|
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. |
On September 26 2017 06:58 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 06:57 Danglars wrote:On September 26 2017 06:48 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 06:43 Danglars wrote:On September 26 2017 06:26 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 06:23 Danglars wrote:On September 26 2017 05:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:On September 26 2017 05:33 xDaunt wrote:And this statement from the Steelers QB, ladies and gentlemen, is why it is always a bad idea to politicize nationalism and patriotism in this country: I was unable to sleep last night and want to share my thoughts and feelings on our team’s decision to remain in the tunnel for the National Anthem yesterday. The idea was to be unified as a team when so much attention is paid to things dividing our country, but I wish we approached it differently. We did not want to appear divided on the sideline with some standing and some kneeling or sitting.
As a team, it was not a protest of the flag or the Anthem. I personally don’t believe the Anthem is ever the time to make any type of protest. For me, and many others on my team and around the league, it is a tribute to those who commit to serve and protect our country, current and past, especially the ones that made the ultimate sacrifice.
I appreciate the unique diversity in my team and throughout the league and completely support the call for social change and the pursuit of true equality. Moving forward, I hope standing for the Anthem shows solidarity as a nation, that we stand united in respect for the people on the front lines protecting our freedom and keeping us safe. God bless those men and women. Source. The NFL knows its fucked. Trump won. He knows it, and I think he's daring democrats to join the NFL players in protesting the national anthem. Can you be more specific as to how any of this proves or shows anything? I don't see what you are seeing. The Steelers are one of the teams that stayed in the locker room during the national anthem in protest to what Trump said (I know Ben says the motive was different in his statement, but let's get real). Only one of their players came out (and uncoincidentally, he now has the most popular jersey in the country). The backlash from Steelers fans (and from NFL fans) has been more than noticeable. Big Ben is seeing it, and clearly felt compelled to publish this statement with his regrets. With a few words, Trump has routed the anthem protesters by making their actions a referendum on their patriotism instead of on the root issue of racial fairness. Yes, it's a dick a move on his part, but its effectiveness is undeniable. And in all fairness, the the protesters opened themselves up to it by it choosing the anthem as their point of protest in the first place. The cherry on top was that the protester of the protest, as it were, is a Hispanic American. This is a member of the group the liberal elite tells you must be most offended by who Trump is and what he does. He was the lone dissenter in registering this protest of Trump and racial injustice. Ben, to his credit, caught on to what crowd he doesn't want to be associated with. The kinds of people that think the flag and anthem are where you expose the country's racism. It's like the people who consider all forms of visible protest "a means to start the conversation on race" also happen to consider, "Fuck you!" a terrific start to conversations in general. You don't want to tell America that patriotism and nationalism are the enemies of the new race war. Trump's antics will take back seat and he'll enjoy a mild win (until he messes it up again, I'm sure). Front and center, brought to you by the crowd that also produced "Why you're a racist and what you can do about it" and "Conservatism is a cover for White Nationalism," we're now playing "This Country's Flag and Anthem are symbols of racial injustice to black athletes & allies." Never has anyone been so fortunate in his enemies than Donald Trump. Alright I'm out of this thread I can't take posts like this anymore lol You didn't respond to my last reply to you. I wasn't aware you were actively in the thread right now. On September 26 2017 06:27 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 06:23 Danglars wrote:On September 26 2017 05:55 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 05:36 Mohdoo wrote:On September 26 2017 05:33 xDaunt wrote:And this statement from the Steelers QB, ladies and gentlemen, is why it is always a bad idea to politicize nationalism and patriotism in this country: I was unable to sleep last night and want to share my thoughts and feelings on our team’s decision to remain in the tunnel for the National Anthem yesterday. The idea was to be unified as a team when so much attention is paid to things dividing our country, but I wish we approached it differently. We did not want to appear divided on the sideline with some standing and some kneeling or sitting.
As a team, it was not a protest of the flag or the Anthem. I personally don’t believe the Anthem is ever the time to make any type of protest. For me, and many others on my team and around the league, it is a tribute to those who commit to serve and protect our country, current and past, especially the ones that made the ultimate sacrifice.
