In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On June 05 2016 18:26 SK.Testie wrote: Also, the word problematic must have been in everyone's gender studies class. It's used rampantly by leftists. It's like their favourite fucking word. Why does this pattern repeat itself?
I wouldn't know, I've never taken a class on gender studies.
On June 05 2016 18:24 Surth wrote: Drone strikes are not targeting fundamentalist groups. They are *creating* fundamentalist groups.
On the topic of that: lets talk about climate change! Hands up everyone who believes it is a hoax by the chinese!
Trump supporters don't even buy that crap. But it would be correct that it would hurt American business interests. And right now Americans simply don't give enough of a shit about climate change. And China is confirmed not give a shit for at least 20-30 more years with a lot more coal plants being built.
Hillary is part of the Neocon or Neoliberal plan to destabilize as many ME countries as possible. I remember an insider journalist told us about this plan close to 14-12 fucking years ago and said 'it starts with this country and goes with these others and then it ends with Iran' and asking about Iran he said that 'it's because it's the most powerful of them + it's a very mountainous region with a high population so it's very difficult to engage in warfare there'. I honestly don't know if that's still on the agenda. They beat that war drum nearly a decade ago but maybe SA/Iran won't be on the agenda ever now. The petrodollar rules all so the wars had to be. So if you're going to play the emotional appeal on who gets killed and how awful it is, I'm pretty certain Hillary's going to kill more brown people. She's always been labelled as a hawk and thinks of herself as an American warrior.
Indeed. This is why quite a few of us do not support Hillary.
But it's in Americas interests!
Also, I fear commies far more than I fear racists. And there's actual commie elements latched onto the the underbelly of the dems now especially thanks to Bernie. Racists will at least bitch and sit on their ass and do nothing. But maybe I should fear both equally, or one more than the other. But since I'm white in a majority white country, I have a definite bias in that so I suppose if you can convince me to fear racists more than commies I'd be all ears. It's a hard sell though.
If you think racists "do nothing", you do not understand racism.
No. I fear them far less. Commies damage will take generations to undo and will end in slaughter. It's the road to hell paved with good intentions. There's more racists than commies, but there's varying degrees of racism. From a girl saying, "ew I want my baby to be my race not that race" to "eh they're not so bad just the bad ones" to "DEPORT THEM ALL" to the fringe "KILL 'EM ALL!!" And I have a pretty bleak view of it. Because I don't think it's going to be solved no matter how much liberal propaganda you have of people smiling and working together. The people in Chicago hate the black community. But they haven't genocided them. They'll just move away from the violence as always. They just say, 'let them kill each other give them more guns until no one is left standing'.
Like here's Mohammed Ali, I don't know if he denounced this video but he's clearly a racist here at a middle point in his life, but he doesn't come off as a racist with terrible intentions. So if you call someone a racist, it's not the end of the world. That racist may not be hating a single person. They just have a preference.
Racists will at least bitch and sit on their ass and do nothing. But maybe I should fear both equally, or one more than the other. But since I'm white in a majority white country, I have a definite bias in that so I suppose if you can convince me to fear racists more than commies I'd be all ears. It's a hard sell though.
One day some white guy will be serving a prison sentence for a crime he didn't commit and he'll wonder how it came to this. I wish I could show him this post and say, "when your ancestors had a chance to do something, they sat around and said, 'eh it's not that bad for me' instead of pushing their peers to be better. That's why no one fixed it before the demographics shifted out of your favor.
There's been plenty of white people who've been falsely imprisoned.
Of course, that wasn't the assertion. I suppose I should add the coy engagement as part of why it might get so bad.
On the topic of that: lets talk about climate change! Hands up everyone who believes it is a hoax by the chinese!
Trump supporters don't even buy that crap. But it would be correct that it would hurt American business interests. And right now Americans simply don't give enough of a shit about climate change. And China is confirmed not give a shit for at least 20-30 more years with a lot more coal plants being built.
You don't know if trump supporters buy that crap. But apologies, I did not actually want to talk about the "chinese hoax part", just wanted to get a feel for how people here generally feel about climate change.
