|
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. |
Looks like Alabama went full retard. Now we know why people like Corker are retiring.
The alternative is worse than the status quo.
|
On September 27 2017 10:50 Nevuk wrote:Only 993 to go. This is a really sad amount to be celebrating.
well there haven't been that many. Could mean a lot in terms of where the winds are blowing and stuff. It's not something to be cheering but is isn't something to at least pay attention to. I don't think I've ever voted for a state legislature seat in my life (my district is firmly republican.) so could be an indicator of voter enthusiasm. Pretty sure these things don't get a ton of attention.
|
On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:11 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 02:49 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Of course that slid under everyone's radara, that he talked with a vet about the most respectful way to protest. That he was thoughtful and understood the gravity of what he wanted to do.
I might send that to my brother. Or maybe have my mother do it. Eric Reid (Colin's kneeling teammate) also had some great remarks that should tag along with those ones. He does a great job cutting through the Republican partisan spin on this issue. I approached Colin the Saturday before our next game to discuss how I could get involved with the cause but also how we could make a more powerful and positive impact on the social justice movement. We spoke at length about many of the issues that face our community, including systemic oppression against people of color, police brutality and the criminal justice system. We also discussed how we could use our platform, provided to us by being professional athletes in the N.F.L., to speak for those who are voiceless.
After hours of careful consideration, and even a visit from Nate Boyer, a retired Green Beret and former N.F.L. player, we came to the conclusion that we should kneel, rather than sit, the next day during the anthem as a peaceful protest. We chose to kneel because it’s a respectful gesture. I remember thinking our posture was like a flag flown at half-mast to mark a tragedy. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/opinion/colin-kaepernick-football-protests.html?smid=fb-share Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if the same considerations when blacks are unarmed and killed as were whites, more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality. Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way.
Woah, a post with clear reasoning and evidence instead of blindly calling racism!
This is the kind of conversation we need to be having.
|
On September 27 2017 10:38 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 09:39 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 09:33 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 09:16 Gorsameth wrote:On September 27 2017 09:13 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 08:33 Falling wrote:Huh. That actually makes a lot of sense. I was discussing this in real life and we were all wondering why it was such a big deal as kneeling really didn't seem the most disrespectful thing in the world... like maybe it related to a QB surrendering first before getting tackled? But in most contexts, kneeling is actually quite respectful. Seems like a fair way to protest in my opinion. He paired it with explicitly divisive statements on the flag. “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. Then he had his police=pigs socks and Che Guevara shirt. I don't care what this new round of players thinks, because Trump has certainly thrown his hat into the ring. It started with an overtly political stance and it was all about what the flag symbolized. Why should a man respect a country that does not respect him as a person in the same manner as any other because of the color of his skin? You presume agreement with a number of things on that question. How about confirming that he left very little room for interpretation on what the protest was about. Then maybe you can move on to honest questions with a basis in shared reality. Kaep said he was not standing for the anthem because he was protesting police brutality. He has since confirmed that multiple times. Over and over. The flag and anthem are part and parcel of one another. His reason has not changed. You decided to add more to it or obfuscate his reason with your own to find outrage. I directly quoted him. Like he literally said that and people heard he said that and responded to him saying that. Either address with actual quotes and dates what changed, or you're just ignoring and washing over it. Because you're saying his reason has not changed without putting that in context of what I just quoted.
His whole reason to protest was to bring awareness to police brutality. That is his reason. That has not changed. That you continue to be incensed over this makes me question if you actually understand the reason behind the protest. Take the flag out of the picture, it's clouding your reasoning skills. The flag stands for justice for all and freedom and he's protesting that blacks in America are not receiving it. So why support it?
Again, he is protesting police brutality by kneeling during the anthem. The flag and anthem are the vehicle to his protest, not what he is actually protesting. Same with how the bridge in Selma is the vehicle and not the object of the protest.
|
On September 27 2017 11:03 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 10:38 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 09:39 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 09:33 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 09:16 Gorsameth wrote:On September 27 2017 09:13 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 08:33 Falling wrote:Huh. That actually makes a lot of sense. I was discussing this in real life and we were all wondering why it was such a big deal as kneeling really didn't seem the most disrespectful thing in the world... like maybe it related to a QB surrendering first before getting tackled? But in most contexts, kneeling is actually quite respectful. Seems like a fair way to protest in my opinion. He paired it with explicitly divisive statements on the flag. “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. Then he had his police=pigs socks and Che Guevara shirt. I don't care what this new round of players thinks, because Trump has certainly thrown his hat into the ring. It started with an overtly political stance and it was all about what the flag symbolized. Why should a man respect a country that does not respect him as a person in the same manner as any other because of the color of his skin? You presume agreement with a number of things on that question. How about confirming that he left very little room for interpretation on what the protest was about. Then maybe you can move on to honest questions with a basis in shared reality. Kaep said he was not standing for the anthem because he was protesting police brutality. He has since confirmed that multiple times. Over and over. The flag and anthem are part and parcel of one another. His reason has not changed. You decided to add more to it or obfuscate his reason with your own to find outrage. I directly quoted him. Like he literally said that and people heard he said that and responded to him saying that. Either address with actual quotes and dates what changed, or you're just ignoring and washing over it. Because you're saying his reason has not changed without putting that in context of what I just quoted. His whole reason to protest was to bring awareness to police brutality. That is his reason. That has not changed. That you continue to be incensed over this makes me question if you actually understand the reason behind the protest. Take the flag out of the picture, it's clouding your reasoning skills. The flag stands for justice for all and freedom and he's protesting that blacks in America are not receiving it. So why support it? Again, he is protesting police brutality by kneeling during the anthem. The flag and anthem are the vehicle to his protest, not what he is actually protesting. Same with how the bridge in Selma is the vehicle and not the object of the protest.
