|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.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. |
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 29 2017 10:17 Nyxisto wrote:
Can we please not call Sam Harris an intellectual, he's like the Deepak Chopra of internet atheism
He's far from perfect but how is he not an intellectual? He seems to fit the definition...
(Don't agree with everything he says by any stretch and I dont think he's awesome at talking to people he disagrees with, but he seems to fit the definition of "learned")
He does annoy me a bit tho 
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 29 2017 10:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 09:58 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On May 29 2017 09:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 29 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On May 29 2017 06:31 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:A series of protests that began Tuesday May 22 increased pressure on the administration, culminating in an occupation of the library building during which administrators were blockaded in a room to listen to concerns of students.
...
People were especially worried about Weinstein’s continued media crusade, saying students were a “mob” engaged in a “witch hunt”, and going on Tucker Carlson Tonight during the meeting with George Bridges, falsely asserting that students had taken over campus and threatened violence
Gee I wonder why they felt they were being mobbed Also mandatory anti-bias and cultural competency training sounds like something from South Park Student groups upset that accurate portrayals of their behavior were communicated to media because they then look bad for having done it. I can only imagine what the training involves. You're mobbing someone refusing to bow to demands that all white people leave campus for a day. His form of protest is more effective than your form of counter-protest (so long as video is captured of the event). Given the thread is full of clueless takes on what was actually happening it's impressive you managed to make the worst. The reason there was an action goes WAAAYYYYYY beyond the professor. Firstly, despite being a liberal college in WA its still a remarkably racist place (partly due to how white Olympia is). So it's not just a few months or years, this college has been dealing with racist hippies and liberals since it's inception. That said there was no "Anti-White" or "No-whites" day as I've seen it reported and the professor insinuated. That he's too dense to understand what the Day of Absence, Day of Presence observation is (been going on for years on campus) and interpreted it as "Anti-white" or "No Whites" day is simply idiotic. Every single thing says that all are welcome and people are encouraged to choose which events they wish to attend, also there's no damn obligation to observe it at all. That idiotic sites on the right would spin this as so much more than it is doesn't surprise me. All that said it wasn't an impressive way to confront the professor for his stupidity, but it's apparently not the first time for him. All this is coming out slowly since the students aren't familiar with PR but rest assured no one here has any idea what they are talking about regarding the long standing issues at Evergreen that resulted in these particular actions. Additionally and without surprise, cops targeted students of color and one officer even had to be removed because as his SGT said "he was out of control". But go on folks, pining about the perils of expressive college students or "fascists" as some of the dumber posts suggested instead of the abusive police response or the ongoing racial tensions on campus. When the equity council, advising on behalf of the POC community at Evergreen, are telling professors and staff that we need mandatory training and accountability and the response is complaints that it is unfair to white people at the school this showcases exactly why this type of training is needed. This blatant ignorance of white privilege, show of white fragility and refusal to acknowledge how white supremacy affects people of color at Evergreen is white privilege in action. The white fragility illustrated by Weinstein and the other faculty and staff he claims support him are a way of derailing progress toward equity The professor is right, woe be unto us if we don't understand that it is really the white man that is being persecuted on the Evergreen campus. I wish you wouldn't pull out the "what about" card... this is a big problem because it hurts the credibility of people protesting real issues... (no idea if this protest is a real issue or not, but their behavior made me turn off the video after 2 minutes) Im not American, clearly, and get most of my US news here or various podcasts, but it feels like stuff like this is just free propaganda material and a distraction away from more important problems (as you yourself noted). Let's be clear about what the overarching issue is. America has always been racist. I think this is something we agree on. Slavery, segregation, are racist. The argument from white folks is that sometime after Jim Crow the racism in the US reached an acceptable or "not much" level. That's categorically wrong and white Americans refuse to admit or deal with it. How black people present this to white Americans for the 10,000,000,000,000k time has less bearing on progress than a single white American recognizing their role
I get what you are saying but when stuff like this happens what is the outcome? People pointing at the oversensitive liberals and reaffirming their belief that I guess everything is more or less okay if this is what they spend their time protesting.