Also, I fear commies far more than I fear racists. And there's actual commie elements latched onto the the underbelly of the dems now especially thanks to Bernie. Racists will at least bitch and sit on their ass and do nothing. But maybe I should fear both equally, or one more than the other. But since I'm white in a majority white country, I have a definite bias in that so I suppose if you can convince me to fear racists more than commies I'd be all ears. It's a hard sell though.
If you think racists "do nothing", you do not understand racism.
No. I fear them far less. Commies damage will take generations to undo and will end in slaughter. It's the road to hell paved with good intentions. There's more racists than commies, but there's varying degrees of racism. From a girl saying, "ew I want my baby to be my race not that race" to "eh they're not so bad just the bad ones" to "DEPORT THEM ALL" to the fringe "KILL 'EM ALL!!" And I have a pretty bleak view of it. Because I don't think it's going to be solved no matter how much liberal propaganda you have of people smiling and working together. The people in Chicago hate the black community. But they haven't genocided them. They'll just move away from the violence as always. They just say, 'let them kill each other give them more guns until no one is left standing'.
Like here's Mohammed Ali, I don't know if he denounced this video but he's clearly a racist here at a middle point in his life, but he doesn't come off as a racist with terrible intentions. So if you call someone a racist, it's not the end of the world. That racist may not be hating a single person. They just have a preference. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1Y693cSF7E
Your continued, unironic use of the word "commie" is hilarious. This, on the other hand, isnt:
The people in Chicago hate the black community. But they haven't genocided them. They'll just move away from the violence as always. They just say, 'let them kill each other give them more guns until no one is left standing'.
I don't even want to get into how idiotic your reading of white flight is, I will leave that to someone else. But just to make sure: Does this mean the black community are not part of "the people" in Chicago? Because it almost seems to me like the massive amounts of racism stuck in your brain have led you to believe that black people aren't citizens.
No it comes from the opinion of reading how the citizens of Chicago talk about it. It's taking their comments and giving them life here to showcase it. And no, the use of commies isn't funny because you may have less in Germany but Bernie gave them a lot more credence. And they're far, far harder to spot.
Grew up in all white hick town of 20k-ish people. 1 black family. Most liked them, most treated him well. Never had a problem at church, at restaurants, and they could snowmobile with 'the boys'. Hell they were our church singers. Heard there were racists, but they never bothered anyone. I don't think racism is as big a fear as you incline considering Obama got elected twice. Not all 50-60 million or w/e the number was who voted against him voted against him because they were racist. They voted against him because they were Republicans. The fringe racists are a minority, just like the commies. And again, I put commies as worse. Though while I don't see either coming to power, I still fear commies far more. Again, may have implicit white bias.
On June 05 2016 19:07 SK.Testie wrote: No it comes from the opinion of reading how the citizens of Chicago talk about it. It's taking their comments and giving them life here to showcase it.
Nevermind that recommendation of Zizek's Violence, reading books clearly is not for you. To reiterate, you wrote "The people in Chicago [verb] the black community" as if the "black community" of Chicago was not part of the "people in Chicago." This is what underpins everything you write in this god-forsaken thread. That blacks are some kind of Other. That they don't really belong. That they aren't really part of America. "The people" as a construct, for you, are white people.
And no, the use of commies isn't funny because you may have less in Germany but Bernie gave them a lot more credence. And they're far, far harder to spot.
You are correct, of course, commies aren't a big problem in Germany. Racist right-wingers are.
I don't think racism is as big a fear as you incline considering Obama got elected twice. Not all 50-60 million or w/e the number was who voted against him voted against him because they were racist.
Uhm... yes? Of course? I don't think anyone here would argue that. Though I dont want to put words in anyone's mouth here. The issue is that you still seem to think that racism is just the KKK lynching people. Racism is also and in large part systemic violence. It does not neccessarily involve a mob shouting obscenities while kicking a black person to death. Although that still happens too, make no mistake about it.
Here is a string of comments from Chicago citizens. They see the MSM ignore it or not give it the time they feel it deserves. You are never going to assuage them when they see a disparity like this. You either address it and educate or the sentiment will grow and people will treat it with sarcasm. You either stop "LOLING" and address the comments below (they are more tactful on reddit) or you will never have an honest discussion on the matter.
