| Forum Index > General Forum |
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 | ||
|
Uldridge
Belgium4887 Posts
It's just that GH is making distinctions based on skin color instead of exploitative past. Where do we make the distinction between individuals and groups? Is a 3rd generation immigrant considered White, or is that impossible? There are all these subdivisions we need to make in order to untangle this extremely complex topic and I'm not fond of just calling it "whiteness". | ||
Liquid`Drone
Norway28691 Posts
On January 25 2023 18:11 Uldridge wrote: I'm not arguing against our exploitative past or the fact that we put ourselves ahead of the exploited area. I am recognizing that. It's just that GH is making distinctions based on skin color instead of exploitative past. Where do we make the distinction between individuals and groups? Is a 3rd generation immigrant considered White, or is that impossible? There are all these subdivisions we need to make in order to untangle this extremely complex topic and I'm not fond of just calling it "whiteness". Here, there's definitely a difference between the US and Europe (and Africa, for that matter). I remember reading a French-Senegalese woman who described how, when traveling from the US through France to Senegal, she changed ethnicity twice. In the US, she was considered black, in France, she was considered mixed race, and in Senegal, she was considered white. Furthermore, while 'white' and 'black' will normally be possible to separate, and if someone is both, it'll normally be possible to see that as well, those aren't the only two ethnic groups. The difference between 'white' and 'arab' is more fictitious/depending on country of origin. Appearance wise, there's not much separating your average Iberian from your average Arab (good historical reasons for this), but one is considered white while the other is not. This, however, ties in with how 'white' is largely synonymous with 'of European descent', again, signifying how it's a social construct. In Norway, our statistical database considers someone 'partially immigrant' until the 5th generation. Whether they'd qualify as white would presumably depend on just how they look, I guess. Like Spanish people are considered white, and there are lots of Norwegians with some Spanish heritage (plenty intermingling in our costal areas going hundreds of years back). While a second generation Iranian-Norwegian will look as pale as any, but not be considered entirely 'white'. Honestly I don't think it's possible to achieve a 'global consensus' in this regard. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23335 Posts
On January 25 2023 18:11 Uldridge wrote: I'm not arguing against our exploitative past or the fact that we put ourselves ahead of the exploited area. I am recognizing that. It's just that GH is making distinctions based on skin color instead of exploitative past. Where do we make the distinction between individuals and groups? Is a 3rd generation immigrant considered White, or is that impossible? There are all these subdivisions we need to make in order to untangle this extremely complex topic and I'm not fond of just calling it "whiteness". Whiteness is a bit more complicated than simply skin color. I once put it this way: Beyond the social construction (based in fiction/propaganda) designed to exploit groups of people as "non-white" (and it's fallout) there's no such thing as "whiteness" or being "white". Except as it exists as defined by "white" people, which is an amorphous group in perpetuity. If that's not helpful than perhaps this post from Kwark would be? On July 17 2019 21:05 KwarK wrote: Basically the further you get from either Anglo Saxon (although Celtic and Nordic are also something we’ll probably not hold against you because some people are born Welsh and they can’t help that) or Protestant the less white you are. Tier 1 would be Protestant Northern Europe Tier 2 is Catholic Northern Europe 3 would be Slavic Europe, assuming not too Slavic, anywhere the Germans crusaded to basically 4 would be Mediterranean, these guys generally worship something they call Dios 5 would be white Middle Eastern due to the multiple diasporas there, these guys generally worship something they call Allah When Wegandi says that Spain is in Europe he is referring to geography, it was a Moorish colony until 500 years ago. They may be European but if I stood next to a Spaniard and asked you to point out the white guy then I’m winning that 11 times out of 10. And ultimately that’s what counts. White isn’t about light skin, it’s about differentiation. You may have light skin but if mine is lighter then I can claim that mine is real white and yours is brown. None of us have skin that is the same colour as paper but that’s not what it’s about, it’s about hierarchy. You can tell that Saxons and Iberians are two different peoples and therefore there is a ranking because it’s not in the interests of the dominant group to not make that distinction. If Celts, and not Anglo Saxons, had set up the system then I might not have been on the top because you can distinguish between the two. But Celts got grandfathered in to the Anglo Saxon white system. It’s not about light skin, it’s about power. Anglo Saxons don’t have the whitest skin but they do have the most power. | ||
|
BlackJack
United States10574 Posts
| ||
|
PoulsenB
Poland7711 Posts
On January 27 2023 19:28 BlackJack wrote: I suspect the big story in the US the next few days is going come with the release of the video footage of the murder of Tyre Nichols later today. He was severeley beaten and killed during a traffic stop by 5 presumably white supremacist police officers, all of whom have been charged with 2nd degree murder. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhLTokmWk7I All 5 officers involved in this case are black. Kinda doubt they are white supremacists. | ||
|
Liquid`Drone
Norway28691 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11565 Posts
Police in the US kill a lot of black men. That is a big problem. It is that simple. They also kill way too many other people. That is also a problem. And yet the discussion always gets distracted and confused by weird side-points. | ||
|
ZerOCoolSC2
9004 Posts
