5 ms·

Sure, propaganda has led people to believe all sorts of things, but importantly there were real events that really happened independent of people's opinions of

Sure, propaganda has led people to believe all sorts of things, but importantly there were real events that really happened independent of people's opinions of them. I think we have a fundamental responsibility to fight against propaganda and fight for truth. Drawing a parallel between Donald Trump and Eugene Debs running for president from prison is an absurd comparison. Sure, it's true that Trump may end up running for president from prison just as Eugene Debs did, but that's possibly the only similarity between these two figures. Making this comparison, as if Donald Trump is some sort of fighter for workers, sounds awfully politically motivated.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
somenameforme 3y ago
I'm not sure you'd really agree with what you're saying! The Pullman strike [1] wasn't a bunch of people walking off and then running around with signs. The initial strike was largely ineffectual, so the strikers started rioting and actively preventing other trains and workers from being able to operate, including with violence. In one instance within the riots a bridge was dynamited when soldiers in a train were crossing! These actions are exponentially more vile than anything Trump is being charged with, and Eugene Debs was overtly and actively at the head of these strikes/riots. He ended up serving 6 months in prison for it. Given the state of our justice system now a days, they would have tried to put him in prison for life. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pullman_Strike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pullman_Strike
- kerkeslager 3y ago
  I would agree with what I'm saying, because what you are saying is simply not true. While not everyone in the strike remained peaceful, Debs himself was very firmly a believer in peaceful protest. From the link you posted, Debs said: > Strong men and broad minds only can resist the plutocracy and arrogant monopoly. Do not be frightened at troops, injunctions, or a subsidized press. Quit and remain firm. Commit no violence. American Railway Union will protect all, whether member or not when strike is off. Emphasis mine. Also notable, none of the things Debs was charged with were violent crimes. Don't link things that don't support your point as if they do. At best that means you didn't read it, and at worst you're being intentionally dishonest.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - somenameforme 3y ago
    Try to find a single incorrect or false statement I made - you will not. You are doing precisely what you claimed to want to critique others for - you are rejecting the facts to try to turn Debs into whatever you want him to be. Debs lead strikes which turned into riots, resulting in massive property damage and numerous deaths, multiple times. This is a fact. You trying to spin him into being some sort of dedicated believer in peaceful protest is your opinion, and a poorly supported one at that. That's not to say you can't hold that opinion - you can believe whatever you want. But what you can't (or at least shouldn't) do is reject the facts around the past, which is what you are also doing.
    - kerkeslager 3y ago
      > You are doing precisely what you claimed to want to critique others for - you are rejecting the facts to try to turn Debs into whatever you want him to be. On the contrary, I embraced the facts which you linked--it's just that the facts which you linked don't say what you claim they do. I would encourage anyone reading this conversation to click the link somenameforme posted and see that in fact, the link says what I'm saying it does. > Debs lead strikes which turned into riots, resulting in massive property damage and numerous deaths, multiple times. Did Debs incite that violence? You can juxtapose him next to violence all you want, but that's not evidence that did anything to cause it. > This is a fact. You trying to spin him into being some sort of dedicated believer in peaceful protest is your opinion, and a poorly supported one at that. Well, we can agree to disagree about whether the quote you linked supports my opinion well or poorly. But I don't feel that I need to support my opinion better than I have, given your total absence of any support for your opinion. If you choose to post any evidence which actually supports your opinion I'll be happy to do more thorough research (and admit I'm wrong, if I am wrong). The fact is, Eugene Debs did write to the strikers, "Commit no violence." If you want to ignore that fact so you can pretend he's some sort of terrist, it might have been easier if you hadn't linked a page with that very quote in it. :)
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  Whoa, we finally have a pro-Pullman guy here. Amazing /s. > The initial strike was largely ineffectual. Yes. Pullman refused to even meet with the union. The title is "Anarchy in the US" for a reason. Nowadays, "secondary boycotts" are expressly regulated, which is part of the evolution in labor laws that came about partly in response to the Pullman strike. Debs was not "actively at the head of these strikes/riots." Maybe read something other than Wikipedia. > preventing other trains and workers from being able to operate, including with violence Again: "anarchy." The other unions would happily run trains with no Pullman cars. The railroad managers refused because they were standing together to keep the union from winning. > He ended up serving 6 months in prison for it. wrong again. The 6 months were for contempt of the injunction. His grand trial for the more serious things you're talking about was dropped when Pullman defied a subpoena and refused to testify.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