I appreciate the unique diversity in my team and throughout the league and completely support the call for social change and the pursuit of true equality. Moving forward, I hope standing for the Anthem shows solidarity as a nation, that we stand united in respect for the people on the front lines protecting our freedom and keeping us safe. God bless those men and women. Source. The NFL knows its fucked. Trump won. He knows it, and I think he's daring democrats to join the NFL players in protesting the national anthem. Can you be more specific as to how any of this proves or shows anything? I don't see what you are seeing. The Steelers are one of the teams that stayed in the locker room during the national anthem in protest to what Trump said (I know Ben says the motive was different in his statement, but let's get real). Only one of their players came out (and uncoincidentally, he now has the most popular jersey in the country). The backlash from Steelers fans (and from NFL fans) has been more than noticeable. Big Ben is seeing it, and clearly felt compelled to publish this statement with his regrets. With a few words, Trump has routed the anthem protesters by making their actions a referendum on their patriotism instead of on the root issue of racial fairness. Yes, it's a dick a move on his part, but its effectiveness is undeniable. And in all fairness, the the protesters opened themselves up to it by it choosing the anthem as their point of protest in the first place. The cherry on top was that the protester of the protest, as it were, is a Hispanic American. This is a member of the group the liberal elite tells you must be most offended by who Trump is and what he does. He was the lone dissenter in registering this protest of Trump and racial injustice. Ben, to his credit, caught on to what crowd he doesn't want to be associated with. The kinds of people that think the flag and anthem are where you expose the country's racism. It's like the people who consider all forms of visible protest "a means to start the conversation on race" also happen to consider, "Fuck you!" a terrific start to conversations in general.You don't want to tell America that patriotism and nationalism are the enemies of the new race war. Trump's antics will take back seat and he'll enjoy a mild win (until he messes it up again, I'm sure). Front and center, brought to you by the crowd that also produced "Why you're a racist and what you can do about it" and "Conservatism is a cover for White Nationalism," we're now playing "This Country's Flag and Anthem are symbols of racial injustice to black athletes & allies." Never has anyone been so fortunate in his enemies than Donald Trump. The bold part is ahistorical. The conversation started by saying "Hey you black people, you're our property now" Since then it's mostly been "Hey can we have our rights that you promised us now?" And America saying "Go Fuck Yourself" SO please stop with this bullshit "they want to start with fuck you" nonsense. It's offensively ridiculous. You keep pretending we're back in the Civil Rights Era where you can make cogent comparisons to slavery and civil rights. Let me know when you're in 2017 and we can talk about the worst attitudes to center your movement in opposition of and we can talk about some very foolish ways to start conversations. I can't help your offense. You're being ridiculous. You're using ahistorical analysis and intentional ignorance to pretend as if you're simply advancing the white supremacy narrative out of some good natured paternal effort to help the fractionally (in your eyes) legitimate part of the efforts. It disgusts me on a visceral level to see something so repugnant being repeated ad nauseam. Go shit on NASCAR for mandating people worship the flag for a while if you have to keep on about this nonsense. I phrased my comment in the circumstances and atmosphere of today. You keep wanting to time-machine back to past eras, which is an obvious attempt to recenter on more familiar ground. Your disgust maybe is maybe also in the 1960s, so I must ask you to take your disgust, repugnance, and offense to today's era. If your only defense is saying how my analysis would be wrong if both of us lived and talked fifty decades ago, I think your problem is a dearth of evidence and argumentation for your point. I still haven't seen any examination of my comment other than bolding a sentence and calling it ahistorical. I think your current protests also need to actually engage if you desire engagement. You're proving that engagement is the least of your worries. C'mon Dangles, you and I got to get back to our plantations to watch the slaves.
I was about to laugh, but then I realized the plantation is my chair and watching the slaves is chatting on the internet about politics without spending 51% of my time addressing horrific systematic denial of basic human rights to African Americans and minorities.
|
On September 26 2017 07:14 NewSunshine wrote:
So that's it then, it's dead for sure now? McCain already said no, thankfully. How many times is it now that Republicans have tried repealing Obamacare? They always get their hopes up, but they can't be bothered to write a bill that makes sense, so they can't even vote for it. Their own bill. What a fucking joke.
This falsely assumes it was ever alive (it wasn't).
Time to move on to the Debt and Taxes disasters/debacles. Enough with Healthcare. Trump has more winning to do!
|
My understanding is that the GOP knew from the beginning Obama's legacy is untouchable. However, they rallied against it so strongly that they had to at least play the part of legitimately trying to get rid of it. Have they done that yet? For those of you who chant for repeal, is this enough? If they move on, will you vote against them? Did they give it a good enough shot yet?
|
On September 26 2017 03:33 Nebuchad wrote:
French news just had a piece on Kaepernick and they went with "to protest the murders of african american people by police". I just like that they went with that word over something more neutral like "deaths", it caught me off guard when I heard it.
Because in many of these cases, under french law the police would be committing murder?
Remember, the threshold for use of lethal force by the police on a civilian, armed or unarmed, is 'I felt threatened.' No physical threat of any kind is required, just a statement after the fact about their feelings.