So how can you say the presentation is irrelevant if it has this kind of negative impact? I don't get it.
|
On May 29 2017 10:24 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:17 Nyxisto wrote:
Can we please not call Sam Harris an intellectual, he's like the Deepak Chopra of internet atheism He's far from perfect but how is he not an intellectual? He seems to fit the definition... (Don't agree with everything he says by any stretch and I dont think he's awesome at talking to people he disagrees with, but he seems to fit the definition of "learned") He does annoy me a bit tho
Sam Harris is basically a hack. He's a good orator but his content is so severely lacking that it would be an insult to his intelligence to assume that he doesn't realize it, so I don't, and I just treat him as the propagandist that he probably is. Generally what people do is they hear him vaguely talk about some stuff, they think he presents them well, and so they assume he must hold all of the sane ideas that they themselves hold, and that if you disagree with Harris, you probably disagree with those sane ideas. It's really hard to debate harrisites in general cause most of them actually have no idea what he believes on a variety of topics.
I can PM you an extremely long rant about Sam Harris that I wrote a long time ago if you want something more substantive.
|
On May 29 2017 10:31 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 29 2017 09:58 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On May 29 2017 09:02 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 29 2017 07:08 Danglars wrote:On May 29 2017 06:31 FueledUpAndReadyToGo wrote:A series of protests that began Tuesday May 22 increased pressure on the administration, culminating in an occupation of the library building during which administrators were blockaded in a room to listen to concerns of students.
...
People were especially worried about Weinstein’s continued media crusade, saying students were a “mob” engaged in a “witch hunt”, and going on Tucker Carlson Tonight during the meeting with George Bridges, falsely asserting that students had taken over campus and threatened violence
Gee I wonder why they felt they were being mobbed Also mandatory anti-bias and cultural competency training sounds like something from South Park Student groups upset that accurate portrayals of their behavior were communicated to media because they then look bad for having done it. I can only imagine what the training involves. You're mobbing someone refusing to bow to demands that all white people leave campus for a day. His form of protest is more effective than your form of counter-protest (so long as video is captured of the event). Given the thread is full of clueless takes on what was actually happening it's impressive you managed to make the worst. The reason there was an action goes WAAAYYYYYY beyond the professor. Firstly, despite being a liberal college in WA its still a remarkably racist place (partly due to how white Olympia is). So it's not just a few months or years, this college has been dealing with racist hippies and liberals since it's inception. That said there was no "Anti-White" or "No-whites" day as I've seen it reported and the professor insinuated. That he's too dense to understand what the Day of Absence, Day of Presence observation is (been going on for years on campus) and interpreted it as "Anti-white" or "No Whites" day is simply idiotic. Every single thing says that all are welcome and people are encouraged to choose which events they wish to attend, also there's no damn obligation to observe it at all. That idiotic sites on the right would spin this as so much more than it is doesn't surprise me. All that said it wasn't an impressive way to confront the professor for his stupidity, but it's apparently not the first time for him. All this is coming out slowly since the students aren't familiar with PR but rest assured no one here has any idea what they are talking about regarding the long standing issues at Evergreen that resulted in these particular actions. Additionally and without surprise, cops targeted students of color and one officer even had to be removed because as his SGT said "he was out of control". But go on folks, pining about the perils of expressive college students or "fascists" as some of the dumber posts suggested instead of the abusive police response or the ongoing racial tensions on campus. When the equity council, advising on behalf of the POC community at Evergreen, are telling professors and staff that we need mandatory training and accountability and the response is complaints that it is unfair to white people at the school this showcases exactly why this type of training is needed. This blatant ignorance of white privilege, show of white fragility and refusal to acknowledge how white supremacy affects people of color at Evergreen is white privilege in action. The white fragility illustrated by Weinstein and the other faculty and staff he claims support him are a way of derailing progress toward equity The professor is right, woe be unto us if we don't understand that it is really the white man that is being persecuted on the Evergreen campus. I wish you wouldn't pull out the "what about" card... this is a big problem because it hurts the credibility of people protesting real issues... (no idea if this protest is a real issue or not, but their behavior made me turn off the video after 2 minutes) Im not American, clearly, and get most of my US news here or various podcasts, but it feels like stuff like this is just free propaganda material and a distraction away from more important problems (as you yourself noted). Let's be clear about what the overarching issue is. America has always been racist. I think this is something we agree on. Slavery, segregation, are racist. The argument from white folks is that sometime after Jim Crow the racism in the US reached an acceptable or "not much" level. That's categorically wrong and white Americans refuse to admit or deal with it. How black people present this to white Americans for the 10,000,000,000,000k time has less bearing on progress than a single white American recognizing their role I get what you are saying but when stuff like this happens what is the outcome? People pointing at the oversensitive liberals and reaffirming their belief that I guess everything is more or less okay if this is what they spend their time protesting. So how can you say the presentation is irrelevant if it has this kind of negative impact? I don't get it.