What does the flag/anthem have to do with the police? As for the flag itself, everyone has their own notion of what it stands for. Attempting to create a consensus on something so divisive that you stake the movement to, is fucking idiotic. You've obfuscated the agenda item before you even begin, then you wonder/complain why people are viewing the acts in different ways than you are? Are people really this obtuse? Protest outside of police buildings, refuse to play in one game, etc. There are many vehicles to protest. Deciding to use such a divisive and personal device such as the flag and anthem to use as the vehicle is just dumb, and instead of seeing that, there is a ton of doubling down. Continue this lose/lose proposition though if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside even if nothing ever changes though.
(Shouldn't you be trying to change peoples opinions who have different views than you do, and thus, the strategy employed should focus on them, not on you, or anyone else who all ready shares the view you're trying to make a majority opinion? Don't worry, I have the same problems with my own movements doing this, and hell I do it from time to time, but I try not to.)
|
On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:11 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 02:49 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Of course that slid under everyone's radara, that he talked with a vet about the most respectful way to protest. That he was thoughtful and understood the gravity of what he wanted to do.
I might send that to my brother. Or maybe have my mother do it. Eric Reid (Colin's kneeling teammate) also had some great remarks that should tag along with those ones. He does a great job cutting through the Republican partisan spin on this issue. I approached Colin the Saturday before our next game to discuss how I could get involved with the cause but also how we could make a more powerful and positive impact on the social justice movement. We spoke at length about many of the issues that face our community, including systemic oppression against people of color, police brutality and the criminal justice system. We also discussed how we could use our platform, provided to us by being professional athletes in the N.F.L., to speak for those who are voiceless.
After hours of careful consideration, and even a visit from Nate Boyer, a retired Green Beret and former N.F.L. player, we came to the conclusion that we should kneel, rather than sit, the next day during the anthem as a peaceful protest. We chose to kneel because it’s a respectful gesture. I remember thinking our posture was like a flag flown at half-mast to mark a tragedy. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/opinion/colin-kaepernick-football-protests.html?smid=fb-share Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way.
I more or less agree with what you've said, but you have to put this in a historical context. Look at the civil rights movement and how that started and how eventually, whites got on board. That is what should be happening now, but we have so much noise and ignorance clouding what needs to be discussed, people aren't mobilizing as they did back then. It seems like they are, with all of the protests and the like taking place, but nothing is happening. There are no laws being introduced to help mitigate the racial inequality that protesters are protesting. Instead, they are being told to not rock the boat, don't bring up uncomfortable topics during times people want to turn their brains off, and if they really want to create change, elect people who will get laws put in place. I'm not saying this is an overnight fix and that it will take time, but people aren't wanting to engage in conversation and see why people are upset, calling names, and tired of being told to wait until the right time.
Socioeconomically speaking, we could debate back and forth until the cows come home on that one. There's so much evidence that the systemic and institutionalized racism/classicism keeps PoC disadvantaged, but we won't get that changed without a complete dying off of baby boomers. We can go back and forth on so many topics that I think we'd be arguing just to argue because we agree on a lot of these points.
White people aren't as outraged about whites not getting the attention blacks are getting nationally because at the end of the day, they are still white. Like Chris Rock said, "There's not a single white person who would change lives with him. And he's rich."
|
For any non-Americans confused by this whole flow of conversation, they take their died cloths very seriously.
|
On September 27 2017 11:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way. I more or less agree with what you've said, but you have to put this in a historical context. Look at the civil rights movement and how that started and how eventually, whites got on board. That is what should be happening now, but we have so much noise and ignorance clouding what needs to be discussed, people aren't mobilizing as they did back then. It seems like they are, with all of the protests and the like taking place, but nothing is happening. There are no laws being introduced to help mitigate the racial inequality that protesters are protesting. Instead, they are being told to not rock the boat, don't bring up uncomfortable topics during times people want to turn their brains off, and if they really want to create change, elect people who will get laws put in place. I'm not saying this is an overnight fix and that it will take time, but people aren't wanting to engage in conversation and see why people are upset, calling names, and tired of being told to wait until the right time. Socioeconomically speaking, we could debate back and forth until the cows come home on that one. There's so much evidence that the systemic and institutionalized racism/classicism keeps PoC disadvantaged, but we won't get that changed without a complete dying off of baby boomers. We can go back and forth on so many topics that I think we'd be arguing just to argue because we agree on a lot of these points. White people aren't as outraged about whites not getting the attention blacks are getting nationally because at the end of the day, they are still white. Like Chris Rock said, "There's not a single white person who would change lives with him. And he's rich."
