|
Now that we have a new thread, 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 complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
United States44353 Posts
On July 17 2019 21:39 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 20:42 Gahlo wrote:On July 17 2019 19:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
No really GH, you can't see how "mixed" might be more than just "white" or "black"? Or "non-white" as the case may be? It might not be majority true pertaining of Brazil in particular, but you can't see it in general?
I know you like to put out this image of yourself of seeing everything through the lens of American culture, but not recognising that people may describe themselves as more than just "white" or "black" or "not-white" or "not-black" or "mixed that can be any of those four" is taking it a bit too far. The problem with discussing mixed race people is that nobody walks around with a "Hi, I'm ___ and this is my 23 and Me result" tag. We are viewed as whatever our skin presents us as in public. Obama is Black, but he's also White, but nobody cares about that because he looks Black. Tiger Woods is Black, but he's also Asian, but nobody cares about that because he looks Black. A friend I had in highschool was white, but she was also Black, but nobody cared because she looked white. There becomes a disconnect between what you may identify as racially and what society identifies you as based on how you appear. This gets taken a bit further when discussing things like "whiteness". For some it's shade, for some it's geographical, etc. I was actually refering to that GH doesn't seem to recognise that people who are not or do not identify as "black" or "white" or "black/white" mixed exists. It's mindboggling. Forget indigenous people, there's an entire fucking planet out there.
GH is referring to the social construct of white where the group in power in America define themselves as white and everyone else as not white. It’s not about ethnicities, it’s about hierarchies. White isn’t the name of the skin colour, otherwise fucking gingers would be at the top and nobody wants that. It’s the name of the group. Over time as power has spread we had to invite various browns into the white hierarchy, even though they cook with olive oil instead of honest butter, but now they’re white too. White enough at least, even though their skin and hair is darker than mine.
|
|
|
United States44353 Posts
On July 17 2019 22:07 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 22:06 KwarK wrote:On July 17 2019 21:43 Velr wrote:
The Russian collusion stuff DID NOT lead to nowhere… FFS. It led to the sentencing of Trump’s Campaign Manager and Deputy Campaign Manager, both of whom were actively coordinating with Russian Intelligence, and revealed a widespread campaign of Russian psyops behind Wikileaks, the Killary nonsense, the Podesta nonsense, the Twitter echo chambers, and the fiction of a BLM race war coming. It revealed Russia’s active support of a candidate and that candidates knowing acceptance of the support. But without impeachment people accept Trump’s narrative of exoneration, even though Mueller’s text literally says “does not exonerate”. If they don't impeach it's fair to say he was exonerated by congress/the senate (? realized this is more of a question than statement)
In as much as lynch mobs who weren’t prosecuted in racist towns were exonerated. The conclusion wasn’t that it didn’t happen, it was that they’re okay with it.
|
On July 17 2019 22:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 22:07 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 17 2019 22:06 KwarK wrote:On July 17 2019 21:43 Velr wrote:
The Russian collusion stuff DID NOT lead to nowhere… FFS. It led to the sentencing of Trump’s Campaign Manager and Deputy Campaign Manager, both of whom were actively coordinating with Russian Intelligence, and revealed a widespread campaign of Russian psyops behind Wikileaks, the Killary nonsense, the Podesta nonsense, the Twitter echo chambers, and the fiction of a BLM race war coming. It revealed Russia’s active support of a candidate and that candidates knowing acceptance of the support. But without impeachment people accept Trump’s narrative of exoneration, even though Mueller’s text literally says “does not exonerate”. If they don't impeach it's fair to say he was exonerated by congress/the senate (? realized this is more of a question than statement) In as much as lynch mobs who weren’t prosecuted in racist towns were exonerated.
Well then I guess it's up to who writes the history books at that point eh? No sense in Republicans going around contradicting the history they plan on writing, now is there?
|
|
|
4713 Posts
So from what I've followed, I know that Muller ran an investigation for two years in which time he prosecuted several people, went to through tons of docs and in the end after submitting the report to AG Barr, no collusion was determined.
The report did not completely exhortation Trump, but also did not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt he colluded.
The point is the leftist media ran with the 100% collusion narrative for 2 years, and when no collusion was determined they got burned as the ratings and viewership of CNN, MSNBC etc continue to decline. It, funnily enough even boosted Trumps fake news rant
This guy's argument in the video is flawed because he assumes the moral high ground for the Dems/left and set them out as some kind of truth and fact seekers when in fact they also flat out lie, lie by omission, cherry pick and frame probably just as much as the reps.
Not saying all Dems do this or that the Reps are somehow saints, but both sides have some mud on them and to try and take the moral high ground against Reps like that is just reductive and shortsighted.