What is the outcome? People say idiotic things like they would have if it didn't happen. Since they brought us here in chains they've been complaining about us getting to loud/inaccurate with our complaints. It has nothing to do with the substance of the complaints.
Anyone using this as an example of "the intolerant left" is espousing a perspective that's not going to change based on them better articulating why the professor was being an idiot.
Responsible allies would say something to effect of "If only they didn't insist on perpetuating white supremacy, perhaps we could avoid situations like this"
EDIT: OR they could try whatever style it is yall expect from POC.
But let's dispense of the preposterous notion that racism is perpetuated not by racists, but by the oppressed people not properly courting their racist oppressors.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On May 29 2017 10:31 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:24 Liquid`Jinro wrote:On May 29 2017 10:17 Nyxisto wrote:
Can we please not call Sam Harris an intellectual, he's like the Deepak Chopra of internet atheism He's far from perfect but how is he not an intellectual? He seems to fit the definition... (Don't agree with everything he says by any stretch and I dont think he's awesome at talking to people he disagrees with, but he seems to fit the definition of "learned") He does annoy me a bit tho Sam Harris is basically a hack. He's a good orator but his content is so severely lacking that it would be an insult to his intelligence to assume that he doesn't realize it, so I don't, and I just treat him as the propagandist that he probably is. Generally what people do is they hear him vaguely talk about some stuff, they think he presents them well, and so they assume he must hold all of the sane ideas that they themselves hold, and that if you disagree with Harris, you probably disagree with those sane ideas. It's really hard to debate harrisites in general cause most of them actually have no idea what he believes on a variety of topics. I can PM you an extremely long rant about Sam Harris that I wrote a long time ago if you want something more substantive.
I'd love to actually. I agree with him on a bunch of things but I've always found something off-putting about him so would be very interested.
|
Canada11586 Posts
On May 29 2017 10:22 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:14 Falling wrote:
It actually matters because it's fighting the wrong battles and tearing down allies. It matters because this happened this mischaracterization of American intellectuals have created unnecessary firestorms over the wrong things- you can see intellectuals with past experience in the same sort of mob attacks coming out to support Brett: Nicolas Christakis and Sam Harris for instance.
Their responses are idiotic and uninformed. they were going off of not even understanding what the event is. He wasn't defying a ban of white people on campus like people want to make it sound and no one was going to harm him (god people are so terrified of POC, even though many of the obnoxious voices appeared to by white allies).
How can you tell that they are reacting to the wrong thing? They aren't mentioning anything about a white ban. I suspect Nicolas, specifically, is reacting to video of the yelling students surrounding Brett, outraged for a very interpretation of an email. Very similar to Nicolas' own situation.
On May 29 2017 10:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
The police saying "they couldn't keep him safe" is typical scaremongering. He was under no threat to his safety, the only thing under assault was his white fragility. Meanwhile police did actually assault students and the cafeteria cook went on a power trip and said he couldn't feed the group of POC for fear they would raid the fridge.
I mean, that's easy to say but he wasn't the one who called the police, nor was he much concerned about not going back on campus. So much for his fragility. And as a minority, then neither of your favourite two words are applicable here.