I do not know why or how you are misinterpreting this. You have a divided community. So how are you going to solve this. The ones who say racist things? Or the ones who are doing the shooting (that also say racist things)? Or both and why? You must take their 'racist' criticisms and assuage them rather than LOL at them. You must give them your information that can make those numbers understandable to them.
Otherwise, any random observer who is new to the discussion (and there are always people new to the discussion) is going to see the numbers and be like.. "?? ? ?? ??"
I see you dance around this topic but never address it directly. Because already you're shutting down the conversation.
How are you going to address the cynical comments below? Is silencing them and laughing at them in any way helpful? I feel like your actions are much more about the words and how they are said, rather than ever touching on the actual problem. Whether it's school funding, broken families, or whatever feel the main contributor is to this vast disparity in violence. I'm trying to tell you that what you're doing to me right now, this tactic? Isn't education for these people below. Give them reading material, stats, or talk to them like human beings. I highly doubt they were born this cynical.
If you feel my language creates polarization, say so. But you are clearly not ready to have this conversation if you are not ready to address quite literally any newcomer to the conversation with facts, sources, and numbers to explain that disparity. And any newcomer will come in using whatever language or information they have but you must counter information with information. You can't just laugh it off or the person bringing it leaves bewildered and confused.
You could tell them, "Well, let's see, they came from slaves so that's already a bad relationship foundation. They've been poisoned by led in the water. The CIA itself broke families up using crack and there's been multiple subversions to destroy black communities" etc. To combat racism, I do not think the solution is laughing and ostracizing, because it's not working is the next point I am trying to make. All it does is come off like a circle jerk.
Unless you are working under the automatic premise that racists cannot be reformed, and are automatically racists for life (pic related) and do not have functioning reasoning skills. I hope I have made my case more understandable. PC people will never go into those hotbeds of racism and confront the racism. They will talk about it in their own circles saying, 'lul racists'. So are we to assume Robert Byrd changed his views after working in the public service? Or are we to assume he was always a deep racist and Clinton was a friend of his.
The best way to combat racism is with your own facts and information. Not this "wow, just wow!" "LOLOLOL" and snarky comments. I've read a few books on both sides of it. But you're going to have to talk it out with those people without the holier than thou attitude.
Think of a new mind who has been largely without race relation in his life. 16 years old. Looks at those numbers above. What is he/she going to logically think? You see "35 black assailats, 13 hispanic, and one white". Do you think their first conclusion is irrational? Or do you think they should first, "woah, why is that happening". Because both will probably occur. And you're going to need to address the first line of thought.
Otherwise you will never have a real conversation about race in America. You have a great number of people losing faith in multiculturalism. And you should work with your racists to address it. I hope I've made myself clear, otherwise the polarization and cynicism will continue. The battle lines will be drawn and you're going to make a more divisive community.
You need to explain those numbers, with a lot of proof to a new mind entering the arena. You don't need to explain it to me directly because I've already done plenty of reading on the subject from both sides. Because new minds enter the arena on it every day. Does this not make some sense to you? Otherwise Robert Byrd had no place in public office, yet he was a senator.
Do you think the people are below are beyond hope? Are they worth engaging? Or are they a lost cause? And if so, why? To shut out an inquiring mind seems counter productive, always.
Walt Meade Can't help but wonder how many of those shot in Chicago this year have been shot before. I think we could save a assload of money if we give them some free range time and some ammo for practice. With a little judicious marksmanship, we should be able to get the shot : killed ratio way up and the recidivism rate way down. Like · Reply · 2 · 7 hrs 1 Reply Steve Garvy Steve Garvy About 1 for 4 so far. A bit better than last weekend, but still could be better. Hopefully they'll pick up the pace and accuracy a bit to keep thinning the herd of the black lives matter vermin and liberal progressive voters. Like · Reply · 7 · 22 hrs Jeff Goetzen Jeff Goetzen Some cities have lead in their water, Chicago has lead in the air. Like · Reply · 22 · 22 hrs Ed Kulovitz Ed Kulovitz So true Like · Reply · 18 hrs Dianne DeMio Marchese Dianne DeMio Marchese True that! Like · Reply · 14 hrs Nick Perentesis
Write a reply...