Also, I think this identity politics thing is going nowhere and it just serves to divide and breed more hate in people. I think discussions on class (lower, middle, upper) would be more productive, its probably also partially a reason why Trump won. People are tired of political correctness and rightfully so, Trump promised to help the economy, bring back jobs, help the lower and middle classes etc.
If the Dems want to beat Trump they should abandon the identity politics BS and focus more on what the American people really care about.
|
"identity politics/... divide and breed hate" is how the right describes trying to return to when marginalized people were unable or unwilling to express their concerns in ways that don't coddle those that exploit them.
Meaning the right will always label marginalized people demanding their rights as being unreasonable, rushing, divisive, etc... in an effort to keep them marginalized. Therefore preserving their own marginally better position as a result of that marginalization of "others".
|
On July 17 2019 22:30 Destructicon wrote:
So from what I've followed, I know that Muller ran an investigation for two years in which time he prosecuted several people, went to through tons of docs and in the end after submitting the report to AG Barr, no collusion was determined.
The report did not completely exhortation Trump, but also did not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt he colluded.
The point is the leftist media ran with the 100% collusion narrative for 2 years, and when no collusion was determined they got burned as the ratings and viewership of CNN, MSNBC etc continue to decline. It, funnily enough even boosted Trumps fake news rant
This guy's argument in the video is flawed because he assumes the moral high ground for the Dems/left and set them out as some kind of truth and fact seekers when in fact they also flat out lie, lie by omission, cherry pick and frame probably just as much as the reps.
Not saying all Dems do this or that the Reps are somehow saints, but both sides have some mud on them and to try and take the moral high ground against Reps like that is just reductive and shortsighted.
Also, I think this identity politics thing is going nowhere and it just serves to divide and breed more hate in people. I think discussions on class (lower, middle, upper) would be more productive, its probably also partially a reason why Trump won. People are tired of political correctness and rightfully so, Trump promised to help the economy, bring back jobs, help the lower and middle classes etc.
If the Dems want to beat Trump they should abandon the identity politics BS and focus more on what the American people really care about.
I love the term identity politics and political correctness.
1) Trump is ALL ABOUT identity politics. That is pretty much all he does. He is going for white/conservative identity
2) I love to replace the words 'political correctness' with the words 'stop being an asshole'. It's the same thing but makes reading things sooo much more fun
People are tired of 'stop being and asshole' and rightfully so
3) Isn't CNN making BANK online? I would have to look into it but I remember seeing that most of their money comes from their online presence now adays and viewership ratings being down doesn't actually hurt them (as a 30 year old, I don't know anyone my age who has cable. Anecdotal evidence is the best kind but take it for what you will )
|
United States44353 Posts
White pride is dumb because we don’t need to celebrate whiteness when we can just do our cultural things. I’m British which means I get to burn an effigy of Guy Fawkes, enjoy strong cheese, have a real preference when it comes to beer, and make everyone speak my language. That’d be what would be on a Brit pride parade. Celebrating whiteness wouldn’t mean anything to me because the parade float would just be me pissing on a manacled black guy and that doesn’t capture who I am.
|
4713 Posts
On July 17 2019 22:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
"identity politics/... divide and breed hate" is how the right describes trying to return to when marginalized people were unable or unwilling to express their concerns in ways that don't coddle those that exploit them.
Meaning the right will always label marginalized people demanding their rights as being unreasonable, rushing, divisive, etc... in an effort to keep them marginalized. Therefore preserving their own marginally better position as a result of that marginalization of "others".
How does that work exactly, I thought all people in the US, barring the illegal immigrants, have equal rights. Like anywhere you go you are not allowed to discriminate based off ethnicity, sex, religion etc.
Is the right denying US citizens those rights based off those same features you are not allowed to discriminate against?
|
United States44353 Posts
On July 17 2019 22:30 Destructicon wrote:
So from what I've followed, I know that Muller ran an investigation for two years in which time he prosecuted several people, went to through tons of docs and in the end after submitting the report to AG Barr, no collusion was determined.
The report did not completely exhortation Trump, but also did not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt he colluded.
The point is the leftist media ran with the 100% collusion narrative for 2 years, and when no collusion was determined they got burned as the ratings and viewership of CNN, MSNBC etc continue to decline. It, funnily enough even boosted Trumps fake news rant
This guy's argument in the video is flawed because he assumes the moral high ground for the Dems/left and set them out as some kind of truth and fact seekers when in fact they also flat out lie, lie by omission, cherry pick and frame probably just as much as the reps.
Not saying all Dems do this or that the Reps are somehow saints, but both sides have some mud on them and to try and take the moral high ground against Reps like that is just reductive and shortsighted.