On May 29 2017 10:22 GreenHorizons wrote:
White people complaining about "fascist students" or "eating their own" don't realize those people aren't acting as allies in those times so they won't be treated as if they are. He couldn't understand that he was perfectly welcome to attend any event he wanted, on or off campus.
Not true. That assumes a protest movement always chooses the right target and is always correct in its goals, targets, and methods: doubtful whenever you get a group together. That assumes a sort of immaculate protest movement for all protests. (Reminds me of a story from my uncle's work where a fellow bicycle U locked his neck to an auto opening gate to an oil refinery... turns out he showed up to the wrong location, wrong company to protest and could have beheaded himself if the next truck didn't notice him.)
Ok fine if not 'intellectual', can I say 'academic'? The point is, it's liberal academics that are being attacked. And at the very least I could say of Harris (and believe me, I strongly disagree with Harris) is that he is actually quite careful in trying to represent his opponent's positions. That he found the same was not true back to him (being called an Islamaphobic and the like) has made him a sympathetic ear to those who are also misrepresented.
|
On May 29 2017 10:42 Falling wrote:
[ The point is, it's liberal academics that are being attacked.
Liberal academics deserve to be attacked (rhetorically, not physically, which he wasn't ever at any risk of happening).
He was espousing an idiotic take on something he clearly couldn't understand and used it to spin the right wing snowflakes into a tizzy over him being idiotic and students doing a less than perfect job of informing him.
|
Canada11586 Posts
On May 29 2017 10:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:42 Falling wrote:
[ The point is, it's liberal academics that are being attacked.
Liberal academics deserve to be attacked (rhetorically, not physically, which he wasn't ever at any risk of happening). He was espousing an idiotic take on something he clearly couldn't understand and used it to spin the right wing snowflakes into a tizzy over him being idiotic and students doing a less than perfect job of informing him.
They deserve to be attacked for the positions they hold, not for the positions they do not hold; the latter was happening in those videos or even in those student articles which called his emails racist. Further, if it was such a voluntary thing, why was there such a hue and cry when he attempted to continue his courses for that day?
|
On May 29 2017 10:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
...
But let's dispense of the preposterous notion that racism is perpetuated not by racists, but by the oppressed people not properly courting their racist oppressors.
Can you clarify whether your position is that the correct notion is 100% of the former and 0% of the latter?
|
On May 29 2017 10:48 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On May 29 2017 10:42 Falling wrote:
[ The point is, it's liberal academics that are being attacked.
Liberal academics deserve to be attacked (rhetorically, not physically, which he wasn't ever at any risk of happening). He was espousing an idiotic take on something he clearly couldn't understand and used it to spin the right wing snowflakes into a tizzy over him being idiotic and students doing a less than perfect job of informing him. They deserve to be attacked for the positions they hold, not for the positions they do not hold; the latter was happening in those videos or even in those student articles which called his emails racist.
I think it's clear at this point that I disagree that there was nothing racist in that email.
I trust we disagree for several reasons.
1. What racism is. (I know, I know, white society decided what the word means long ago, it's theirs, the academics can't have it)
2. I'm sure that group of students each individually had their own interpretations and any one of them can't be said to be representing the nuanced perspective of everyone else there.
3.You probably still think he isn't lying and being racist when he suggests there was a "no-whites" day or a "anti-white" day. Or that it is he and those like him being oppressed by such a day of activities.
|
On May 29 2017 10:50 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
...
But let's dispense of the preposterous notion that racism is perpetuated not by racists, but by the oppressed people not properly courting their racist oppressors. Can you clarify whether your position is that the correct notion is 100% of the former and 0% of the latter?
does it really matter when it's a strawman position; as noone was arguing that point anyways? at least not in any sense remotely related to fault or ethical worth, and not in the way he's implying.
at any rate gh's relentless need to attack even those trying to help is unproductive. too much rage, in addition to the intellectual sloppiness. makes people just not wanna support him; not really helpful for the cause either, but long term rage caused by suffering do that to people.
|
Canada11586 Posts
I think it's clear at this point that I disagree that there was nothing racist in that email.
