| Forum Index > Closed |
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. | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:29 GreenHorizons wrote: To the people who have seen the movie Get Out: + Show Spoiler + Do you think the family and friends that attended the party thought of themselves as "racist"? + Show Spoiler + Obviously not! Many of then voted for Obama, and everyone knows that Obama voters can't be racist. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:26 Schmobutzen wrote: I don't say wait! I say: ponder your actions and try to change what you can actually change! There we go. That is what I was trying to say. Hoping for a mass increase in the civic virtue of individuals [curing individual racism] is ridiculous. Even with mass re-education camps we would be unlikely to stamp it out. But pushing hard on public policy racism can have some spillover effects and can produce real results. | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11519 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:20 Nebuchad wrote: And this is one of the main reasons why you're okay with being patient. You don't think the problem is that bad. Either you or GH is wrong about this. At some point, you're going to have to figure out which one is. A lot of this probably has to do with perception based on your own circumstances. Both could be correct in their own situation. For example, i am a student in a university with geeky hobbies. That leaves me in a specific milieu of people i interact with. This milieu is not racist. However, i can totally believe that if you go into a random small pub in a tiny eastern german village, things might look entirely different. I also agree that i might not notice all racist behaviour, because i am very obviously a white german in Germany. This is part of what makes this so hard. A lot of the people who believe that there is barely any racism are probably correct in their specific surroundings, and extrapolate from that onto the rest of the country. So if someone claims that there is actually a lot of racism, their personal experiences make them believe that that person is wrong and claiming that there is a lot of racism in their personal surroundings and thus exaggerating, or something along those lines. Meanwhile, the other person could be completely correct in their assessment that their own surroundings are racist, and believe that the person who thinks that there is not a lot of racism must thus be a racist that is fine with the amount of racism that that second person experiences in a different milieu, as opposed to the much smaller amount of racism that the first person experiences in his own milieu. This is a situation where clearly communicating what you believe to be racist, or not racist, is very important on both sides. I think you will often find that you actually agree, you just weren't communicating correctly. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:31 Mercy13 wrote: + Show Spoiler + Obviously not! Many of then voted for Obama, and everyone knows that Obama voters can't be racist. On May 30 2017 06:35 Wulfey_LA wrote: There we go. That is what I was trying to say. Hoping for a mass increase in the civic virtue of individuals [curing individual racism] is ridiculous. Even with mass re-education camps we would be unlikely to stamp it out. But pushing hard on public policy racism can have some spillover effects and can produce real results. + Show Spoiler + "It works better if you understand the process"  Why would mass reeducation camps be worse than it taking another 100 years? I'm not taking one side or the other, I'm just curious how you're balancing this? On May 30 2017 06:38 Simberto wrote: A lot of this probably has to do with perception based on your own circumstances. Both could be correct in their own situation. For example, i am a student in a university with geeky hobbies. That leaves me in a specific milieu of people i interact with. This milieu is not racist. However, i can totally believe that if you go into a random small pub in a tiny eastern german village, things might look entirely different. I also agree that i might not notice all racist behaviour, because i am very obviously a white german in Germany. This is part of what makes this so hard. A lot of the people who believe that there is barely any racism are probably correct in their specific surroundings, and extrapolate from that onto the rest of the country. So if someone claims that there is actually a lot of racism, their personal experiences make them believe that that person is wrong and claiming that there is a lot of racism in their personal surroundings and thus exaggerating, or something along those lines. Meanwhile, the other person could be completely correct in their assessment that their own surroundings are racist, and believe that the person who thinks that there is not a lot of racism must thus be a racist that is fine with the amount of racism that that second person experiences in a different milieu, as opposed to the much smaller amount of racism that the first person experiences in his own milieu. This is a situation where clearly communicating what you believe to be racist, or not racist, is very important on both sides. I think you will often find that you actually agree, you just weren't communicating correctly. Regarding the confusion as to how much racism a white German in Germany experiences in their milieu and POC experience in their preferred milieu (like the white German in Germany among friends, except not at all because they can't do that), or the more general social environment that is the professional, criminal, scholastic, etc social environment in the US that we exist in, it's fine to not be immediately aware of how dramatically different they are and how distorted the white German in Germany's perspective would be compared to a POC in the US. But we've long passed the time for most of the people having a problem coming to this understanding being reasonable. Once someone mentions it, it should become pretty clear like, "yeah, I probably don't have any idea how often racism is a part of people's life since me and my friends aren't like that". Maybe this is a very complicated and hard to recognize thing that I'm just hyper aware of due to my personal circumstances. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12204 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:43 Wulfey_LA wrote: When the country passed a healthcare bill that expanded medicaid (hello poors) dramatically, there was a political revolution in this country that tossed the Democrats from across the nation. If you live in reality, then you understand that greater suburbia and rural areas of the USA are not on board with more helping of poors (who tend to be darker). And now the majority of the country is in favor of medicare for all according to the polls, republican representatives are shutting down their town halls because they don't want to address their republican base who agrees with it and who really dislike Obamacare being only repealed and not replaced, and Bernie Sanders is using the surf of Medicare for All to cruise over a wave of popularity all the way to number 1 in the US. So of course, time for small steps. This is probably the single worst example that you could have chosen to illustrate the value of patience and gradualism | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:47 Nebuchad wrote: And now the majority of the country is in favor of medicare for all according to the polls, republican representatives are shutting down their town halls because they don't want to address their republican base who agrees with it and who really dislike Obamacare being only repealed and not replaced, and Bernie Sanders is using the surf of Medicare for All to cruise over a wave of popularity all the way to number 1 in the US. So of course, time for small steps and patience. This is probably the single worst example that you could have chosen to illustrate the value of patience and gradualism (1) We have a much more important opinion poll on Nov 8, 2016. No amount of polls count against votes. (2) "Single payer" on its own polls great, but show me the polls that actually cite a plan that includes the taxes to pay for it. EDIT: (3) Trump+Republicans ran on repealing ACA for years. They keep winning. Why do you think the populace just clamors for single payer when they keep voting for less GOV in health insurance? | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
a_flayer
Netherlands2826 Posts
On May 30 2017 05:53 GreenHorizons wrote: Buried in all of this was my point that it distracts us from seeing that none of the working class has someone to vote for You get a choice between two different salesmen for the same general oppression. And so long as each group agrees to perpetuate the oppression of the one beneath they get to continue to enjoy their "superiority" over the other. Every once in the while you cross the voids in between various groups, but the working class has a lot more that should unite us against the elites than divides us, but that requires letting go of the white supremacist culture that allows people in Owsley County, Kentucky thinking Republicans aren't talking about them when they talk about the "takers". Yes, I just think that in your posts you are occasionally conflating the issues of economic oppression and racism a little bit. The particular group of economic oppressors is not the majority of white people, and does not represent or even help the majority of white people. So within the particular context of economic oppression, I think focusing on the issue of race ('white supremacy') is rather pointless and actually plays into the hands of both the genuine racists and the economic oppressors (as two separate groups). This extends in some form to political oppression as well, since the two are so closely related, especially in the US. Although it's true that black people as a group will likely be proportionally better off from greater economic equality, I think the issue of combating racism should be largely limited to contexts of overt abuse such as the problem with police violence and the social/psychological context of fighting against prejudice when it comes to skin color. I think the latter is really only solved through a generational shift of views in society which can be helped along in media and by creating role models for kids and such. Obama is a good example of that, in that he will serve a role model for today's generation (both black and white kids) to further shift society away from prejudice. Economic equality to the point of having a proportional amount of black people as economic oppressors (ie. part of the 1%) should slowly follow out of that shift in societies view on skin color, and I think there have been great strides towards that in the past 50 years (considering the ~350 years of white supremacy that preceded it). The remaining 99% of people should always unite against the economic oppressors through things like labour unions/the people's party/whatever, regardless of what should be irrelevant issues such as skin color. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
EDIT: having spoken to conservatives, they universally believe their own bullshit. I get where Krugman is coming from, that they voted against their financial interests. But having talked to trumpkins, they really value Trump's promises to hurt the people that (1) don't look like them or (2) live their rural lifestyle. | ||
|
Gorsameth
Netherlands21704 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:59 Wulfey_LA wrote: Have we considered that WV voters may value Trump's public commitments to roll back pluralism may count for more than the dollars and cents realities of a welfare state like WV? WV voters really believed that whole racism+coal sales pitch by Trump. Maybe they judged sticking it to the libs and busting the browns more important than their looming healthcare collapse. History tells us their reaction will be "I thought he was going to cut the social security/healthcare of those no live foreigners and not our own, we didn't sign up for that" | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:53 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote: Krugman has posted and written about how WV keeps voting against its own interests. Although I suppose it's possible they thought Trump actually was going to fix everything. Krugman does come of as a bit snobbish at times but he makes good points. https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/867141372855296001 https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/866735908329889793 https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/866679460187127808 https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/868095208822583300 https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/868481508360818688 https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/868483182450151424 This is just it, like I pointed to Owsley County, Kentucky and why race, economics, and politics are currently inextricable from each other, no matter how much we'd like to make it about anything else. EDIT: Also Krugman is a tool. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12204 Posts
On May 30 2017 06:52 Wulfey_LA wrote: (1) We have a much more important opinion poll on Nov 8, 2016. No amount of polls count against votes. (2) "Single payer" on its own polls great, but show me the polls that actually cite a plan that includes the taxes to pay for it. EDIT: (3) Trump+Republicans ran on repealing ACA for years. They keep winning. Why do you think the populace just clamors for single payer when they keep voting for less GOV in health insurance? Trump ran on repeal and replace, not repeal and repeal. Now he's not doing the replacing well and as a result Trumpcare is massively unpopular. I understand that you can single out a Trump vote and say "woop conservatism" but when you have an explanation that is coherent with the polls and the actions today (again, town halls), namely that they thought Trump would make it better than it is and are now disappointed that he doesn't, it's fairly nonsensical for you to ignore that possibility and just go "I guess they just don't want a good insurance system". | ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12204 Posts