Yeah but Chris Rock is a comedian and was just trying to be funny (and very divisive should I add).
I'm 100% sure that some homeless white guy would want to be him any time of the day.
|
On September 27 2017 11:12 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 11:03 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 10:38 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 09:39 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 09:33 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 09:16 Gorsameth wrote:On September 27 2017 09:13 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 08:33 Falling wrote:Huh. That actually makes a lot of sense. I was discussing this in real life and we were all wondering why it was such a big deal as kneeling really didn't seem the most disrespectful thing in the world... like maybe it related to a QB surrendering first before getting tackled? But in most contexts, kneeling is actually quite respectful. Seems like a fair way to protest in my opinion. He paired it with explicitly divisive statements on the flag. “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. Then he had his police=pigs socks and Che Guevara shirt. I don't care what this new round of players thinks, because Trump has certainly thrown his hat into the ring. It started with an overtly political stance and it was all about what the flag symbolized. Why should a man respect a country that does not respect him as a person in the same manner as any other because of the color of his skin? You presume agreement with a number of things on that question. How about confirming that he left very little room for interpretation on what the protest was about. Then maybe you can move on to honest questions with a basis in shared reality. Kaep said he was not standing for the anthem because he was protesting police brutality. He has since confirmed that multiple times. Over and over. The flag and anthem are part and parcel of one another. His reason has not changed. You decided to add more to it or obfuscate his reason with your own to find outrage. I directly quoted him. Like he literally said that and people heard he said that and responded to him saying that. Either address with actual quotes and dates what changed, or you're just ignoring and washing over it. Because you're saying his reason has not changed without putting that in context of what I just quoted. His whole reason to protest was to bring awareness to police brutality. That is his reason. That has not changed. That you continue to be incensed over this makes me question if you actually understand the reason behind the protest. Take the flag out of the picture, it's clouding your reasoning skills. The flag stands for justice for all and freedom and he's protesting that blacks in America are not receiving it. So why support it? Again, he is protesting police brutality by kneeling during the anthem. The flag and anthem are the vehicle to his protest, not what he is actually protesting. Same with how the bridge in Selma is the vehicle and not the object of the protest. What does the flag/anthem have to do with the police? As for the flag itself, everyone has their own notion of what it stands for. Attempting to create a consensus on something so divisive that you stake the movement to, is fucking idiotic. You've obfuscated the agenda item before you even begin, then you wonder/complain why people are viewing the acts in different ways than you are? Are people really this obtuse? Protest outside of police buildings, refuse to play in one game, etc. There are many vehicles to protest. Deciding to use such a divisive and personal device such as the flag and anthem to use as the vehicle is just dumb, and instead of seeing that, there is a ton of doubling down. Continue this lose/lose proposition though if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside even if nothing ever changes though. (Shouldn't you be trying to change peoples opinions who have different views than you do, and thus, the strategy employed should focus on them, not on you, or anyone else who all ready shares the view you're trying to make a majority opinion? Don't worry, I have the same problems with my own movements doing this, and hell I do it from time to time, but I try not to.)
That's the thing. It was never as big a deal as it is now. The focus started on police brutality and it has remained that way. When it got really moving and a lot of actors started voicing their two cents, that's when the message got fuzzy. Then you get Fox and friends claiming it was about the anthem/flag and people stopped seeing the real reason the protest began. Notice how we stopped talking about police brutality and these last dozen pages have been about the flag and if someone is patriotic or not? That's what happened. Everyone got sidetracked and it's harder than ever to get the topic back on the reason for the protest. Leave the flag/anthem out of it. It's a vehicle. It's not representative of the protest no more than a bus, a rainbow, or a bridge. People are looking for ways to change the topic of discussion as to not face the real issue at hand, which is police brutality and racial inequality. Remove the flag from any further argument, and we can discuss this with sense and reason. Otherwise, we'll never get anywhere.
|
On September 27 2017 11:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way. I more or less agree with what you've said, but you have to put this in a historical context. Look at the civil rights movement and how that started and how eventually, whites got on board. That is what should be happening now, but we have so much noise and ignorance clouding what needs to be discussed, people aren't mobilizing as they did back then. It seems like they are, with all of the protests and the like taking place, but nothing is happening. There are no laws being introduced to help mitigate the racial inequality that protesters are protesting. Instead, they are being told to not rock the boat, don't bring up uncomfortable topics during times people want to turn their brains off, and if they really want to create change, elect people who will get laws put in place. I'm not saying this is an overnight fix and that it will take time, but people aren't wanting to engage in conversation and see why people are upset, calling names, and tired of being told to wait until the right time. Socioeconomically speaking, we could debate back and forth until the cows come home on that one. There's so much evidence that the systemic and institutionalized racism/classicism keeps PoC disadvantaged, but we won't get that changed without a complete dying off of baby boomers. We can go back and forth on so many topics that I think we'd be arguing just to argue because we agree on a lot of these points. White people aren't as outraged about whites not getting the attention blacks are getting nationally because at the end of the day, they are still white. Like Chris Rock said, "There's not a single white person who would change lives with him. And he's rich."