somenameforme 3y ago

I'm not sure you'd really agree with what you're saying! The Pullman strike [1] wasn't a bunch of people walking off and then running around with signs. The initial strike was largely ineffectual, so the strikers started rioting and actively preventing other trains and workers from being able to operate, including with violence. In one instance within the riots a bridge was dynamited when soldiers in a train were crossing! These actions are exponentially more vile than anything Trump is being charged with, and Eugene Debs was overtly and actively at the head of these strikes/riots. He ended up serving 6 months in prison for it. Given the state of our justice system now a days, they would have tried to put him in prison for life. [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pullman_Strike https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pullman_Strike

kerkeslager 3y ago
I would agree with what I'm saying, because what you are saying is simply not true. While not everyone in the strike remained peaceful, Debs himself was very firmly a believer in peaceful protest. From the link you posted, Debs said: > Strong men and broad minds only can resist the plutocracy and arrogant monopoly. Do not be frightened at troops, injunctions, or a subsidized press. Quit and remain firm. Commit no violence. American Railway Union will protect all, whether member or not when strike is off. Emphasis mine. Also notable, none of the things Debs was charged with were violent crimes. Don't link things that don't support your point as if they do. At best that means you didn't read it, and at worst you're being intentionally dishonest.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- somenameforme 3y ago
  Try to find a single incorrect or false statement I made - you will not. You are doing precisely what you claimed to want to critique others for - you are rejecting the facts to try to turn Debs into whatever you want him to be. Debs lead strikes which turned into riots, resulting in massive property damage and numerous deaths, multiple times. This is a fact. You trying to spin him into being some sort of dedicated believer in peaceful protest is your opinion, and a poorly supported one at that. That's not to say you can't hold that opinion - you can believe whatever you want. But what you can't (or at least shouldn't) do is reject the facts around the past, which is what you are also doing.
  - kerkeslager 3y ago
    > You are doing precisely what you claimed to want to critique others for - you are rejecting the facts to try to turn Debs into whatever you want him to be. On the contrary, I embraced the facts which you linked--it's just that the facts which you linked don't say what you claim they do. I would encourage anyone reading this conversation to click the link somenameforme posted and see that in fact, the link says what I'm saying it does. > Debs lead strikes which turned into riots, resulting in massive property damage and numerous deaths, multiple times. Did Debs incite that violence? You can juxtapose him next to violence all you want, but that's not evidence that did anything to cause it. > This is a fact. You trying to spin him into being some sort of dedicated believer in peaceful protest is your opinion, and a poorly supported one at that. Well, we can agree to disagree about whether the quote you linked supports my opinion well or poorly. But I don't feel that I need to support my opinion better than I have, given your total absence of any support for your opinion. If you choose to post any evidence which actually supports your opinion I'll be happy to do more thorough research (and admit I'm wrong, if I am wrong). The fact is, Eugene Debs did write to the strikers, "Commit no violence." If you want to ignore that fact so you can pretend he's some sort of terrist, it might have been easier if you hadn't linked a page with that very quote in it. :)
AlbertCory 3y ago
Whoa, we finally have a pro-Pullman guy here. Amazing /s. > The initial strike was largely ineffectual. Yes. Pullman refused to even meet with the union. The title is "Anarchy in the US" for a reason. Nowadays, "secondary boycotts" are expressly regulated, which is part of the evolution in labor laws that came about partly in response to the Pullman strike. Debs was not "actively at the head of these strikes/riots." Maybe read something other than Wikipedia. > preventing other trains and workers from being able to operate, including with violence Again: "anarchy." The other unions would happily run trains with no Pullman cars. The railroad managers refused because they were standing together to keep the union from winning. > He ended up serving 6 months in prison for it. wrong again. The 6 months were for contempt of the injunction. His grand trial for the more serious things you're talking about was dropped when Pullman defied a subpoena and refused to testify.