Dan Hartung Dan Hartung Chicago is not even in the top ten most dangerous cities in the US. I know that goes against the raison d'etre of this group. But hyperbole serves no one. Like · Reply · 16 hrs Jeff Leoni Jeff Leoni Maybe someone in Chicago should shoot a gorilla then this shit might get more attention. Like · Reply · 6 · 22 hrs John Hammond John Hammond Obama's home town...How's that gun control working for ya..lmao
We are all well aware of the rampant racism going around. You're the one diminishing it and comparing it to a ridiculous and non existent problem. And now you're trying to lecture people on it. I'm not laughing at the problems, I'm laughing at you cause you're ridiculous and can't even be coherent about your opinions now. That post would've made sense if you talked about how commies are gonna ruin the world. Instead you make a post defending the opposite position you have on the previous posts.
Nah, I still think commies are worse and more subversive to the public discourse because to laugh at the invisible 'non-existent' ideology of commies you have to spot them in your own college campuses.
Racists are more overt and want answers but can no longer even voice it because of fear of losing their job or social status etc. Which isn't an honest conversation. It's just public shaming. It's when they don't get answers that they turn into cynics. There's multiple books on the subject but if the PC crowd cares rather than dancing around the subject they'd throw out some books on it.
So what's your best way to explain those numbers to a racist? You have to be ready to fight and take the conversation on.
So can you convert a racist? I feel the methodology of talking about race will never be addressed until the conversation is free and honest without restrictions. Each fear, each question, must be broken down and addressed with a suitable answer. Otherwise each side becomes cynical and draws their battle lines.
So until they get a suitable answer to their most damning critiques, you yourself are contributing to racist sentiment. Right now Chicago feels that their weekly death toll is worth MSM attention. Can you address to them why it is not worth MSM attention?
On June 05 2016 16:35 Falling wrote: As a mod, I kinda have to read more than one thread, and US General is definitely the most trafficked and the most likely to have problems. But the interesting political discussions were here and this year it's more depressing than interesting.
you can always join me in the movement for stronger moderation of the thread
also; can we focus on responding to each other in thread? instead of attacking the strawman and/or extremists that exist on most sides? attacking the strawman minorities on each side gets quite tiresome.
What do Chicago and Detroit have in common? Chicago - Continually Democrat controlled since the 1920s Detroit - Continually Democrat controlled since the 1960s
There's a lot more commonalities than that; but mostly your post just implies that the problems are all due to democracts, which is unfounded, and not a very good analyses of such complicated things anyways. It's mostly just spewing hate on another side rather than trying to truly find the underlying issues and solutions.
On June 05 2016 22:35 SK.Testie wrote: Nah, I still think commies are worse and more subversive to the public discourse because to laugh at the invisible 'non-existent' ideology of commies you have to spot them in your own college campuses.
Racists are more overt and want answers but can no longer even voice it because of fear of losing their job or social status etc. Which isn't an honest conversation. It's just public shaming. It's when they don't get answers that they turn into cynics. There's multiple books on the subject but if the PC crowd cares rather than dancing around the subject they'd throw out some books on it.
You seem fine voicing your racist bullshit without fear of losing your job.
And, more generally on systemic violence, I'd still recommend Zizek's Violence.
Of course, I don't expect you to actually read anything, since you are *still* speaking in the name of these mythical "citizens of Chicago" whose opinion you apparently know, and who apparently only consist out of white people.
On June 05 2016 22:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: What do Chicago and Detroit have in common? Chicago - Continually Democrat controlled since the 1920s Detroit - Continually Democrat controlled since the 1960s
The four most violent cities in the US, as measured by homicides/population, are actually St Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, and New Orleans. With the exception of Baltimore, all of these were originally FRENCH. Coincidence? I don't think so!
It also bears worth mentioning that a discussion of Chicago or Detroit that does not mention the government of the state in which they sit is mostly useless. As one might imagine, it's quite difficult to implement effective gun control when folks can literally drive less than 2 hours and be in a state where there is none.