On May 30 2017 07:03 GreenHorizons wrote: This is just it, like I pointed to Owsley County, Kentucky and why race, economics, and politics are currently inextricable from each other, no matter how much we'd like to make it about anything else. EDIT: Also Krugman is a tool. I'm really curious how Paula Jean is going to do against Manchin, it's one of the more interesting data points for the future. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On May 30 2017 07:07 Nebuchad wrote: I'm really curious how Paula Jean is going to do against Manchin, it's one of the more interesting data points for the future. I'm hoping well, but she's up against a political Goliath and she's just a regular person wanting to help West Virginians. Her opponents are more powerful and entrenched but her allies more plentiful if they can be roused and directed to action. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 30 2017 05:17 GreenHorizons wrote: I'm not excluding white people from being decent human beings, but I can assure you if the overwhelming majority of* white Americans* stopped supporting white supremacy, systemic and institutional racism and the politicians who perpetuate it, it would stop. And not supporting them is something decent human beings do, but decent human beings also do bad things like vote to support those things. I get how people can interpret things the way they do but it sails right past people how just the "I think black people should take a lesson from the christian right and vote more" concept is offensive, particularly coming from someone who knows better like P6. Personally I spend a lot of time trying to explain racism to white people I know, which I don't have to do. I do it because I'm committed to dealing with racism in my country and it is the area where I can do the most good. So maybe take it down a notch. But, you are right, my comment was a bit out of line, but the turn out rates for the entire left have been terrible for nearly 20 years. We can blame the DNC all day, but that still doesn't win elections. My overall opinion on voting is that left should spend less time waiting for the ideal candidate that perfectly represents all their views to show up and just fucking vote for people on the ticket and own their ass. This includes every demographic on the left. Wishing White Americans would stop voting for a party caters to racist isn't going to make it stop. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23250 Posts
On May 30 2017 07:25 Plansix wrote: Personally I spend a lot of time trying to explain racism to white people I know, which I don't have to do. I do it because I'm committed to dealing with racism in my country and it is the area where I can do the most good. So maybe take it down a notch. But, you are right, my comment was a bit out of line, but the turn out rates for the entire left have been terrible for nearly 20 years. We can blame the DNC all day, but that still doesn't win elections. My overall opinion on voting is that left should spend less time waiting for the ideal candidate that perfectly represents all their views to show up and just fucking vote for people on the ticket and own their ass. This includes every demographic on the left. Wishing White Americans would stop voting for a party caters to racist isn't going to make it stop. I tried to give you some credit (though I know some of my revolutionary friends would say "stop praising that white boy for doing what any decent person should do" ) But I appreciate the effort, and I appreciate you recognizing why that turn of phrase was problematic even if you didn't mean it in the way it came off (like you were dismissing the role white Christians play/ed in preventing black people from voting for one). Without specificity to race, everyone, particularly people at the lower end of the economic ladder, need to increase their civic engagement and there's wisdom in not looking to oppressive power structures to lead them through it. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On May 30 2017 07:04 Nebuchad wrote: Trump ran on repeal and replace, not repeal and repeal. Now he's not doing the replacing well and as a result Trumpcare is massively unpopular. I understand that you can single out a Trump vote and say "woop conservatism" but when you have an explanation that is coherent with the polls and the actions today (again, town halls), namely that they thought Trump would make it better than it is and are now disappointed that he doesn't, it's fairly nonsensical for you to ignore that possibility and just go "I guess they just don't want a good insurance system". the republicans mostly just ran on repeal. repeal and replace was always blatant BS anyways; as they had no actual alternative to replace it with, and everyone knew it, or should have known it. people often claim they want something then vote against it when it's given to them; votes, in aggregate, are often very dumb and contradictory. and most people are highly oblivious to the realities of what they're voting on and have a terrible factual grasp of it. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On May 30 2017 07:47 GreenHorizons wrote: I tried to give you some credit (though I know some of my revolutionary friends would say "stop praising that white boy for doing what any decent person should do" ) But I appreciate the effort, and I appreciate you recognizing why that turn of phrase was problematic even if you didn't mean it in the way it came off (like you were dismissing the role white Christians play/ed in preventing black people from voting for one). Without specificity to race, everyone, particularly people at the lower end of the economic ladder, need to increase their civic engagement and there's wisdom in not looking to oppressive power structures to lead them through it. Then you have to cease the power structure for yourself. The hostile take over of the DNC is way easier if you got the numbers to back it up. And can prove those numbers exist by winning elections with them. Want someone like Booker to give up taking money from drug companies, get him elected by a large margin and then tell him to stop or you will find someone to replace him. It is a lot easier to pressure someone if they know you can hurt them. And don't listen to your revolutionary friends on the subject of talking to white people. People vote for self interest and then decency, in that order. The problems of racism can't be the focus of political discussions if they are forced to compete with economic problems. | ||
| ||
|
|
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
CSO Contender
[BSL 2025] Weekly
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Summer Champion…
SC Evo League
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
BSL Team Wars
Team Dewalt vs Team Bonyth
Afreeca Starleague
Sharp vs Ample
Larva vs Stork
Wardi Open
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
