was Liberal Fascism.

Edit: Here it is. Don't read the reviews without a gas mask.

Actually it goes way farther back then that! After slavery was abolished, the white people in charge (for a lack of a better phrase) realized they could not just do what they wanted to black people anymore. The solution to this, through the law, was arresting them for minor reasons and locking them up. This of course expanded over time and as you said, The Drug War became a great resource for continued oppression- intentional and unintentional.

The New Jim Crow does an incredible job of going over it. Whether or not you agree with her theories, it's an important viewpoint to familiarize yourself with.

Lol. One reviewer is not happy about this book at all:


>VERY one-sided view of the War of Northern Aggression

>Sad to say, biased writers are still leaving out the facts. I was disappointed in this thick book with page after page of the same old revisionist history we've been fed since the North invaded the South and denied them their Constitutionally guaranteed State's Rights. The South had no desire to fight, they simply wanted to secede quietly, then live and let live. A better book to read that is succinct, completely factual and not nearly as drawn out is "Facts The Historians Leave Out" John S. Tilley : The author states his facts well and clearly. He acknowledges that both the North and the South were responsible for the Civil War. The book was thought-provoking, making me really consider what I believed.

Emphasis added for irony.

Yeah, the same response comes form every regressive after saying something racist/sexist/etc.

These people are the fucking worst, they hide behind economic orthodoxy to not admit that their ideology and economic predictions have failed, they mock people on starvation wages, mock them for wanting a fair share of their productivity, mock them for wanting true equality of opportunity for their children, all the while ignoring economic studies that contradict their unregulated marked fanatisem, in favor of what is thought by econ departments with conflicts of interest, funded by Koch backed groups.

Economics has been ideologicalised and fails to live up to scientific scrutiny. I really recommend anyone to read this book https://www.amazon.de/Economism-Bad-Economics-Rise-Inequality/dp/1101871199

or this one https://www.amazon.de/Capital-Twenty-First-Century-Thomas-Piketty/dp/067443000X

Even if they were right, if unregulated capitalism with no minimum wage, no public healthcare etc were the best way, if people working in slave like conditions all over the world and in privat prisons were the only way, and it is not, what does it say about the people in that sub mocking people for wanting a bit more than that?

This is a subject where any humor is just spitting in someones face

Yeah they have completely different meanings. They're probably both always or usually offensive when said by non-blacks in a non-academic capacity, but that doesn't mean they're equally abhorrent and offensive was my point, and people in the linked thread seem to be treating the word "nigga" with the same disgusted reverence with which we treat the word "nigger."

There's been a lot written about it, although I've read very little on it. Here's one book, and I find it fairly amusing that reviewers can't even refer to it by name.

If the question is scholarship and clarity, no fault can be found with Randall Kennedy's [N-word]

That's probably because amazon doesn't allow cursing in their reviews, but it's still funny, like that poor reporter who tried to talk to Sam Jackson about it. If somebody can't even say it when they're directly talking about it, they're probably not ready to talk about it, as Sam Jackson so hilariously showed.

Thug Kitchen was a fucking mess. Having to explain to people why a book written in faux-AAVE by two WASP-y motherfuckers was racist as fuck got really grating.

It was also entirely superfluous, as Coolio already wrote the go to "ghetto gourmet" cook book.

> Lee didn't own slaves, his family freed them years before.

In 1857, George Washington Parke Custis - the father of Mary Custis Lee (the wife of Robert E. Lee) died. In his will, he stipulated that all of the Arlington slaves should be freed upon his death if the estate was found to be in good financial standing or within five years otherwise (technically, this was a court ruling interpreting the relevant clause).

Robert E. Lee was the executor of his estate, and his wife inherited the Arlington estate (and slaves).

Robert E. Lee issued his Emancipation Proclamation freeing those slaves on January 2, 1863. The day after Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. Regarding slaves on the Arlington estate in Northern Virginia, which had been in the hands of the Union since secession, and which had been occupied by Union troops since May 24, 1861.

> This is repeated again and again for many people fighting. People fought in that war for a bunch of reasons.

"Among the enlistees in 1861, slightly more than one in ten owned slaves personally. This compared favorably to the Confederacy as a whole, in which one in every twenty white persons owned slaves. Yet more than one in every four volunteers that first year lived with parents who were slaveholders. Combining those soldiers who owned slaves with those soldiers who lived with slaveholding family members, the proportion rose to 36 percent. That contrasted starkly with the 24.9 percent, or one in every four households, that owned slaves in the South, based on the 1860 census. Thus, volunteers in 1861 were 42 percent more likely to own slaves themselves or to live with family members who owned slaves than the general population.