On January 27 2023 21:26 Simberto wrote: I find it excessively weird how this discussion is being held. Police in the US kill a lot of black men. That is a big problem. It is that simple. They also kill way too many other people. That is also a problem. And yet the discussion always gets distracted and confused by weird side-points. I find it best to watch the words they use and when they choose to use them. BJ posted what he posted for a reason. You can see what he thinks quite easily and it makes it easy to not engage him because it is fruitless. Most of his posts are. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States43020 Posts
On January 27 2023 20:22 PoulsenB wrote: All 5 officers involved in this case are black. Kinda doubt they are white supremacists. This problem was solved years ago. By wearing the badge they’re the chosen whites | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10774 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18067 Posts
On January 28 2023 00:13 Velr wrote: But i'm happy to say they can't be racist. I haven't a clue whether they are or aren't, but stating categorically that they can't be is obviously wrong. They can be black and still discriminate against other blacks based on skin color. Especially as police officers in the US, it seems quite likely they've been indoctrinated that black people are more likely to be criminal and more likely to be dangerous, so be extra violent "in self-defense" when you see black people in "suspicious" circumstances. And I don't know that the police officers' own skin color matters much in that narrative. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15722 Posts
The long story short is that the rail companies that forced Biden to fight the strikes have profited an enormous amount of money. Many times more than the money needed to hire more staff to allow workers to take time off. I still honestly do not understand why they did not strike anyway. The idea that they will actually be punished or fired or whatever is totally just not possible. I wish there was some kinda gofundme kind of effort to reinforce the idea that they will be fine even if they were fired. But if the whole idea is "Our country can not function unless you are slaves, so you have to be slaves", then that should mean replacing or firing them is not possible. Its very surprising to me that the unions themselves did not strike anyway. Every indication is that they hold all the cards. I don't get it. I'm probably missing something. What am I missing? Why did they not just strike anyway? I really feel like these workers hold all the cards. | ||
|
NewSunshine
United States5938 Posts
| ||
|
killa_robot
Canada1884 Posts
On January 28 2023 02:59 Mohdoo wrote: https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/24/business/union-pacific-railroad-earnings/index.html The long story short is that the rail companies that forced Biden to fight the strikes have profited an enormous amount of money. Many times more than the money needed to hire more staff to allow workers to take time off. I still honestly do not understand why they did not strike anyway. The idea that they will actually be punished or fired or whatever is totally just not possible. I wish there was some kinda gofundme kind of effort to reinforce the idea that they will be fine even if they were fired. But if the whole idea is "Our country can not function unless you are slaves, so you have to be slaves", then that should mean replacing or firing them is not possible. Its very surprising to me that the unions themselves did not strike anyway. Every indication is that they hold all the cards. I don't get it. I'm probably missing something. What am I missing? Why did they not just strike anyway? I really feel like these workers hold all the cards. My understanding was that the group that wanted to strike was a subset of the employees as a whole, not all of them. You CAN bring a company to its knees by striking, even against the will of the government, but everyone needs to be on board for it, and in this case I believe that wasn't the situation. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23335 Posts
On January 28 2023 02:22 NewSunshine wrote: For what it's worth, internalized discrimination is absolutely a thing. Furthermore, whether or not those officers were racist on a personal level, as Kwark points out they're furthering the cause of the White Supremacist cops by doing their work for them. The only difference here that I think is noteworthy is that it's a case of police officers killing a black man and actually being charged for murder. Guess they didn't fight that one too hard since the officers are black too. 6 birds, 1 stone. I see it as an example of why Democrats focus on making police look like the people they are harassing, abusing, torturing, murdering, etc. is woefully inadequate. As an institution they are rotten to the core and have to be abolished. An entirely new approach to reducing aberrant behavior must be implemented. Anything less is complacency with the horrors of the status quo at best. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
StasisField
United States1086 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23335 Posts
On January 28 2023 05:45 StasisField wrote: I would also like to hear how excelerationism will lead to a civil war that improves everyone's lives and doesn't completely fuck things up for everyone for several decades. I've yet to hear an argument from an excelerationist that doesn't make them sound as delusional as your everyday libertarian. I'm certainly no accelerationist, so you won't get it from me if that's what you're expecting. | ||
| ||
Maestros of the Game
Offline Playoffs - Top 4
Serral vs ReynorLIVE!
Clem vs TBD
ComeBackTV
 4342RotterdaM2546
PiGStarcraft1116
IndyStarCraft
 440CosmosSc2
 263SteadfastSC246
Rex160
EnkiAlexander
 1193DClanTV
 107IntoTheiNu
 43[ Submit Event ] |
|
StarCraft 2 RotterdaM StarCraft: Brood War 2546PiGStarcraft1116 IndyStarCraft 440CosmosSc2  263SteadfastSC  246Rex 160UpATreeSC 86MindelVK 27Calm Counter-Strike 4640Rain  2559ZZZero.O 200ggaemo 104Hyun 63Rock 47JYJ36 Sacsri 33Killer 21sas.Sziky 21[ Show more ] Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games gofns22963 tarik_tv22032 qojqva1996 Grubby1080 B2W.Neo485 KnowMe132 QueenE95 ArmadaUGS81 Trikslyr57 NeuroSwarm37 fpsfer 1 |
|
Replay Cast
BSL Team Wars
Team Bonyth vs Team Sziky
BSL
Artosis vs Sziky
Afreeca Starleague
Soma vs BeSt
Wardi Open
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Bisu vs Larva
LiuLi Cup
OSC
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
