< 1 2 3 4 > 
 
   
 

Where have all the bigots gone?

 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  579
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
13 June 2020 11:07
 

“Black lives matter is everywhere.  Of course black lives matter, but the messaging of this movement around the reality of police violence is wrong, and it’s creating a public hysteria.”  Sam Harris

“Plausible deniability by closet racists will dismiss the evidence as an exception and declare blacks over-reacting.”

And what of the blacks who claim the same thing as Sam Harris?  Are they closet racists?  Are they under-reacting?  Should we believe claims that are anywhere in the ballpark of “for every one recorded there’s 100 that go unnoticed”.  Are these people being killed and nobody notices?  Because that would be very difficult.  So we can say that 1,000 FOIS is a valid number (collected by the Washington Post).  Well only 250 are black.  So is every black shooting a racist attack perpetrated by a white cop?
Should we believe these claims at all?  Why aren’t the 2x more whites killed by police every year being shown?  They were all perfectly justified?  There are no racist black cops?  Zero? 

 

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  8230
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
13 June 2020 11:34
 
Skipshot - 13 June 2020 10:53 AM
icehorse - 13 June 2020 10:32 AM

skip:

Black people are now forcing white people to have a reckoning with themselves, and white people don’t like it.

Police brutality is a small problem
Racism is a significant problem
Wealth and income inequality are HUGE problems.

I know it’s not PC to say it, but these protestors are doing it wrong. Tackling police brutality is a “rearranging deck chairs on the titanic” activity in 2020.

Yeah, we know.  But let’s fix the easiest one first.  It also happens to be the most dangerous one, too.

There is some merit to fixing the easiest one first. It’s arguable that it’s the most dangerous, but we can probably leave that question for the moment.

So perhaps fixing police brutality could be the launching pad we need to tackle what I think the biggest threats to society are: oligarchs then climate change. I put oligarchs first because they block our efforts to curb climate change.

So police brutality, racism, misogyny, even COVID, the oligarchs are loving all of them.

 
 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  10273
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
14 June 2020 10:59
 
DEGENERATEON - 13 June 2020 11:07 AM

“Black lives matter is everywhere.  Of course black lives matter, but the messaging of this movement around the reality of police violence is wrong, and it’s creating a public hysteria.”  Sam Harris

“Plausible deniability by closet racists will dismiss the evidence as an exception and declare blacks over-reacting.”

And what of the blacks who claim the same thing as Sam Harris?  Are they closet racists?  Are they under-reacting?  Should we believe claims that are anywhere in the ballpark of “for every one recorded there’s 100 that go unnoticed”.  Are these people being killed and nobody notices?  Because that would be very difficult.  So we can say that 1,000 FOIS is a valid number (collected by the Washington Post).  Well only 250 are black.  So is every black shooting a racist attack perpetrated by a white cop?
Should we believe these claims at all?  Why aren’t the 2x more whites killed by police every year being shown?  They were all perfectly justified?  There are no racist black cops?  Zero? 

 

And there is the bullshit.  Telling protesters they are wrong, recrimination, and deflection.  You are what the protests are about, and you don’t like it.  Tough titty.  Learn to listen and self-reflect.  If not, then the least the protesters are asking is to be left alone.  Why is that a problem for you?

 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  579
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
14 June 2020 13:25
 

“You are what the protests are about”
Nope.  Everyone knows what the protests are about.  Deflection?  Care to explain your deflection from what the protests are about? 
Leave the protesters alone?  As in - don’t criticize what they are protesting?  Keep my mouth shut?  Nope.
You don’t like what I and others are saying - tough titty.  If you want to ignore what is obviously delusional (aka the core of the protests), then so be it.  But I’m not going to ignore it. 