I just want to tackle that quote and the last paragraph for now: that's complete bullshit. You ask any random white person living in the trailer park, or in Appalachia, or in some of the poorest parts of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana, and they'd trade places with Chris Rock in a heartbeat (I chose these places, because they're the stereotypical "racist" locations). In fact, outside of anecdotal evidence (which I have, since I'm from the South and lived here for over a majority of my life, and I am sure, others have anecdotal evidence to the contrary), how the fuck do you measure that quote? Do you simply believe it because you have an a priori assumption that all whites are racist? I mean, I'd trade places with Chris Rock in a heartbeat. Then you're going to tell me, no, it's not literal, and then I'll tell you again, what outside of your assumption (founded again, on this idea that all/majority whites are racist, which when brought up people on this forum keep saying no one is saying, but yet you keep reading shit like that quote which is EXACTLY what you're saying) are you basing this off of. Where is your statistical evidence? For people who proudly proclaim science all the time, you back up the most ridiculous non-scientific sociology/humanities bullshit.
|
On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:11 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 02:49 Plansix wrote:
[quote]
Of course that slid under everyone's radara, that he talked with a vet about the most respectful way to protest. That he was thoughtful and understood the gravity of what he wanted to do.
I might send that to my brother. Or maybe have my mother do it. Eric Reid (Colin's kneeling teammate) also had some great remarks that should tag along with those ones. He does a great job cutting through the Republican partisan spin on this issue. I approached Colin the Saturday before our next game to discuss how I could get involved with the cause but also how we could make a more powerful and positive impact on the social justice movement. We spoke at length about many of the issues that face our community, including systemic oppression against people of color, police brutality and the criminal justice system. We also discussed how we could use our platform, provided to us by being professional athletes in the N.F.L., to speak for those who are voiceless.
After hours of careful consideration, and even a visit from Nate Boyer, a retired Green Beret and former N.F.L. player, we came to the conclusion that we should kneel, rather than sit, the next day during the anthem as a peaceful protest. We chose to kneel because it’s a respectful gesture. I remember thinking our posture was like a flag flown at half-mast to mark a tragedy. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/25/opinion/colin-kaepernick-football-protests.html?smid=fb-share Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way.
Why do you think black people are acutely aware of these problems and doing whatever they can to address them and white people are waiting to be convinced they're worth taking action immediately on?
|
|
|
On September 27 2017 11:20 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 11:12 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 11:03 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 10:38 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 09:39 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 09:33 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 09:16 Gorsameth wrote:On September 27 2017 09:13 Danglars wrote:On September 27 2017 08:33 Falling wrote:Huh. That actually makes a lot of sense. I was discussing this in real life and we were all wondering why it was such a big deal as kneeling really didn't seem the most disrespectful thing in the world... like maybe it related to a QB surrendering first before getting tackled? But in most contexts, kneeling is actually quite respectful. Seems like a fair way to protest in my opinion. He paired it with explicitly divisive statements on the flag. “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. Then he had his police=pigs socks and Che Guevara shirt. I don't care what this new round of players thinks, because Trump has certainly thrown his hat into the ring. It started with an overtly political stance and it was all about what the flag symbolized. Why should a man respect a country that does not respect him as a person in the same manner as any other because of the color of his skin? You presume agreement with a number of things on that question. How about confirming that he left very little room for interpretation on what the protest was about. Then maybe you can move on to honest questions with a basis in shared reality. Kaep said he was not standing for the anthem because he was protesting police brutality. He has since confirmed that multiple times. Over and over. The flag and anthem are part and parcel of one another. His reason has not changed. You decided to add more to it or obfuscate his reason with your own to find outrage. I directly quoted him. Like he literally said that and people heard he said that and responded to him saying that. Either address with actual quotes and dates what changed, or you're just ignoring and washing over it. Because you're saying his reason has not changed without putting that in context of what I just quoted. His whole reason to protest was to bring awareness to police brutality. That is his reason. That has not changed. That you continue to be incensed over this makes me question if you actually understand the reason behind the protest. Take the flag out of the picture, it's clouding your reasoning skills. The flag stands for justice for all and freedom and he's protesting that blacks in America are not receiving it. So why support it? Again, he is protesting police brutality by kneeling during the anthem. The flag and anthem are the vehicle to his protest, not what he is actually protesting. Same with how the bridge in Selma is the vehicle and not the object of the protest. What does the flag/anthem have to do with the police? As for the flag itself, everyone has their own notion of what it stands for. Attempting to create a consensus on something so divisive that you stake the movement to, is fucking idiotic. You've obfuscated the agenda item before you