The attachment to slavery, though, was even more powerful. One in every ten volunteers in 1861 did not own slaves themselves but lived in households headed by non family members who did. This figure, combined with the 36 percent who owned or whose family members owned slaves, indicated that almost one of every two 1861 recruits lived with slaveholders. Nor did the direct exposure stop there. Untold numbers of enlistees rented land from, sold crops to, or worked for slaveholders. In the final tabulation, the vast majority of the volunteers of 1861 had a direct connection to slavery. For slaveholder and nonslaveholder alike, slavery lay at the heart of the Confederate nation. The fact that their paper notes frequently depicted scenes of slaves demonstrated the institution’s central role and symbolic value to the Confederacy.

More than half the officers in 1861 owned slaves, and none of them lived with family members who were slaveholders." - historian Joseph T. Glatthaar, General Lee's Army: From Victory to Collapse

They may have fought for many reasons... but an awfully large portion of those reasons involved slavery.

https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229

>The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior. The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets. The dangers spelled out in Three Felonies a Day do not apply solely to “white collar criminals,” state and local politicians, and professionals. No social class or profession is safe from this troubling form of social control by the executive branch, and nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional democracy hangs in the balance.

Do you really think that a victimless crime should get someone sent to federal prison for 7 years? Pot-smokers break the law, want to throw them in federal prison for 7 years?

People who rely on the "law" as a way of figuring out if something is right or wrong are much more concerning to me than being slightly off on a profit estimate... especially when all the "Victims" profited and are in no way angry about anything.

This is a simple case of someone being smeared by the news media to the point where it became convenient for someone to "find out" some crime he committed even though he's innocent of any real wrongdoing.

Is Shkreli a smug asshole? Yeah. That isn't something that should be punished with federal prison.

Preface: This is going to be long but because I'm trying to be thorough in context for myself and expand on my thoughts and points, you don't need to respond to all of it unless you feel like it

> oh, weird my bad. ummm idk just merge the two thoughts lmao not entirely sure what i was trying to do there, im tired and working on other work too rn

Not a problem haha

>yes

Okay, if I suggested resources or books to read in regards to that, do you think you'd take the time and effort to read them?

>for sure. perhaps analogies will help? So rape victims often have recurring thoughts of "i couldve carried my drink," "I should have worn a sweater," "it's my fault for going to that party," stuff like that. In that way they are victim blaming themselves. They did absolutely nothing wrong but are still trying to put it on them.

Ah I see, I do that myself in general. I feel guilty for things far more than I blame others.

>Just curious who these scholars are you read that don't think black people should use the n-word, I research this kind of thing significantly (I participate in and coach debate on a competitive level) and the lit base is definitely in my favor from what I see.

Dr. Amos Wilson - who even states that black on black violence (while he believes was basically designed by white people to keep blacks subservient) that it's the sole responsibility of blacks to fix.

Sheriff David Clark - He is black and grew up hating cops. He watched in the summer olympics as Tommi smith and John Carlos raised their fists (https://i.imgur.com/Xng6uxS.jpg), this is when he knew that something was wrong with America.

~Story time~

He raised his fist as a police car passed his house, trying to convey and I quote "Black pride. Black power. You aren't welcome here." The police car stopped and the officer got out, thinking in his mind that he was trying to flag him down, the situation instantly changed when Clarks father Clark Sr. stepped outside and realized what his son did.

His father was an army ranger, back then they called black soldiers "buffalo soldiers" they had a patch to distinguish them, they embraced the name and it was a sign of respect. His father was in a particular company that suffered severe casualties. General Douglas MacArthur recognized the importance and historical significance of Clarks company and stated: "I have one criticism of negro troops who fought under my command in the Korean War, they didn't send me enough of them."

His father was a no-nonsense man, he was adamant that when his son (months before he raised his fist at the cops) was called the N word and told to get off the swings at a playground, that he not be a victim. His father went through the slander, the segregation, the insults, the deaths around him without complaining. In his mind his son had no reason to be angry at those cops. After being scolded by his father, he never did it again.

Clarks position, he's black and has been through those times when in America saying the N word was used as a form of power over blacks, he could grasp the black power fist symbol and what it stood for. His father however was also a part of his life (which unfortunately many black families can't say the same, even I grew up in a single parent household as a minority) which instilled some good life lessons in him. He eventually became an officer and could then see the situation from both sides, in how the black community treats officers. A lot of the black community however has seen it fit to disown him and ignore his own life and experiences.