 
Skipshot
 
Avatar
 
 
Skipshot
Total Posts:  10273
Joined  20-10-2006
 
 
 
14 June 2020 15:29
 
DEGENERATEON - 14 June 2020 01:25 PM

“You are what the protests are about”
Nope.  Everyone knows what the protests are about.  Deflection?  Care to explain your deflection from what the protests are about? 
Leave the protesters alone?  As in - don’t criticize what they are protesting?  Keep my mouth shut?  Nope.
You don’t like what I and others are saying - tough titty.  If you want to ignore what is obviously delusional (aka the core of the protests), then so be it.  But I’m not going to ignore it.

Protesters: Leave us alone.
DEGENERATION:  No.

[ Edited: 15 June 2020 13:52 by Skipshot]
 
DEGENERATEON
 
Avatar
 
 
DEGENERATEON
Total Posts:  579
Joined  14-09-2017
 
 
 
14 June 2020 16:44
 

Religious folk to Christopher Hitchens:  “Why don’t you just leave us alone?  Why don’t you just stay home?”
Christopher Hitchens:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqK4TM97ZCE

Anti-racism and the delusional thoughts on murder and crime in the US are the new illusion.  The new evil that needs to be squashed.  I do enjoy fighting against this ultimate wickedness and ultimate stupidity.

 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  8230
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
14 June 2020 17:54
 
Skipshot - 14 June 2020 03:29 PM
DEGENERATEON - 14 June 2020 01:25 PM

“You are what the protests are about”
Nope.  Everyone knows what the protests are about.  Deflection?  Care to explain your deflection from what the protests are about? 
Leave the protesters alone?  As in - don’t criticize what they are protesting?  Keep my mouth shut?  Nope.
You don’t like what I and others are saying - tough titty.  If you want to ignore what is obviously delusional (aka the core of the protests), then so be it.  But I’m not going to ignore it.

Protesters: Leave is alone.
DEGENERATION:  No.

There is something quite unfalsifiable (and a bit religious / zealot), in this flavor of identity politics.

“You simply cannot know how it is for us ‘because privilege’, and you are not allowed to have an opinion.”

 
 
no_profundia
 
Avatar
 
 
no_profundia
Total Posts:  645
Joined  14-07-2016
 
 
 
20 June 2020 12:36
 
icehorse - 14 June 2020 05:54 PM
Skipshot - 14 June 2020 03:29 PM
DEGENERATEON - 14 June 2020 01:25 PM

“You are what the protests are about”
Nope.  Everyone knows what the protests are about.  Deflection?  Care to explain your deflection from what the protests are about? 
Leave the protesters alone?  As in - don’t criticize what they are protesting?  Keep my mouth shut?  Nope.
You don’t like what I and others are saying - tough titty.  If you want to ignore what is obviously delusional (aka the core of the protests), then so be it.  But I’m not going to ignore it.

Protesters: Leave is alone.
DEGENERATION:  No.

There is something quite unfalsifiable (and a bit religious / zealot), in this flavor of identity politics.

“You simply cannot know how it is for us ‘because privilege’, and you are not allowed to have an opinion.”

I don’t think talking about “falsifiable” here is super helpful. Factual claims are “falsifiable” or “unfalsifiable” but preferences and desires are not.

The protesters are unhappy with the way the police operate as an institution, they want to see reforms, and as citizens they have just as much right as anyone else to have some say regarding how the institutions they live under operate. If I say “I am unhappy with the way the police operate as an institution and I want it changed” that is not “falsifiable”.

It is possible that some of the factual claims people adduce when explaining why they are unhappy with the way an institution operates are falsifiable but I don’t think people’s dissatisfaction can be simply reduced to those factual claims. I think the dissatisfaction is deeper than the reasons given for it in lots (most?) cases.

And I think dismissing someone’s concerns, preferences and desires as “delusional” is more than just “having an opinion.”

 
 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  8230
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
20 June 2020 17:56
 
no_profundia - 20 June 2020 12:36 PM
icehorse - 14 June 2020 05:54 PM
Skipshot - 14 June 2020 03:29 PM
DEGENERATEON - 14 June 2020 01:25 PM

“You are what the protests are about”
Nope.  Everyone knows what the protests are about.  Deflection?  Care to explain your deflection from what the protests are about? 
Leave the protesters alone?  As in - don’t criticize what they are protesting?  Keep my mouth shut?  Nope.
You don’t like what I and others are saying - tough titty.  If you want to ignore what is obviously delusional (aka the core of the protests), then so be it.  But I’m not going to ignore it.