On September 26 2017 03:50 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 03:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 26 2017 03:34 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:29 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 26 2017 03:16 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:12 Liquid`Drone wrote:On average, I like it when athletes voice their political opinions. But not always. I would have thought much higher of Paulo Di Canio if he hadn't. Generally though, athletes are role models and I want more people to involve themselves in politics and to be politically conscious.  How is calling the country racist being a role model? This has been my point about these racial issues all along: the free use of the term "racist" to defame a huge percentage of the country's population will never accomplish anything more than render the debate toxic and further polarize the sides. Police brutality is not a racial issue, but these idiots can't help themselves but make it one. They aren't unifying the country to solve a problem. They are further dividing it. I think most people are pretty bad at expressing themselves in ways that foster productive discussion, and I'd be very happy if the racist term was used far less than it is because it's so loaded and even if it's technically possible to make the case that a lot of behavior displayed from a whole lot of people is racist, it's also predictably going to be perceived as an insult halting the productive discussion. However, from what I've seen, I think there's a lot of legitimacy to the argument that police brutality is a racial issue and that there is a racial divide in how white and black people are treated by the police and justice system in the US. (Even if you can also make the case that a lot of this is based on poverty lines rather than race, I don't see how you can claim that race isn't an element, for example black people driving expensive cars being suspected of having stolen them much more frequently than white people, or a rich black guy forgetting his keys and trying to climb into his window being perceived as a burglar much more so than the rich white guy doing the same.) Again, disparate impact is not and should not be considered the same thing as racism. Shitty policing is a universal issue that can and should be dealt with on a race-neutral basis. No, it should not. Not even by a long shot. Stop trying to separate things so that you feel better about talking about them/avoiding them. We would not be talking about police brutality if not for these protests and blacks PoC bringing them up. We'd be back to the era before social media. Also, no one in here is calling 48% of the country racist. But you make it hard not to paint everyone with a broad brush. You haven't been around enough long enough to make this pronouncement. A number of liberal posters have made this charge. Kwark immediately comes to mind, and I could very easily find others if I was so inclined.
Their not all racists per say, many of them are tho. And the rest are enablers. People who don't care enough about others being oppressed that they keep supporting the people doing the oppressing.
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.
-Martin Luther King, Jr
|
On September 26 2017 07:37 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 03:33 Nebuchad wrote:
French news just had a piece on Kaepernick and they went with "to protest the murders of african american people by police". I just like that they went with that word over something more neutral like "deaths", it caught me off guard when I heard it. Because in many of these cases, under french law the police would be committing murder? Remember, the threshold for use of lethal force by the police on a civilian, armed or unarmed, is 'I felt threatened.' No physical threat of any kind is required, just a statement after the fact about their feelings. Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 03:50 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 26 2017 03:34 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:29 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 26 2017 03:16 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:12 Liquid`Drone wrote:On average, I like it when athletes voice their political opinions. But not always. I would have thought much higher of Paulo Di Canio if he hadn't. Generally though, athletes are role models and I want more people to involve themselves in politics and to be politically conscious. How is calling the country racist being a role model? This has been my point about these racial issues all along: the free use of the term "racist" to defame a huge percentage of the country's population will never accomplish anything more than render the debate toxic and further polarize the sides. Police brutality is not a racial issue, but these idiots can't help themselves but make it one. They aren't unifying the country to solve a problem. They are further dividing it. I think most people are pretty bad at expressing themselves in ways that foster productive discussion, and I'd be very happy if the racist term was used far less than it is because it's so loaded and even if it's technically possible to make the case that a lot of behavior displayed from a whole lot of people is racist, it's also predictably going to be perceived as an insult halting the productive discussion. However, from what I've seen, I think there's a lot of legitimacy to the argument that police brutality is a racial issue and that there is a racial divide in how white and black people are treated by the police and justice system in the US. (Even if you can also make the case that a lot of this is based on poverty lines rather than race, I don't see how you can claim that race isn't an element, for example black people driving expensive cars being suspected of having stolen them much more frequently than white people, or a rich black guy forgetting his keys and trying to climb into his window being perceived as a burglar much more so than the rich white guy doing the same.) Again, disparate impact is not and should not be considered the same thing as racism. Shitty policing is a universal issue that can and should be dealt with on a race-neutral basis. No, it should not. Not even by a long shot. Stop trying to separate things so that you feel better about talking about them/avoiding them. We would not be talking about police brutality if not for these protests and blacks PoC bringing them up. We'd be back to the era before social media. Also, no one in here is calling 48% of the country racist. But you make it hard not to paint everyone with a broad brush. You haven't been around enough long enough to make this pronouncement. A number of liberal posters have made this charge. Kwark immediately comes to mind, and I could very easily find others if I was so inclined. Their not all racists per say, many of them are tho. And the rest are enablers. People who don't care enough about others being oppressed that they keep supporting the people doing the oppressing. Show nested quote +History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.
