EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8712
| 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. | ||
|
Karis Vas Ryaar
United States4396 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23162 Posts
On September 12 2017 10:47 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: Start your clocks, when will Clinton attack this or simply try and take credit for this idea while on her book tour? Source For context of where she's been on the issue already | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35136 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23162 Posts
On September 12 2017 11:21 Gahlo wrote: If it comes to it, she'll fall back to how she wanted it in the early 90's or something and how she was the only one that did. I'd just be curious what the explanation for campaigning on shutting it down the last chance she had to push for it (also at its most popular point). | ||
|
LegalLord
United Kingdom13775 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
Meanwhile in NH and elsewhere, shit gets fucked. | ||
|
CatharsisUT
United States487 Posts
On September 12 2017 07:18 xDaunt wrote: I think that racism and racial supremacism are distinct concepts, but correct , I do not believe that racism requires racial supremacism as an element. However, racial supremacism is a subset of racism under my definition. As for Coates, I don't really know what action he recommends (aside from what he has previously written on reparations). However, once he frames the problems as racial problems, he inevitably is going to be looking to racial solutions. And given his vitriolic framing of the issue, I would expect the solutions to be very bad. How should a person act if they identify a racial problem causing tremendous damage? Your issue is he isn't nice enough about it? Do you just discount the very idea of problems based on race? That seems...simplistic at best. If not, then why do you act like Coates identifying a "racial problem" is, on its face, disqualifying? | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 12 2017 12:07 CatharsisUT wrote: How should a person act if they identify a racial problem causing tremendous damage? Your issue is he isn't nice enough about it? Do you just discount the very idea of problems based on race? That seems...simplistic at best. If not, then why do you act like Coates identifying a "racial problem" is, on its face, disqualifying? Like I said before, Ta-Nehisi Coates goes beyond just identifying racial problems. He shows genuine antipathy towards white people in his writings. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On September 12 2017 12:27 Plansix wrote: Man, what could white people have done to earn such hostility? One could argue that you and i didn't do shit. Now, i'm not gonna get on xDaunts white supremacist train, but spreading hate is spreading hate, regardless towards whom. The notion that someone can't be racist towards "whites" is retarded. Now, i'm not saying that guy is or isn't (didn't read his stuff, so no idea) - but certainly it's not impossible by definition. Again. I didn't do shit. If you make sweeping comments like this, you are to blame for trump, you are to blame for 9/11, and you are to blame for every single war your country started. That's not how it works. edit: jeez, every kid that was part of stringing up that kid should get the chair - but lets not kid ourselves, they most likely won't even see jail, and on the off chance that they will, it'll be less than 3 months. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 12 2017 12:39 m4ini wrote: One could argue that you and i didn't do shit. Now, i'm not gonna get on xDaunts white supremacist train, but spreading hate is spreading hate, regardless towards whom. The notion that someone can't be racist towards "whites" is retarded. Now, i'm not saying that guy is or isn't (didn't read his stuff, so no idea) - but certainly it's not impossible by definition. Again. I didn't do shit. If you make sweeping comments like this, you are to blame for trump, you are to blame for 9/11, and you are to blame for every single war your country started. That's not how it works. I didn't do shit either, but I greatly benefited from the shit people did before me. And if I'm not actively trying to undo the shit people did before me, I'm just reaping the rewards. It is about engaging with that simple concept. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 12 2017 07:55 IgnE wrote: well lets parse what "whiteness is an existential threat" means. i think it has a twofold meaning: one is that trump as a singularly incompetent and stupid individual won because of the coincidence of a number of factors, perhaps foremost among them was his appeal to male chauvinism and a peculiarly white protestant americanism set apart from the secular, coloured world. an american isolationism defined not exclusively, but primarily in terms of god and skin color. the second threat is the threat of civil war precipitated by ignoring the plight of black people in this country and cursorily summarized in his "programme" or "plan of action points" it is of course true that obama got almost every black voter and for the simple reason he was black. but in comparing obama to trump, and on the reaction a "obama's blackness presents an existential threat" article would