Also, I think this identity politics thing is going nowhere and it just serves to divide and breed more hate in people. I think discussions on class (lower, middle, upper) would be more productive, its probably also partially a reason why Trump won. People are tired of political correctness and rightfully so, Trump promised to help the economy, bring back jobs, help the lower and middle classes etc.
If the Dems want to beat Trump they should abandon the identity politics BS and focus more on what the American people really care about.
Identity politics is what the right call attempts for marginalized group to join the majority. The right creates a group called gays and says they should be second class citizens. The group, which they created through the legal distinction, then collectively calls for an end of this bullshit. The right then labels that identity politics.
The reason non-Christians, gays, non-whites, people not born here, and so forth all have their own identities is because they have been excluded from the default. They’re not asking for special treatment, they’re asking for regular treatment. They’re asking for politics to stop treating them as a special outsider group and get on with their lives.
If the right want an end to black people getting together to talk about black issues the way to end that is to address the black issues. But if they’re going to prop up a system that creates ongoing issues for black people then they’re the ones leading to that distinction. They create the identity. It’s a construct. In a society that wasn’t at all homophobic there would be no more gay identity politics than there is left handed identity politics. Or, to imagine the inverse, if the government insisted that everyone had to use their right hand to write we’d quickly gain a left handed group with their own identity politics.
The whole thing is nonsense. You might as well just punch people in the face and then bitch about how they’re always talking about getting punched in the face.
|
United States44353 Posts
On July 17 2019 22:51 Destructicon wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 22:33 GreenHorizons wrote:
"identity politics/... divide and breed hate" is how the right describes trying to return to when marginalized people were unable or unwilling to express their concerns in ways that don't coddle those that exploit them.
Meaning the right will always label marginalized people demanding their rights as being unreasonable, rushing, divisive, etc... in an effort to keep them marginalized. Therefore preserving their own marginally better position as a result of that marginalization of "others". How does that work exactly, I thought all people in the US, barring the illegal immigrants, have equal rights. Like anywhere you go you are not allowed to discriminate based off ethnicity, sex, religion etc.
Since when?
|
United Kingdom10006 Posts
On July 17 2019 22:30 Destructicon wrote:
So from what I've followed, I know that Muller ran an investigation for two years in which time he prosecuted several people, went to through tons of docs and in the end after submitting the report to AG Barr, no collusion was determined.
The report did not completely exhortation Trump, but also did not prove beyond a shadow of a doubt he colluded.
The point is the leftist media ran with the 100% collusion narrative for 2 years, and when no collusion was determined they got burned as the ratings and viewership of CNN, MSNBC etc continue to decline. It, funnily enough even boosted Trumps fake news rant
This guy's argument in the video is flawed because he assumes the moral high ground for the Dems/left and set them out as some kind of truth and fact seekers when in fact they also flat out lie, lie by omission, cherry pick and frame probably just as much as the reps.
Not saying all Dems do this or that the Reps are somehow saints, but both sides have some mud on them and to try and take the moral high ground against Reps like that is just reductive and shortsighted.
Also, I think this identity politics thing is going nowhere and it just serves to divide and breed more hate in people. I think discussions on class (lower, middle, upper) would be more productive, its probably also partially a reason why Trump won. People are tired of political correctness and rightfully so, Trump promised to help the economy, bring back jobs, help the lower and middle classes etc.
If the Dems want to beat Trump they should abandon the identity politics BS and focus more on what the American people really care about.
Trump got elected on a platform that was 99% identity politics because it was so popular with his right wing voters.
|
|
|
United States44353 Posts
On July 17 2019 23:25 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 22:39 KwarK wrote:
White pride is dumb because we don’t need to celebrate whiteness when we can just do our cultural things. I’m British which means I get to burn an effigy of Guy Fawkes, enjoy strong cheese, have a real preference when it comes to beer, and make everyone speak my language. That’d be what would be on a Brit pride parade. Celebrating whiteness wouldn’t mean anything to me because the parade float would just be me pissing on a manacled black guy and that doesn’t capture who I am. Is this in response to what I posted? It does not appear your read.
Only in as much as you saying white pride triggered me to spew my thoughts over the topic. Not a response to you.
|
On July 17 2019 22:09 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 21:39 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On July 17 2019 20:42 Gahlo wrote:On July 17 2019 19:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
No really GH, you can't see how "mixed" might be more than just "white" or "black"? Or "non-white" as the case may be? It might not be majority true pertaining of Brazil in particular, but you can't see it in general?