even begin, then you wonder/complain why people are viewing the acts in different ways than you are? Are people really this obtuse? Protest outside of police buildings, refuse to play in one game, etc. There are many vehicles to protest. Deciding to use such a divisive and personal device such as the flag and anthem to use as the vehicle is just dumb, and instead of seeing that, there is a ton of doubling down. Continue this lose/lose proposition though if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside even if nothing ever changes though. (Shouldn't you be trying to change peoples opinions who have different views than you do, and thus, the strategy employed should focus on them, not on you, or anyone else who all ready shares the view you're trying to make a majority opinion? Don't worry, I have the same problems with my own movements doing this, and hell I do it from time to time, but I try not to.) That's the thing. It was never as big a deal as it is now. The focus started on police brutality and it has remained that way. When it got really moving and a lot of actors started voicing their two cents, that's when the message got fuzzy. Then you get Fox and friends claiming it was about the anthem/flag and people stopped seeing the real reason the protest began. Notice how we stopped talking about police brutality and these last dozen pages have been about the flag and if someone is patriotic or not? That's what happened. Everyone got sidetracked and it's harder than ever to get the topic back on the reason for the protest. Leave the flag/anthem out of it. It's a vehicle. It's not representative of the protest no more than a bus, a rainbow, or a bridge. People are looking for ways to change the topic of discussion as to not face the real issue at hand, which is police brutality and racial inequality. Remove the flag from any further argument, and we can discuss this with sense and reason. Otherwise, we'll never get anywhere.
You don't understand. You've failed to place yourselves in the shoes of people not like you, who may not see the world in the same way you do, and instead of doing so - you just say they're racist and there's nothing you can do, but you can reach many of these people (I know, my folks are these people), by not being a stupid dolt and using a symbol, that you even say doesn't matter. Why use the damn symbol then? It's counterproductive. That's reality. You can fight reality, or you can acknowledge it. That's up to you. All I see is a bunch of people doubling down and alienating a lot of people that aren't strictly on either side. Again, it's that pesky - the flag/anthem means a bunch of different shit to a bunch of different people.
|
That sounds oddly familiar....
|
On September 27 2017 11:22 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way. Why do you think black people are acutely aware of these problems and doing whatever they can to address them and white people are waiting to be convinced they're worth taking action immediately on?
Are you always so thinly veiled. Everyone knows your view, you don't have to be so coy. I get it - whitey is racist, there's no other explanation. Notice, by the way, that none of what I say is actually addressed. It's just repeating the mantra.
|
On September 27 2017 11:21 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 11:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way. I more or less agree with what you've said, but you have to put this in a historical context. Look at the civil rights movement and how that started and how eventually, whites got on board. That is what should be happening now, but we have so much noise and ignorance clouding what needs to be discussed, people aren't mobilizing as they did back then. It seems like they are, with all of the protests and the like taking place, but nothing is happening. There are no laws being introduced to help mitigate the racial inequality that protesters are protesting. Instead, they are being told to not rock the boat, don't bring up uncomfortable topics during times people want to turn their brains off, and if they really want to create change, elect people who will get laws put in place. I'm not saying this is an overnight fix and that it will take time, but people aren't wanting to engage in conversation and see why people are upset, calling names, and tired of being told to wait until the right time. Socioeconomically speaking, we could debate back and forth until the cows come home on that one. There's so much evidence that the systemic and institutionalized racism/classicism keeps PoC disadvantaged, but we won't get that changed without a complete dying off of baby boomers. We can go back and forth on so many topics that I think we'd be arguing just to argue because we agree on a lot of these points. White people aren't as outraged about whites not getting the attention blacks are getting nationally because at the end of the day, they are still white. Like Chris Rock said, "There's not a single white person who would change lives with him. And he's rich." I just want to tackle that quote and the last paragraph for now: that's complete bullshit. You ask any random white person living in the trailer park, or in Appalachia, or in some of the poorest parts of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana, and they'd trade places with Chris Rock in a heartbeat (I chose these places, because they're the stereotypical "racist" locations). In fact, outside of anecdotal evidence (which I have, since I'm from the South and lived here for over a majority of my life, and I am sure, others have anecdotal evidence to the contrary), how the fuck do you measure that quote? Do you simply believe it because you have an a priori assumption that all whites are racist? I mean, I'd trade places with Chris Rock in a heartbeat. Then you're going to tell me, no, it's not literal, and then I'll tell you again, what outside of your assumption (founded again, on this idea that all/majority whites are racist, which when brought up people on this forum keep saying no one is saying, but yet you keep reading shit like that quote which is EXACTLY what you're saying) are you basing this off of. Where is your statistical evidence? For people who proudly proclaim science all the time, you back up the most ridiculous non-scientific sociology/humanities bullshit.