receive i have a couple points 1. obama didnt run on blackness. he was a half black ivy leaguge graduate who deliberately shied away from racial politics and tried to court white votes. he distances himself from reverend wright and if anything was a raceless picture of constitutional order and respect for american pageantry (except of course to racists who couldnt get past his skin color) 2. existential threat is an indictment of trump specifically and the two parties generally because there are significant black-specific issues undermining faith in the republic amongst that population: see his action list i cited. i cannot think of any specifically "white issues" that obama opposed or ignored 3. if obama had run on a marcus garvey platform of "blackness" such an article may well have had a good point. 4. i dont think you would argue in good faith that trump has made repeated, serious efforts to listen to the black community and to serve their needs. identitarian politics is not the same as community representation. he on the contrary won on a campaign that alternately ignored and shamed everyone who claimed to speak about discrimination, and which turned "black lives matter" into some bogeyman i would define "whiteness" in part as a conscious or unconscious investment in the social belief that you, personally, are under attack when a minority group speaks up and says "hey we are being treated unfairly. here's what its like to be defined as non-white, abnormal, in this society." I think that's a logical and fairly benign definition of whiteness. However, what you haven't done is show why you think that this is the definition that Coates has in mind. Personally, I think that your definition is inconsistent with Coates' article and his other writings. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On September 12 2017 12:44 Plansix wrote: I didn't do shit either, but I greatly benefited from the shit people did before me. And if I'm not actively trying to undo the shit people did before me, I'm just reaping the rewards. It is about engaging with that simple concept. I lived 34 years in germany, i don't think you need to explain to me "the concept of undoing shit". What you need to do is to not redo the same mistakes. You can't actively undo the shit your country has done. That's a pipe dream. That's never gonna happen. What you gonna do, give the US back to its original owner? Lets not forget that if we talk "benefited from the shit of people before you", that includes conquering, massacres and dehumanizing of native americans, too. It's not like your ancestors did only do wrong on blacks (or mine only on jews). Again. Don't do the same mistakes. That's all you can do, and after the dust settles, that's actually enough. Now, i don't actually think that the US is currently capable of "not doing the same mistakes", considering who's in power and what effect he has on edit: as an example, even though i'm not 100% on this, iirc segregation in schools is skyrocketing again (or never went entirely away? Not sure). This is a mistake that was done before and is coming back now. Your job as a decent human being is to prevent that. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 12 2017 12:53 m4ini wrote: I lived 34 years in germany, i don't think you need to explain to me "the concept of undoing shit". What you need to do is to not redo the same mistakes. You can't actively undo the shit your country has done. That's a pipe dream. That's never gonna happen. What you gonna do, give the US back to its original owner? Lets not forget that if we talk "benefited from the shit of people before you", that includes conquering, massacres and dehumanizing of native americans, too. It's not like your ancestors did only do wrong on blacks. Again. Don't do the same mistakes. That's all you can do, and after the dust settles, that's actually enough. Now, i don't actually think that the US is currently capable of "not doing the same mistakes", considering who's in power and what effect he has on We fundamentally failing at this part. We are undoing the things we put in place to combat racism. And as you cite in the second part, we seem to be doubling down on fucking up. Also my family has been in this country for 100 years. We have benefited from a system that repressed blacks. Half my family is from Boston, which has a wonderful history of deep seeded racism among the working class. | ||
|
Kyadytim
United States886 Posts
Go read or reread Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail, then re-examine whether you think Coates talking negatively about "whiteness" is really that important of a problem. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On September 12 2017 13:06 Kyadytim wrote: I find it somewhat sad that some people are more passionate about arguing over Coates being racist than about discussing the problem that leads a bunch of teenage boys to think it's okay to put a makeshift noose around a dark-skinned child's neck and push him off a picnic table, effectively hanging him. Go read or reread Martin Luther King Jr.'s Letter from a Birmingham Jail, then re-examine whether you think Coates talking negatively about "whiteness" is really that important of a problem. Maybe some of us aren't particularly interested in pointing out the obvious? Feel free to participate in the puerile if you really want to. No one's stopping you. Just don't make the mistake of drawing stupid conclusions from the silence of others on the subject. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