Protesters: Leave is alone.
DEGENERATION:  No.

There is something quite unfalsifiable (and a bit religious / zealot), in this flavor of identity politics.

“You simply cannot know how it is for us ‘because privilege’, and you are not allowed to have an opinion.”

I don’t think talking about “falsifiable” here is super helpful. Factual claims are “falsifiable” or “unfalsifiable” but preferences and desires are not.

The protesters are unhappy with the way the police operate as an institution, they want to see reforms, and as citizens they have just as much right as anyone else to have some say regarding how the institutions they live under operate. If I say “I am unhappy with the way the police operate as an institution and I want it changed” that is not “falsifiable”.

It is possible that some of the factual claims people adduce when explaining why they are unhappy with the way an institution operates are falsifiable but I don’t think people’s dissatisfaction can be simply reduced to those factual claims. I think the dissatisfaction is deeper than the reasons given for it in lots (most?) cases.

And I think dismissing someone’s concerns, preferences and desires as “delusional” is more than just “having an opinion.”

The PC / intersectional / SJ warriors claim that - for example - a white man cannot have a valid opinion concerning these protests.

I’m not sure who you’re referring to with your reference to “delusional”?

 
 
no_profundia
 
Avatar
 
 
no_profundia
Total Posts:  645
Joined  14-07-2016
 
 
 
20 June 2020 23:29
 

The PC / intersectional / SJ warriors claim that - for example - a white man cannot have a valid opinion concerning these protests.

I think there are three possible things going on here that need to be disambiguated:

1. POC who genuinely subscribe to an ideology that espouses the idea that white people are not allowed to have opinions about certain things.
2. Simple interpersonal dynamics that cause misunderstandings.
3. POC feeling like white people are being dismissive of their concerns.

In my experience, which may or may not be representative, the first group is very small. I am not convinced there are a ton of people who genuinely subscribe to an ideology that says white people are not allowed to have opinions.

Most of the time when I see people complaining that “white people are not allowed to have an opinion” it’s on social media, and they are cases where a white person tries to goad a POC into a debate they don’t want to have by telling them they’re wrong about something in an aggressive or condescending way and are told, gently or not so gently, to fuck off, which they interpret as not being allowed to have an opinion.

This is one case where a POC might express uninterest in hearing the opinion of a white person and I think most of these cases could be addressed if people learned when/how to express their opinions in ways that don’t draw such a negative response. In my opinion, the view “white people are not allowed to have an opinion” is sort of an epiphenomenon of an unhealthy interpersonal dynamic and would disappear if that dynamic were healthier (in cases that fit this pattern).

The third scenario where a POC might say they are uninterested in a white person’s opinion is when a POC is expressing their own feelings, desires or preferences. Imagine there is one demographic who feels the police is working just fine for them and another demographic who feels the police in their community is more a repressive force than a protector - they feel they are harrassed while little is done to solve or prevent crimes that they actually care about.

So, they complain and say “Hey, this institution isn’t working for us. We would like to institute some reforms,” and the response from the other demographic is “You are delusional. It works fine for me so why are you getting so hysterical?” I think that is the reality we are in. My understanding is that dissatisfaction towards the police among African-Americans, especially in low-income communities, has been high and close to constant since at least the 70s. They have been angry a long time and they feel nothing has been done.

If you were in that position would you care what the demographic of people that the institution was working for had to say? Would the fact that it was working for them invalidate your own concerns? My original point was about this third-case. Trying to “falsify” someone’s feelings, desires or preferences is inherently dismissive and the wrong approach to political problems.

I’m not sure who you’re referring to with your reference to “delusional”?