Brando Starkey - https://theundefeated.com/features/if-you-truly-knew-what-the-n-word-meant-to-our-ancestors-youd-never-use-it/

He states "the current use of the word is owed less to white folk calling black folk “nigger” and more to black folk who thought they were niggers and said so. Black people have hurled the infamous word for nearly as long as white folk have. It exists within black speech now because it existed within black speech then. The uncomfortable truth must be confronted: Absent the internalized oppression of those who called white men and women their masters, “nigger” would probably not be a part of black folk’s lexicon. We black folk are reclaiming it not from bigoted white folk but from our ancestors, who, sadly, deemed their blackness a badge of inferiority."

"I seek not to usher the word to the gallows. I harbor no aims to kill it. I can still bump a Young Thug track or chortle at a Dave Chappelle routine. “Nigger” does not bar my enjoyment of popular culture. My soul, though, winces whenever I hear it. The decision for black people to include it in their vocabulary, nonetheless, remains personal, and I reject the criticism of black folk who continue to wield it."

Randall Kennedy - https://www.amazon.com/Nigger-Strange-Career-Troublesome-Word/dp/0375713719 and some of his thoughts on the issue if you don't feel like buying/reading the book https://www.cnn.com/2015/03/23/opinions/holmes-n-word/index.html

Allen Francis - http://www.ycteenmag.org/topics/african-americans/The_'N'_Word:_It_Just_Slips_Out.html?story_id=NYC-1994-01-07 mostly because his "essay" is used for discussion in schools.

Also The N Word is a documentary you might want to watch.

The NAACP denounces the use of both "nigga" and "nigger".

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2001/08/05/loc_1the_n-word.html

http://www.metroactive.com/papers/metro/04.09.98/cover/nigger-9814.html

We both acknowledge that the word has power, what we differ on is if it should retain its power. If we all stop using it, then future generations won't use it and won't even hear it till they learn about black history through school, or we strip it of its power by normalizing it and truly reforming it like lesbians did with dyke, when you do that, someone trying to use a word against you that you're so used to, it will have no effect.

It's disingenuous to make it so that only white people (who let me remind had nothing to do with the slave trade of the past) get threatened with physical violence for simply singing along to a song, when blacks enslaved other blacks to sell to europeans and blacks also owned black slaves, not only that but it seems like black people have this monopoly on slavery, when they were far from the only race of people enslaved (humans enslaved humans, that was just a thing) and had that kind of history, no other race though milks quite it as much or has a race only word.

>What I mean here is that the alt right has created these strawmen, but even non-alt-right people are starting to believe them as reality.

I see. Is it at all possible that while the alt right are usually what we see as "the bad guys" that maybe even some of what their saying has some truth to it? Because if we're being completely honest, no one side has the 100% truth about anything. As horrible as they see us in the left, we know that there is some (though we clearly think it's more than just some) truth to what we're saying. I imagine they have also done their own research, though to further their own agenda, much like we also do, but I'm fairly positive that it's probably backed by at least some historical truth, sprinkled with misconceptions/myths and agenda pushing, which is every political side at this point to be honest.

>Parts karma, parts it's a nice way for me to vent about the idiocy (pardon me) of other viewpoints, and parts hoping that some people will see my side. I'll admit I don't always do a good job of convincing someone else in favor of just mocking them, but it's also annoying to have to explain what SHOULD be basic knowledge to other people.

I can understand that, though after some deep soul searching and a lot of reading, I've come to realize that my version of reality isn't the same as yours or even my neighbor. What is "common sense" or just seems natural for me is weird and odd to someone else. For example we grew up eating pizza with popcorn as a kind of "side dish" totally normal for me. Once I met other people and my girlfriend I realized that wasn't "a thing" that people did, it was unique to my family. I learned that popcorn was literally just a movie theater treat.

My reality changed. Some people who are white grow up in black neighborhoods, have mostly black friends and are allowed to say the N word along with them, some are not. So in a situation like Kendricks show, someone might be conflicted on if singing along is expected (it's 2018) or if we're still supposed to censor ourselves. I make no assumption on that girls intentions, because only she knows that, I do not however believe they were malicious, it would make little sense.

Just food for thought that what might seem like totally common sense to even a few hundred or thousand people, by comparison it's not the majority and even then some peoples realities are different, they aren't being malicious on purpose usually.

>Anyway, sorry if I was ever too rude. If I could leave you with one resource, it would be The New Jim Crow by Michelle Alexander, a full and free PDF of the book can be found here

That's really cool, I'll be able to put this on my kindle to read, thank you for that.