I know you like to put out this image of yourself of seeing everything through the lens of American culture, but not recognising that people may describe themselves as more than just "white" or "black" or "not-white" or "not-black" or "mixed that can be any of those four" is taking it a bit too far. The problem with discussing mixed race people is that nobody walks around with a "Hi, I'm ___ and this is my 23 and Me result" tag. We are viewed as whatever our skin presents us as in public. Obama is Black, but he's also White, but nobody cares about that because he looks Black. Tiger Woods is Black, but he's also Asian, but nobody cares about that because he looks Black. A friend I had in highschool was white, but she was also Black, but nobody cared because she looked white. There becomes a disconnect between what you may identify as racially and what society identifies you as based on how you appear. This gets taken a bit further when discussing things like "whiteness". For some it's shade, for some it's geographical, etc. I was actually refering to that GH doesn't seem to recognise that people who are not or do not identify as "black" or "white" or "black/white" mixed exists. It's mindboggling. Forget indigenous people, there's an entire fucking planet out there. GH is referring to the social construct of white where the group in power in America define themselves as white and everyone else as not white. It’s not about ethnicities, it’s about hierarchies. White isn’t the name of the skin colour, otherwise fucking gingers would be at the top and nobody wants that. It’s the name of the group. Over time as power has spread we had to invite various browns into the white hierarchy, even though they cook with olive oil instead of honest butter, but now they’re white too. White enough at least, even though their skin and hair is darker than mine.
The original question I asked was this:On July 17 2019 18:52 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Are you familiar with that there is more than "white" and "black" ? I wasn't asking about American social constructs. So either GH isn't, or he doesn't read.
But whilst you are here, how do you place the Greeks and the Russians and the Caucasus region in the Tier of whiteness? :D
|
|
|
White is not a culture JimmiC.
I am of British culture and practice their cultural traits in a majority British culture. I have wonky yellow teeth and drink tea and I speak in a funny British accent. Somehow I have managed to avoid being drawn to the large loud man telling them they are ok and spews hate.
And reading the link is just awful. It's just dressed up racism repackaged. "White interest" whose interest is for a slower rate of change to absorb those of mixed races. wtf.
|
United States44353 Posts
On July 17 2019 23:41 Dangermousecatdog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 22:09 KwarK wrote:On July 17 2019 21:39 Dangermousecatdog wrote:On July 17 2019 20:42 Gahlo wrote:On July 17 2019 19:16 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
No really GH, you can't see how "mixed" might be more than just "white" or "black"? Or "non-white" as the case may be? It might not be majority true pertaining of Brazil in particular, but you can't see it in general?
I know you like to put out this image of yourself of seeing everything through the lens of American culture, but not recognising that people may describe themselves as more than just "white" or "black" or "not-white" or "not-black" or "mixed that can be any of those four" is taking it a bit too far. The problem with discussing mixed race people is that nobody walks around with a "Hi, I'm ___ and this is my 23 and Me result" tag. We are viewed as whatever our skin presents us as in public. Obama is Black, but he's also White, but nobody cares about that because he looks Black. Tiger Woods is Black, but he's also Asian, but nobody cares about that because he looks Black. A friend I had in highschool was white, but she was also Black, but nobody cared because she looked white. There becomes a disconnect between what you may identify as racially and what society identifies you as based on how you appear. This gets taken a bit further when discussing things like "whiteness". For some it's shade, for some it's geographical, etc. I was actually refering to that GH doesn't seem to recognise that people who are not or do not identify as "black" or "white" or "black/white" mixed exists. It's mindboggling. Forget indigenous people, there's an entire fucking planet out there. GH is referring to the social construct of white where the group in power in America define themselves as white and everyone else as not white. It’s not about ethnicities, it’s about hierarchies. White isn’t the name of the skin colour, otherwise fucking gingers would be at the top and nobody wants that. It’s the name of the group. Over time as power has spread we had to invite various browns into the white hierarchy, even though they cook with olive oil instead of honest butter, but now they’re white too. White enough at least, even though their skin and hair is darker than mine. The original question I asked was this: Show nested quote +On July 17 2019 18:52 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Are you familiar with that there is more than "white" and "black" ? I wasn't asking about American social constructs. So either GH isn't, or he doesn't read. But whilst you are here, how do you place the Greeks and the Russians and the Caucasus region in the Tier of whiteness? :D
Greeks don’t eat proper food and use the wrong alphabet. They’re basically Middle Eastern. Smell like incense and buggery. Little better than Coptics. Russians depend if they’re from the German part or the Slavic part. Still wrong alphabet though. Right food, probably a rank above Greeks but that Orthodox stuff needs to stay in the motherland. Indigenous steppe Russians are obviously just indigenous, all colonized people are the same tier. Caucasus is a mess due to being on the crossroads of Eurasia. Get your Dulux colour chart and make your best guess.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