-Martin Luther King, Jr
So are you willing to differentiate between the two when you talk about people being racist or do you want to just continue the issue and call those 48% racist?
|
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them?
|
On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them?
Right here:
"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
|
On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them?
Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes.
|
On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes.
So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing?
|
On September 26 2017 07:28 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:14 NewSunshine wrote:
So that's it then, it's dead for sure now? McCain already said no, thankfully. How many times is it now that Republicans have tried repealing Obamacare? They always get their hopes up, but they can't be bothered to write a bill that makes sense, so they can't even vote for it. Their own bill. What a fucking joke. This falsely assumes it was ever alive (it wasn't). Time to move on to the Debt and Taxes disasters/debacles. Enough with Healthcare. Trump has more winning to do!
the problem is that the entire GOP agenda is reliant on the savings from repealing the ACA. without them they can't cut taxes or anything.
womp womp.
|
On September 26 2017 07:47 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes. So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing?
My argument is their offence, at the end of the day, doesn't really mean anything to anyone. Why should I care if they're offended? What matters is whether or not there is structural racism, and what they can do to help reduce it. Crying over terms is just another way to take the focus of what matters, which actually just lends credence to the idea that they are, in fact, racist.
|
On September 26 2017 07:47 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes. So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing?
Pretty sure people are saying they need to suck it up and get over it. Because unlike real oppression, they are whining about people voicing opposition to being oppressed.
|
On September 26 2017 07:45 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Right here: Show nested quote +"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
Nope, that's not it. He's expressing his frustration for dealing with Joe Whitey, but he's not issuing a prescription for how to do it.
|
On September 26 2017 07:49 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:47 Sermokala wrote:On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes. So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing? My argument is their offence, at the end of the day, doesn't really mean anything to anyone. Why should I care if they're offended? What matters is whether or not there is structural poverty, and what they can do to help reduce it. Crying over terms is just another way to take the focus of what matters, which actually just lends credence to the idea that they are, in fact, poor.
I italicized the words I changed. I'm sure I can change those words to go in a few different directions but I think you understand what I'm trying to say with this.
|
On September 26 2017 07:52 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:45 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Right here: "First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection." Nope, that's not it. He's expressing his frustration for dealing with Joe Whitey, but he's not issuing a prescription for how to do it.
He's doing it. He's doing what you call "defaming". Don't act dense.
EDIT: He's going a step beyond and calling people making arguments like you WORSE (bigger problem) than the KKK.
|
On September 26 2017 07:41 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:37 Gorsameth wrote:On September 26 2017 03:33 Nebuchad wrote:
French news just had a piece on Kaepernick and they went with "to protest the murders of african american people by police". I just like that they went with that word over something more neutral like "deaths", it caught me off guard when I heard it. Because in many of these cases, under french law the police would be committing murder? Remember, the threshold for use of lethal force by the police on a civilian, armed or unarmed, is 'I felt threatened.' No physical threat of any kind is required, just a statement after the fact about their feelings. On September 26 2017 03:50 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:40 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 26 2017 03:34 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:29 Liquid`Drone wrote:On September 26 2017 03:16 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 03:12 Liquid`Drone wrote:On average, I like it when athletes voice their political opinions. But not always. I would have thought much higher of Paulo Di Canio if he hadn't. Generally though, athletes are role models and I want more people to involve themselves in politics and to be politically conscious. How is calling the country racist being a role model? This has been my point about these racial issues all along: the free use of the term "racist" to defame a huge percentage of the country's population will never accomplish anything more than render the debate toxic and further polarize the sides. Police brutality is not a racial issue, but these idiots can't help themselves but make it one. They aren't unifying the country to solve a problem. They are further dividing it. I think most people are pretty bad at expressing themselves in ways that foster productive discussion, and I'd be very happy if the racist term was used far less than it is because it's so loaded and even if it's technically possible to make the case that a lot of behavior displayed from a whole lot of people is racist, it's also predictably going to be perceived as an insult halting the productive discussion. However, from what I've seen, I think there's a lot of legitimacy to the argument that police brutality is a racial issue and that there is a racial divide in how white and black people are treated by the police and justice system in the US. (Even if you can also make the case that a lot of this is based on poverty lines rather than race, I don't see how you can claim that race isn't an element, for example black people driving expensive cars being suspected of having stolen them much more frequently than white people, or a rich black guy forgetting his keys and trying to climb into his window being perceived as a burglar much more so than the rich white guy doing the same.) Again, disparate impact is not and should not be considered the same thing as racism. Shitty policing is a universal issue that can and should be dealt with on a race-neutral basis. No, it should not. Not even by a long shot. Stop trying to separate things so that you feel better about talking about them/avoiding them. We would not be talking about police brutality if not for these protests and blacks PoC bringing them up. We'd be back to the era before social media. Also, no one in here is calling 48% of the country racist. But you make it hard not to paint everyone with a broad brush. You haven't been around enough long enough to make this pronouncement. A number of liberal posters have made this charge. Kwark immediately comes to mind, and I could very easily find others if I was so inclined. Their not all racists per say, many of them are tho. And the rest are enablers. People who don't care enough about others being oppressed that they keep supporting the people doing the oppressing. History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people.