I do agree that you're failing currently, and the "undoing things" is what i mean by not making the same mistakes. I could also put it this way: go forward in time. Not backwards. But, and here's the important part, that still doesn't make hatespeech less hatespeech. Nobody is denying (well, nobody sane, lets put it this way) that the US did wrong on black people. A black person throwing slurs at a white guy is not better or "more justified" than the other way around. If a jew comes at me, throwing slurs at me, curses and whatnot - i'm gonna knock the shit out of him if he's going too far, regardless of heritage. That's what i mean: hatespeech stays hatespeech, nobody has an inherent right to hatespeech because his ancestors were exploited. Of course, since it's legal, nobody should stop him, but it doesn't really help his otherwise valid point. It's a bit like jews, concentration camps and palestine. It makes your argument kind of invalid even if it's correct (it's kinda hard to explain what i'm trying to say, 5:20 in the morning and english not sufficient enough). I find it somewhat sad that some people are more passionate about arguing over Coates being racist than about discussing the problem that leads a bunch of teenage boys to think it's okay to put a makeshift noose around a dark-skinned child's neck and push him off a picnic table, effectively hanging him. Interesting argument. I assume you're a homophobe because you didn't participate in the lgbt discussions? I made a comment towards the kids, but what exactly do you expect people to discuss? That one could've seen this coming a mile away? That it only was a matter of time in the current climate in the US? It's a fucking logical conclusion to what's happening in the US, there's nothing to discuss. There's plenty to fix, but everything in that regard has been said over and over dozens of times. | ||
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
That lynching thing is ugly. I guess one thing to think about is how old is fifteen, really? (Yeah, the one guy was 14). But I think generally in cases of murder or attempted murder, the law could really hit them harder. Like, not murdering someone is a pretty low expectation to meet. Most teens can manage it, and I'm fairly certain a fifteen year old that murders someone doesn't not know what they are doing. On the other side of things, from that twitter exchange, I don't much care for this urge to publicize the teens. I don't really trust the public's sense of justice, but I would certainly be open to seeing a tougher stance on violent crimes committed by older teens across the board. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
On September 12 2017 13:20 Falling wrote: That lynching thing is ugly. I guess thing to think about is how old is fifteen, really? (Yeah, the one guy was 14). But I think generally in cases of murder or attempted murder, the law could really hit them harder. Like, not murdering someone is a pretty low expectation to meet. Most teens can manage it, and I'm fairly certain a fifteen year old that murders someone doesn't not know what they are doing. On the other side of things, from that twitter exchange, I don't much care for this urge to publicize the teens. I don't really trust the public's sense of justice, but I would certainly be open to seeing a tougher stance for violent crimes committed by older teens across the board. Generally, yeah. You're right. But then there's this. First, in regards to "redoing mistakes": “Notice how he called these predators ‘young children,'” wrote Helm, “infantilizing the white teens. Conversely, teens like Trayvon Martin are made out to be hulking, menacing adults. Chief Chase seems to be centering the perpetrators feelings and futures, all but forgetting about the trauma of a little boy who had his so-called friends hang him from a tree to the point where he had to be medevaced to a hospital.” But then there's this here. He said that unlike the adult judicial system, which is aimed at punishment, the juvenile justice system is designed to correct and rehabilitate aberrant behavior. “These people need to be protected,” Chase said. “Mistakes they make as a young child should not have to follow them for the rest of their life.” That's utter bullshit. Just imagine it being 5 black kids hanging a white one. That's literally the only thing you need to do. You can ruin the live of a weed dealing kid np, but attempted murder with a racial motivation, those kids need be protected. In fact at first i thought they meant the victim, that he needs to be protected, that's why they didn't give out his name/heritage. They're talking about the kids trying to kill another. edit: it's 2017 ffs, and there's kids stringing up another kid because of skin colour. That should be a really hefty wake up call. | ||
|
Falling
Canada11349 Posts
Just imagine it being 5 black kids hanging a white one. Well, as I was referencing a Chapelle bit, I might as go all the way. It's quite likely that in the above case, they wouldn't be called 'young children'. (They) "knew what they were doing". I could be wrong, but I think it's likely. | ||
| ||
