US Politics Mega-thread - Page 7675

On May 30 2017 05:28 GreenHorizons wrote:


Well sort of, what I am saying is that there is NOT an overwhelming majority of white Americans voting in opposition of white supremacy, systemic/institutionalized racism, and the oppression of marginalized people here and elsewhere.

Is that more clear/less offensive?

On May 30 2017 05:59 Schmobutzen wrote:
You have to be patient! Especially in the worldwide sense!

The problem of racism is universal - there are regions and ethnicities who are more involved than others but it seems to be ingrained into people. That is why it will be very hard to counter it. And it will take a long time. In psychology, there is the saying that a learned behavior needs double the time to unlearn it.

Begin in your very personal life - don't preach, don't thought-policing, but show and act. And talk with all persons!

On May 30 2017 06:01 Simberto wrote:


That is an okay statement.

The problem is that if you don't say that, but instead say "White people are racist" or "White people vote for systemic racism", you put me as a white person on the defensive. I don't vote for racism, and i don't think i am racist. I try to actively avoid being racist, in fact. Maybe i don't always suceed, there are some weird genetic impulses that make me pay more attention to people who stand out in some way and look different from me. I actively combat them, and as soon as i talk to people, i am rather certain that they no longer have any effect. I don't live in the US, and thus i don't vote there, but here in Germany i would never even consider voting for the racist parties (Here it is mostly against muslims and refugees, but that is not really relevant). In fact, if a party openly supported discriminatory politics, that would definitively mean that i don't vote for them.

But if you say "White people vote racist" or something along those lines, that makes me think that you are talking to me. Since you are not exactly clear what that "voting racist" means, that could mean that you think i don't vote anti-racist enough, or something along those lines. And since i already vote against racists, that would mean that you want me to take some very extreme position to be considered not racist.

This leads to me wanting to defend myself against the accusation that in my opinion is not well founded. (Also, i don't really like "white" being a defining part of my identity. I don't think that the most relevant thing about me is my skin colour.)

I think if you use more precise statements, you will notice that people react a lot less defensive to your posts.

Mark Zuckerberg, Tim Cook, and the CEOs of 12 other tech companies have called on Texas Governor Greg Abbott to not pass “discriminatory legislation,” as state lawmakers continue to debate a so-called “bathroom bill” that would affect transgender students.

In a letter to Abbot dated May 27th, the executives said the “passage of any discriminatory legislation” in Texas would be “bad for our employees and bad for business.” The letter, as first reported by The Dallas Morning News, was also signed by Google CEO Sundar Pichai, Microsoft President Brad Smith, and Jeff Wilke, CEO of Worldwide Consumer at Amazon, among others.

The proposed law would require transgender students to use restrooms that match the gender listed on their birth certificates. Abbot, a Republican, has said he wants to pass the bill before the Texas legislature adjourns at the end of May, but the legislation has faced opposition from LGBT groups and business organizations who describe it as discriminatory.

"As large employers in the state, we are gravely concerned that any such legislation would deeply tarnish Texas' reputation as open and friendly to businesses and families," the tech CEOs wrote in their letter to Abbot. "Our ability to attract, recruit and retain top talent, encourage new business relocations, expansions and investment, and maintain our economic competitiveness would all be negatively affected.”

“Discrimination is wrong and it has no place in Texas or anywhere in our country,” the letter continues. “Our perspective is grounded in our values and our long-held commitment to diversity and inclusion.”

More than 80 tech executives spoke out against a similar bill in North Carolina last year, in a letter to then-Governor Pat McCrory. That bill was partially repealed in March, under Democratic Governor Roy Cooper.

On May 30 2017 06:05 Nebuchad wrote:
Patience is an easy thing to advocate for people who don't really lose anything when the situation doesn't change (I don't know your situation I'm talking in general).

On May 30 2017 05:59 Schmobutzen wrote:
You have to be patient! Especially in the worldwide sense!

We could enslave white people, take all of their property, and kill anyone who resisted or tried to teach themselves how to read for a few generations, then let white people recover and it would still be less time than it's taken for an overwhelming majority of white Americans to just knock it off with the systemic/institutional/violent racism.

On May 30 2017 06:09 TheDwf wrote:

How many centuries yet?

Didn't MLK write a book whose title is Why We Can't Wait? (If someone more knowledgeable can say whether or not it's a reference to this "be patient" argument...)

Obviously no one expects the problem to magically disappear overnight, but calls for patience can easily be used to stall and do nothing. It's also easier to call for patience when you're not on the receiving end of the injustice. If I didn't want anything to change anything while being on the dominant side, that's the first thing I would say to protestors: "just wait..."

On May 30 2017 06:16 Schmobutzen wrote:
The thing is, the US are not that racist as of the 1950s or even further ago.

On May 30 2017 06:16 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
The body language of Mattis...

https://twitter.com/drstef/status/869216192317227008

On May 30 2017 06:16 Gahlo wrote:

I haven't yet, but I want to.