-Martin Luther King, Jr So are you willing to differentiate between the two when you talk about people being racist or do you want to just continue the issue and call those 48% racist?
I have in the past commented on the distinction. But its also hard to separate the 2 cleanly because the racists are rarely open about their racist beliefs.
Even many happy enablers get a little uncomfortable when someone calls black people vermin for example.
|
On September 26 2017 07:49 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:47 Sermokala wrote:On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes. So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing? My argument is their offence, at the end of the day, doesn't really mean anything to anyone. Why should I care if they're offended? What matters is whether or not there is structural racism, and what they can do to help reduce it. Crying over terms is just another way to take the focus of what matters, which actually just lends credence to the idea that they are, in fact, racist.
Damn, with thoughts like these, you're ready to teach a master class on negotiation.
Lesson 1: How to call someone a cunt and still close the deal.
|
On September 26 2017 07:54 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:49 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:47 Sermokala wrote:On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes. So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing? My argument is their offence, at the end of the day, doesn't really mean anything to anyone. Why should I care if they're offended? What matters is whether or not there is structural racism, and what they can do to help reduce it. Crying over terms is just another way to take the focus of what matters, which actually just lends credence to the idea that they are, in fact, racist. Damn, with thoughts like these, you're ready to teach a master class on negotiation. Lesson 1: How to call someone a cunt and still close the deal.
Not really analogous, given that I'm not trying to close a deal or negotiate anything. I'm not arguing that in order for the Democrats to win, or 'the Left' to win, they should stop calling people racist. For the purposes of this discussion, I don't care about what is most expedient politically.
|
On September 26 2017 07:52 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:49 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:47 Sermokala wrote:On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes. So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing? My argument is their offence, at the end of the day, doesn't really mean anything to anyone. Why should I care if they're offended? What matters is whether or not there is structural poverty, and what they can do to help reduce it. Crying over terms is just another way to take the focus of what matters, which actually just lends credence to the idea that they are, in fact, poor. I italicized the words I changed. I'm sure I can change those words to go in a few different directions but I think you understand what I'm trying to say with this.
Sorry I might be being dense but could you expand or explain yourself, I don't get really what you're saying.
|
On September 26 2017 07:56 kollin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2017 07:54 xDaunt wrote:On September 26 2017 07:49 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:47 Sermokala wrote:On September 26 2017 07:46 kollin wrote:On September 26 2017 07:42 xDaunt wrote:
And where's the MLK quote where he says that the path to get good people to stop being silent is to defame them? Maybe right wing white people should be less fragile? I'm perfectly willing to admit that there are things I do which help propagate structural, systemic racism against black people, because that's what structural racism. I am a racist in that respect. I don't think that makes me a bad person so maybe people on the right need to stop being such snowflakes. So your argument is that because something doesn't offend you or make you feel bad then other people wouldn't be offended or feel bad when they are told they are the same thing? My argument is their offence, at the end of the day, doesn't really mean anything to anyone. Why should I care if they're offended? What matters is whether or not there is structural racism, and what they can do to help reduce it. Crying over terms is just another way to take the focus of what matters, which actually just lends credence to the idea that they are, in fact, racist. Damn, with thoughts like these, you're ready to teach a master class on negotiation. Lesson 1: How to call someone a cunt and still close the deal. Not really analogous, given that I'm not trying to close a deal or negotiate anything.
Oh, it absolutely is a negotiation. Y'all aren't calling us racists for shits and giggles. Y'all want justice! Y'all want change! Y'all need racist whitey to help you pass legislation! That looks like a negotiation to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