ITT: white males declaring that equality between men and women has been achieved and that racism is not really a problem anymore. Also, racists are the ones being persecuted. Priceless.
In other news, Hillary has won the Virgin Islands caucus (about 87% to Sanders' 12%) and netted at least five additional pledged delegates from the contest (6-1). Source.
On June 05 2016 22:35 SK.Testie wrote: Nah, I still think commies are worse and more subversive to the public discourse because to laugh at the invisible 'non-existent' ideology of commies you have to spot them in your own college campuses.
Racists are more overt and want answers but can no longer even voice it because of fear of losing their job or social status etc. Which isn't an honest conversation. It's just public shaming. It's when they don't get answers that they turn into cynics. There's multiple books on the subject but if the PC crowd cares rather than dancing around the subject they'd throw out some books on it.
You seem fine voicing your racist bullshit without fear of losing your job.
And, more generally on systemic violence, I'd still recommend Zizek's Violence.
Of course, I don't expect you to actually read anything, since you are *still* speaking in the name of these mythical "citizens of Chicago" whose opinion you apparently know, and who apparently only consist out of white people.
On June 05 2016 22:49 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: What do Chicago and Detroit have in common? Chicago - Continually Democrat controlled since the 1920s Detroit - Continually Democrat controlled since the 1960s
The four most violent cities in the US, as measured by homicides/population, are actually St Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, and New Orleans. With the exception of Baltimore, all of these were originally FRENCH. Coincidence? I don't think so!
No, I'm intentionally leading progressives here down a road where I question their methodology of dealing with racism and how I think it's hurtful to their very own cause, and to the countries best interests as well. The hypocrisy of how they will preach inclusiveness, but then immediately excommunicate a human being that has turned out racist for one reason or another. Don Imus, Tim Hunt, James Watson, Bill Cosby (uncle tom), Larry Elder (uncle tom), and the list is quite long. So should you be inclusive of racists that have turned out that way and try to conform them instead? The methodology on both sides to even start building actual bridges on this problem is probably quite wrong to begin with and flawed. I don't think I've ever heard the question asked of a person who says a racist utterance.. "what made you racist? Were you always racist?" But I've heard, "do you consider yourself racist". And they'll say no.
Robert Byrd from the KKK was an actual senator. Where Bill Clinton can come out and say, "he made mistakes but changed his ways". We are to assume Robert Byrd changed, but that James Watson cannot? Clinton used the term super predator and there were some ruffled feathers there. There's a clear lack of consistency on what liberals preach, and their actions.
And that has never been evidenced more by this election and the riots taking place. Preach inclusion of different worldviews, but exclude the racist one that is the most heinous, but is easy for all races to fall into and get indoctrinated by. And these will not be addressed by simple platitudes like, "diversity is our strength!" and "we are stronger together!" Those will be mocked by cynics who will just link Angela Merkel saying, "multiculturalism has failed." I think it's a much tougher conversation than you give it credit for, and I feel the method of exclusion will be very harmful down the road as that will only breed bitterness and confusion on all sides. Remember: there are new minds entering the conversation at all times. Do you disclude them for not realizing this was even going on? Or do you include and try to educate?
Also I myself have done a lot of reading on the topic Surth. Still a lot of info I'm missing (and always will be missing because I can't read the entire world source of knowledge in my lifetime) and I'll still continue to read on the topic because it's fascinating. But I hope I've made my point clear that if someones sees those types of numbers, a good % of them will jump to conclusions. So it's up to progressives to practice what they preach and educate rather than exclude. Silencing people and shouting them down is good for no one. There is a dubious hypocrisy on the left, and it's being exposed.
Also to mohdoo: implying race politics isn't relevant while one side makes constant cries of racism. Please. You have to attack the sources and methods to effect true change. Otherwise the pattern repeats. It will be the left saying, "RACISTS!" and the right saying, "GET A JOB GET OFF WELFARE!" Neither of which is helpful.
EPT![[image loading]](http://puu.sh/phz0y/99d4dfafa8.png)
![[image loading]](http://usherald.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/11.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://theredscare1950s.weebly.com/uploads/1/8/7/1/18711478/5779184_orig.jpeg)