You're tackling the quote and not the paragraph, correct? I want to be clear.
You don't take the money. You take all of his baggage and everything that goes with it. You become black. You may be rich, but you're still black. As evidenced by the post above and countless other times, you being rich does not change the fact that in the eyes of many, you're still a Nigger. Just a nigger with money. You'll get all of the benefits of being rich, with all of the bullshit that comes with having dark skin. Which means worry of being pulled over with no cause, potentially being held without cause, being shot, being called nigger, etc, etc, etc. EVERYDAY until you die.
Again, I'm not saying all white people are racist. That's not the meaning behind the quote. In fact, I was reminded of the quote by a white sports caster in Dallas. Funny how he can see what Chris Rock was saying and you seemingly cannot.
If you want that, then by all means, join the party. I don't need to provide statistical evidence by living it anecdotally. This isn't an emotional response to anything, it's just stating facts.
|
On September 27 2017 11:29 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 11:22 GreenHorizons wrote:On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:On September 27 2017 03:20 xDaunt wrote:
[quote]
Except the issue isn't the kneeling or even the sitting. It's the message behind those actions. Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way. Why do you think black people are acutely aware of these problems and doing whatever they can to address them and white people are waiting to be convinced they're worth taking action immediately on? Are you always so thinly veiled. Everyone knows your view, you don't have to be so coy. I get it - whitey is racist, there's no other explanation. Notice, by the way, that none of what I say is actually addressed. It's just repeating the mantra.
No matter how many times people repeat that's my argument it doesn't make it my argument. For people arguing others need to pay more attention to their arguments and not the ones they've manifested you guys seem to be doing a pretty shitty job.
What did you want me to address?
Notice you didn't actually answer the question, just continued the "everything is blame racist whitey's" mantra that's not my argument.
|
On September 27 2017 11:31 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 11:21 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 11:14 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 10:52 Wegandi wrote:On September 27 2017 04:37 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:On September 27 2017 04:21 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:48 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:40 Mohdoo wrote:On September 27 2017 03:38 xDaunt wrote:On September 27 2017 03:33 Wulfey_LA wrote:
[quote]
Yeah, it is the message behind the actions that matter. But the official republican spin is that this is about the <flag/actions/disrespect>, not about protesting the disparate impact of <Officer Use of Force incidents>. Trump/Republicans/Newt/Hannity/FOX are sticking to <flag/actions/disrespect> spin because that is a much easier ground upon which to spin up some white grievance. Talking about <Officer Use of Force incidents> and how they come down heavier and bloodier on people of darker complexion is a hard issue that Republicans would rather pretend doesn't exist. I am surprised that you are accepting the premises of the Lib side here. I don't think that there are meaningful grounds to distinguish between the message and the action. The bottom line is that Kaepernick is intentionally condemning and showing disrespect for the country. That's not going to rub people the right way. In your eyes, is there to say what he is saying in a respectful way? There are a couple layers to peel here. First, using the national anthem to protest the country in any way is a bad idea for the reasons that Donald Trump showed this weekend (like I discussed yesterday). It's too easy to have your cause turned (fairly or not) into a referendum on your patriotism (regardless of the justness of your cause). Second, and like all of the conservative posters have been saying til they have been blue in the face, framing the issue in terms of the country being racist is only going to piss people off and turn them against you. The better way to approach the issue is to frame it as a race neutral issue along the lines of "Police brutality is a problem in this country" or "Inner city families are broken and need help." Amazing things will happen when you stop calling whitey racist. So you are saying that blacks framing these issues as black issues rather than "everyone issues", they lose support from whites? This is in reply to xD, using your post. Whites weren't going to do anything about it. Hispanics were only worried about deportation. Blacks had to be the voice to bring some of these issues up. Only when they did, did we see more PoC, including whites, speaking out on police brutality and racial inequality. Taking race out of it doesn't drive home the fact of what is really going on. It's hiding the true issue at hand behind a fog. By bringing race into this, more people are inclined to speak up in support for the cause. The civil rights movement was about blacks and that got a lot of people on board to get laws enacted that serves everyone equally (or it should). Why is now different? Take the black man's plight in America and use it to forward change for all. The LGBT community is doing it (sometimes wrongly) and they are getting their rights increased slowly but surely. People bring in race because it's an effective means to get things heard and things done. Because you are uncomfortable with it, is not my nor anyone else's problems. It is your own. Whites aren't going to do anything about it because police brutality against whites (the majority of cases) aren't reported and if they are tend to go away quite fast (talk to the average white person - they're totally ignorant about stuff like Kelly Thomas, James Boyd, etc.). There's no national outrage when a policeman kills unarmed white people. Most of the white people killed are poor, have a mental illness, or "were sassy" with the states Gendarmes. Funny enough, if you look at the majority of cases involving blacks the same characteristics show up. I brought it up before, but this is much more a socioeconomic concern than a race concern. Blacks