From DEGENERATEON’s post that you were quoting: “If you want to ignore what is obviously delusional (aka the core of the protests), then so be it.”

 
 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  8230
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
21 June 2020 08:58
 

no-pro:

I think there are three possible things going on here that need to be disambiguated:

1. POC who genuinely subscribe to an ideology that espouses the idea that white people are not allowed to have opinions about certain things.
2. Simple interpersonal dynamics that cause misunderstandings.
3. POC feeling like white people are being dismissive of their concerns.

IMO, climate change and oligarchy are existential threats to society (and there are probably more). Fighting racism is a valid and extremely important activity, but I would say that racism does not pose an existential threat to society.

The opinion I just offered is often met with anger e.g. “you’re a white guy with white privilege so it’s easy for you to say that”. Or words to that effect. If I zoom out, and put on my best “systems thinking” hat, I think that if ALL of us in the 99% were to join forces to defang the oligarchy, then once that ship was righted, the fight against racism would be far easier to win.

I could be right, I could be wrong. But mine is a considered opinion, and when I’m told that I can’t voice it “because privilege”, it seems to me that we’re just jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.

 
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  5476
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
29 June 2020 08:48
 

Like most any group the taboo disappears when they feel they have a local consensus. I come from a community where expressing racist views wasn’t taboo. At least not behind closed doors. My dad would take me to ‘prayer breakfasts’ where the church elders would discuss business. This was at a public restaurant in broad daylight and racism was traded casually. High school football games were like this. I experienced it at gun shows. In churches. I don’t broad brush these kind of events because that’s part of the root problem but I can’t not acknowledge my experience. Social media, public business review and the rules of public speaking have pulled a rug over racist rhetoric to some degree but I assure there are places where it’s the norm.

 

 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7481
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
29 June 2020 10:26
 
icehorse - 21 June 2020 08:58 AM

no-pro:

I think there are three possible things going on here that need to be disambiguated:

1. POC who genuinely subscribe to an ideology that espouses the idea that white people are not allowed to have opinions about certain things.
2. Simple interpersonal dynamics that cause misunderstandings.
3. POC feeling like white people are being dismissive of their concerns.

IMO, climate change and oligarchy are existential threats to society (and there are probably more). Fighting racism is a valid and extremely important activity, but I would say that racism does not pose an existential threat to society.

The opinion I just offered is often met with anger e.g. “you’re a white guy with white privilege so it’s easy for you to say that”. Or words to that effect. If I zoom out, and put on my best “systems thinking” hat, I think that if ALL of us in the 99% were to join forces to defang the oligarchy, then once that ship was righted, the fight against racism would be far easier to win.

I could be right, I could be wrong. But mine is a considered opinion, and when I’m told that I can’t voice it “because privilege”, it seems to me that we’re just jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire.

And, yet, right here, you voiced it.

 
 
Jefe
 
Avatar
 
 
Jefe
Total Posts:  7481
Joined  15-02-2007
 
 
 
29 June 2020 10:30
 
Brick Bungalow - 29 June 2020 08:48 AM

Like most any group the taboo disappears when they feel they have a local consensus. I come from a community where expressing racist views wasn’t taboo. At least not behind closed doors. My dad would take me to ‘prayer breakfasts’ where the church elders would discuss business. This was at a public restaurant in broad daylight and racism was traded casually. High school football games were like this. I experienced it at gun shows. In churches. I don’t broad brush these kind of events because that’s part of the root problem but I can’t not acknowledge my experience. Social media, public business review and the rules of public speaking have pulled a rug over racist rhetoric to some degree but I assure there are places where it’s the norm.

 

Pretty much.  And if you look into the judicial system in LA, you’ll see continuing institutional racist structures.

 
 
icehorse
 
Avatar
 
 
icehorse
Total Posts:  8230
Joined  22-02-2014
 
 
 
30 June 2020 08:59
 

Jefe:

And, yet, right here, you voiced it.

Do you really not see the difference between this forum and “out in the world”?

 
 
 < 1 2 3 4 >