Here is the email in its entirety. Exegete it and show me.
+ Show Spoiler +
The reality is, you and I have not had many back and forth exchanges, so one shouldn't preclude the outcome before starting.
|
Sam Harris certainly always seemed to be lacking something that made him interesting. Though I've been aware of him for a while he was mostly a forgettable individual. I'm surprised he still comes up every once in a while.
|
On May 29 2017 10:55 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:50 Aquanim wrote:On May 29 2017 10:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
...
But let's dispense of the preposterous notion that racism is perpetuated not by racists, but by the oppressed people not properly courting their racist oppressors. Can you clarify whether your position is that the correct notion is 100% of the former and 0% of the latter? does it really matter when it's a strawman position; as noone was arguing that point anyways? at least not in any sense remotely related to fault or ethical worth, and not in the way he's implying. at any rate gh's relentless need to attack even those trying to help is unproductive. too much rage, in addition to the intellectual sloppiness. makes people just not wanna support him; not really helpful for the cause either, but long term rage caused by suffering do that to people.
Thanks for the typically vacuous and mildly insulting post!
And lol @ "people trying to help" no, the only one trying to help is Neb, and you all have basically ignored him or belittled the contribution.
On May 29 2017 10:58 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +I think it's clear at this point that I disagree that there was nothing racist in that email. Here is the email in its entirety. Exegete it and show me. + Show Spoiler +The reality is, you and I have not had many back and forth exchanges, so one shouldn't preclude the outcome before starting.
It would be the part where he suggests it's really the POC oppressing white people with this day (that he clearly doesn't understand).
Then when he suggests in a condescending way that POC and white people should put "phenotype aside" (disregarding this isn't an option for POC) and that white people should "be on campus" as if they weren't welcome on campus (like the POC feel constantly and have come together collectively to say).
That's some of it.
|
On May 29 2017 10:55 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:50 Aquanim wrote:On May 29 2017 10:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
...
But let's dispense of the preposterous notion that racism is perpetuated not by racists, but by the oppressed people not properly courting their racist oppressors. Can you clarify whether your position is that the correct notion is 100% of the former and 0% of the latter? does it really matter when it's a strawman position; as noone was arguing that point anyways? at least not in any sense remotely related to fault or ethical worth, and not in the way he's implying. ...
Whether anybody else was arguing a related point or not, I still wouldn't mind a clarification of what that statement meant.
|
|
|
On May 29 2017 10:22 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
who's writing for him. No way are those his words. There's at least 2 in there he probably doesn't know the meaning of
|
This is by far the most dangerous of Trump's tweets today. He has no idea what is in his signature bills. AHCA cuts medicaid and health insurance subsidies by at least 700$ over 10 years. The Trump budget has another 600$ billion plus in cuts. (http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/05/23/529654114/medical-research-health-care-face-deep-cuts-in-trump-budget) But here we have trump asking to "add more dollars to Healthcare and make it the best anywhere". This isn't just him lying, he believes this crap. The guy has at the very least, extreme memory issues.
|
On May 29 2017 11:10 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2017 10:55 zlefin wrote:On May 29 2017 10:50 Aquanim wrote:On May 29 2017 10:36 GreenHorizons wrote:
...
But let's dispense of the preposterous notion that racism is perpetuated not by racists, but by the oppressed people not properly courting their racist oppressors. Can you clarify whether your position is that the correct notion is 100% of the former and 0% of the latter? does it really matter when it's a strawman position; as noone was arguing that point anyways? at least not in any sense remotely related to fault or ethical worth, and not in the way he's implying. ... Whether anybody else was arguing a related point or not, I still wouldn't mind a clarification of what that statement meant.
The statement means what it says. But for kicks, what do you imagine the balance to be?
|
Interestingly Krugman says the exact problem with Obamacare is not enough money. Good luck making sense of what he's trying to say.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/e5CwA9M.jpg)