make up 13% of the population and are 30% of officer involved shootings. That is a problem, definitely, but it's being blown far out of proportion (as if, as one poster earlier alluded to - white people never experience the same civil rights violations from police as blacks...). The hyperbole is out of control, fueled by a media who uses these events for publicity and viewership. In addition, other areas of civil rights violations aren't out of the statistical norms (e.g. asset forfeiture, abuse, 4th amendment violations, etc.), but some are such as drug incarceration statistics. I point out the above to say that if whites got the same considerations that blacks get (nationally) when killed being unarmed more whites would give a fuck about police brutality and excessive use of force (I really hate the "I feared for my safety, qualified immunity" bullshit). Which many will take as whites being racist, but it's more of "if it isn't effecting me, I don't really care" and that's just sadly, a HUMAN quality (there were no large scale black movement to come to the Kelly Thomas case for instance - which is one of the most egregious unarmed deaths by Police). Please debate me on this one. Again, this "systemic" racism is most heavily prevalent in majority black controlled cities. Detroit, Baltimore, Chicago, etc. with black Chief of Polices, etc. Of course, there are places like NYC that are abysmal with openly racist policies like stop and frisk (but they are supposed to be enlightened progressive northerners....imagine the outrage if stop and frisk was MO in Mobile, Shreveport, Jacksonville, etc.). The point being that yes, there is a major moral and political crisis of the lack of 1) police accountability 2) excessive and abusive practices 3) "thin blue line" as default 4) persecution complex as America is at a time when crime rates are historically low 5) Politicians who continuously create more and more laws forcing their enforcement arm to do things that are extremely negatively perceived by the average person (but, yet, oddly, keep voting for the same politicians - I'm going to name this paradox after myself, I think.). Instead of framing the issue as solely a black one, you should frame the issue as an American one, because as Americans, we're all impacted by these abuses. You're also going to be a lot more successful if you actually care about changing shit, framing the issue this way. I more or less agree with what you've said, but you have to put this in a historical context. Look at the civil rights movement and how that started and how eventually, whites got on board. That is what should be happening now, but we have so much noise and ignorance clouding what needs to be discussed, people aren't mobilizing as they did back then. It seems like they are, with all of the protests and the like taking place, but nothing is happening. There are no laws being introduced to help mitigate the racial inequality that protesters are protesting. Instead, they are being told to not rock the boat, don't bring up uncomfortable topics during times people want to turn their brains off, and if they really want to create change, elect people who will get laws put in place. I'm not saying this is an overnight fix and that it will take time, but people aren't wanting to engage in conversation and see why people are upset, calling names, and tired of being told to wait until the right time. Socioeconomically speaking, we could debate back and forth until the cows come home on that one. There's so much evidence that the systemic and institutionalized racism/classicism keeps PoC disadvantaged, but we won't get that changed without a complete dying off of baby boomers. We can go back and forth on so many topics that I think we'd be arguing just to argue because we agree on a lot of these points. White people aren't as outraged about whites not getting the attention blacks are getting nationally because at the end of the day, they are still white. Like Chris Rock said, "There's not a single white person who would change lives with him. And he's rich." I just want to tackle that quote and the last paragraph for now: that's complete bullshit. You ask any random white person living in the trailer park, or in Appalachia, or in some of the poorest parts of Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana, and they'd trade places with Chris Rock in a heartbeat (I chose these places, because they're the stereotypical "racist" locations). In fact, outside of anecdotal evidence (which I have, since I'm from the South and lived here for over a majority of my life, and I am sure, others have anecdotal evidence to the contrary), how the fuck do you measure that quote? Do you simply believe it because you have an a priori assumption that all whites are racist? I mean, I'd trade places with Chris Rock in a heartbeat. Then you're going to tell me, no, it's not literal, and then I'll tell you again, what outside of your assumption (founded again, on this idea that all/majority whites are racist, which when brought up people on this forum keep saying no one is saying, but yet you keep reading shit like that quote which is EXACTLY what you're saying) are you basing this off of. Where is your statistical evidence? For people who proudly proclaim science all the time, you back up the most ridiculous non-scientific sociology/humanities bullshit. You're tackling the quote and not the paragraph, correct? I want to be clear. You don't take the money. You take all of his baggage and everything that goes with it. You become black. You may be rich, but you're still black. As evidenced by the post above and countless other times, you being rich does not change the fact that in the eyes of many, you're still a Nigger. Just a nigger with money. You'll get all of the benefits of being rich, with all of the bullshit that comes with having dark skin. Which means worry of being pulled over with no cause, potentially being held without cause, being shot, being called nigger, etc, etc, etc. EVERYDAY until you die. Again, I'm not saying all white people are racist. That's not the meaning behind the quote. In fact, I was reminded of the quote by a white sports caster in Dallas. Funny how he can see what Chris Rock was saying and you seemingly cannot. If you want that, then by all means, join the party. I don't need to provide statistical evidence by living it anecdotally. This isn't an emotional response to anything, it's just stating facts.
Well look at the other side.
White people are constantly demonized for the stuff they themselves didn't commit on college campuses/social media or even at their workplace (see all those companies pushing for diversity).
That's pretty hard to live as too.
|
On September 27 2017 10:37 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 10:26 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2017 10:11 Toadesstern wrote:On September 27 2017 09:57 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2017 09:54 Toadesstern wrote:On September 27 2017 09:50 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2017 09:48 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2017 09:42 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2017 09:34 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2017 09:26 Mohdoo wrote:
Did anyone else have to say the pledge of allegiance in school? Looking back, that's creepy as hell lol Just remember, they added "Under God" to combat Communism. Good luck getting it removed, because that is an attack on religion. Not to open this can of worms, but America wouldn't be America without God or capitalism, and communism should be opposed, so those seem like three excellent reasons to keep the phrase. Not to open this can of worms, but lets totally open this can of worms. They added it during McCarthyism, so its really fucking not. It was a deeply stupid reason to change the pledge and was added to indoctrinate our children so they wouldn't' be infected by the terrible ideas of communism. Both ineffective and in opposition of the core beliefs of this country, separation of church as state. Finally, the pledge was written to be used by any nation, not just the US, religious or secular. There is literally no part of adding "Under God" to the pledge of allegiance that isn't embarrassing. To open this can but not really open it, I'll point out I didn't say "add" I said "keep." "America wouldn't be the same without God" I can understand. Not that I'd agree or disagree with it but I can understand how that's related to the question at hand is what I'm saying. But how is God related to communism and capitalism in these modern days? Can't you be a capitalistic, not communistic nation without believing in God? I threw God in there as an extra, maybe that's the issue KwarK is having. But given communist's general hatred of Christianity in particular I'd say the association between the two is not entirely unfounded. but God is the only thing that makes sense for me in that case. Wether that's a good thing is for you to decide but what's with other highly secular nations like Sweden, Japan who are clearly capitalistic and have no issues with communism? I could see some argument about Sweden with it being fairly far out left for you guys but while religion might have been a bollwerk against communism in the past... it's clearly not the case anymore. ESPECIALLY not in the US. You guys are so squarly against anything that comes even close to communism Just so I am understanding you correctly, you are mainly saying that there is no reason for it, as a statement against communism? While we are not in the middle of a Red Scare, admittedly , I'd say the reminder itself is useful. Even if we explained why it was added, without the commentary. I think it has actual value outside of its anti-Red sentiment, but in the context of my first post I'd say that's only part of it. Kind of? I'm personally of the opinion that it's not "neutral" if not needed though. You have thousands of people who don't believe in god in the US without turning to communism while being fine guys. You're basicly saying, if I understand you correctly, that as a reminder it's neutral at worst, and something useful at best. Neither do I think it's completly harmless if not needed nor do I think it would be particularly useful in combating communism if that was needed nowadays
Well of course. And that is what I'm saying. I mean, by the same token, there is no reason to remove it.
On September 27 2017 10:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On September 27 2017 09:57 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2017 09:54 Toadesstern wrote:On September 27 2017 09:50 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2017 09:48 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2017 09:42 Introvert wrote:On September 27 2017 09:34 Plansix wrote:On September 27 2017 09:26 Mohdoo wrote:
Did anyone else have to say the pledge of allegiance in school? Looking back, that's creepy as hell lol Just remember, they added "Under God" to combat Communism. Good luck getting it removed, because that is an attack on religion. Not to open this can of worms, but America wouldn't be America without God or capitalism, and communism should be opposed, so those seem like three excellent reasons to keep the phrase. Not to open this can of worms, but lets totally open this can of worms. They added it during McCarthyism, so its really fucking not. It was a deeply stupid reason to change the pledge and was added to indoctrinate our children so they wouldn't' be infected by the terrible ideas of communism. Both ineffective and in opposition of the core beliefs of this country, separation of church as state. Finally, the pledge was written to be used by any nation, not just the US, religious or secular. There is literally no part of adding "Under God" to the pledge of allegiance that isn't embarrassing. To open this can but not really open it, I'll point out I didn't say "add" I said "keep." "America wouldn't be the same without God" I can understand. Not that I'd agree or disagree with it but I can understand how that's related to the question at hand is what I'm saying. But how is God related to communism and capitalism in these modern days? Can't you be a capitalistic, not communistic nation without believing in God? I threw God in there as an extra, maybe that's the issue KwarK is having. But given communist's general hatred of Christianity in particular I'd say the association between the two is not entirely unfounded. Jesus was a revolutionary communist. It's organized religion as a tool of control and exploit the masses that they don't like. You're making the same error as people who think opposition to war is opposition to soldiers.
No.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
