Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Xmo1, Aug 10, 2018.
It goes without saying....................
Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.
Does it though? I mean, the thread was started to complain about folks in a visible position (NFL players) protesting what they perceive as social injustice (police violence, etc) during Football and the National Anthem.
Toad's first comment in this thread was to claim that the system is not racist, and paint non-whites as "killing their children, neighbors, and random strangers", and that making such claims is not racist and it is, in fact, "the left" being racist by choosing "to ignore facts and skew statistics". He then proceeds to mock and insult various posters in the thread, going so far as to whinge about the very statistics he asked for and claiming they are opinions, etc...
He then goes to make the very defense he claims he isn't - the "I can't be racist because I have black friends" claim - especially with the "went to DC, where we learned what real racism looked like." - apparently, the KKK aren't "real racists" in his opinion. Yet, he continues to spew white supremacist talking points word for word, ignores the effects of Jim Crow era laws, and generally makes a racist fool of himself.
So, I ask again - how is he claiming to be a "responsible gun owner" even remotely related to the topic of the thread? How is it relevant that he purports to be anti-racist because he had "a black man" as his "best man" at his "second wedding", "his family was and is actively anti-racist", and that his family was targeted by other racists, when he himself promotes racist talking points?
How is any of that relevant to the protests going on at the NFL? It sounds like a lot of virtue-signalling to me; poorly done, mind, but virtue-signalling none the less.
Yep. Your family was not racist.
You are apparently not racist because you have black, Muslim and Jewish friends..
Somebody feels their image of being racially tolerant is under threat, so they overestimate how much previous behavior—having a beer with a Black guy, for example—is a sign of their tolerance. But highlighting this behavior has the opposite of the intended effect because people see the overestimation of the behavior’s importance as a sign of prejudice.
"I'm not racist. I have black friends"
Aside from the lazy logic of such a statement, this phrase describes the phenomenon wherein people use black people as accessories and distractions.
Having a black friend, or any relationship with a person of color, doesn't mean your everyday habits and politics are exempt from having racist implications. For proof, look no further than Donald Sterling, who told his girlfriend, a person of color, to stop bringing black people with her to basketball games because he feels blacks are inferior.
Have you ever wondered how they (your father, etc) would feel at the thought of you repeating white supremacist tropes about black people decades later?
I mean, the irony of your righteous anger and this:
Isn't lost on you, is it?
You are bothered for being called a racist for literally spouting racist white supremacist ideology as 'fact' in this thread and then you come out with that?
sculptor said: ↑
It goes without saying....................
You didn't really expect me to want to get in the middle of this:
That's shockingly dumb.
In other words - you had nothing to contribute beyond acting like a puerile troll. Is that a fair assessment?
This is one of those instances where I wish you guys--moderators, generally--could compel someone to elaborate upon their statements. I really want to understand the thought processes which lead a person to conclude that by "focusing upon race, (one) becomes racist," for instance.
not just white folk
Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, Charles Barkley and some others have made similar comments
None of them have said anything remotely like that. That is a gross misrepresentation of what they said. Also I’m not 100% sure but I believe Barkley repudiated a lot of his former statements on race that leaned in the direction you support.
And Bill Cosby. And what's his name on the Supreme Court. And Trump's black guy - there's always one around, proving that Trump is not racist.
And Spike Lee, for that matter. Oprah. Long list.
They are not really similar, though, are they - if you actually read them, in context. In a superficial sense, many black people do criticize some other black people for irresponsibility etc. Some of that will sound like some other criticism of black people, BLM say, by racist whites, of course - especially from racist blacks, a category as familiar as the self-hating Jew of Nazi fame, of course, but also from others.
It isn't. It isn't similar.
They aren't, if you look at them, comments similar in the crucial ways. They aren't, for example, weirdly bullshit misreadings of simple statistical fact concealing an otherwise obvious reality of racist police behavior, such as we saw posted on this thread by resident racism apologists.
The truth is any insinuation of racism makes people uncomfortable. But if you grew up in a racist society, you are racist. It takes education and effort to overcome learned bias. And it takes unequal action to fix a problem of inequality.
You are racist. That's the standard label for people who promulgate standard, stereotypical, overtly racist bullshit straight from wingnut media as if it were respectable adult assessments and reality based opinions, as you have on this forum. Consistently.
It is also the standard label for any adult American, raised in America, who publicly declares themselves oblivious to their own inevitable and culturally inculcated racism - which is what the claim "I am not a racist", by any American over the age of reason, amounts to.
You are a gun nut, on the larger societal scale (you know people nuttier than you, obsessed with guns as fetish objects, but that is not the relevant context). That's a common and fairly reasonable term for people who think Massachusetts's minimal regulatory setup regarding a subset of behaviors with a subset of firearms - not shotguns, hunting weapons, etc - was "prohibitive" of firearms generally, and that is in spades the term for someone who declares their justified need for twenty round magazines in case they are charged by bears in their backyard.
And so we see the necessity for what might be called "consciousness raising" - visible reminders, by visible black people, that the singing of the Star Spangled Banner at football games is a politically fraught and troubled ceremonial occasion.
A system in which too many of the cogs are broken, in which broken cogs are not repaired even when identified, in which broken cogs are declared to be functioning properly, is a broken system.
The black players did not invent the situation they made visible. It was there already.
You just did.
Bravo. You once again prove what a thoughtful and cogent poster you are.
Did you read the links? They list every single incident. You can then google the incidents on your own to see if they are real.
That is true in some ways; we've done a reasonably good job making the system race-blind (although there's definitely more we can do.) However, when a very large fraction of the cogs in a system are broken, then the system is broken.
If your transmission sometimes has trouble going into first gear because the synchro is worn out, you could say "it's just a bad cog; the transmission still works."
If your transmission is so broken that you can't get it to engage most of the time, then it does no good to say "no, my transmission is fine! It's just the shifter fork and some of the gears." Your transmission is broken.
Mike Wallace-"how are we gonna get rid of racism?"
Morgan ---"stop talking about it."
It's really simple guys
(this is @ psych 101)
If you focus on race as the delineating factor then you are being racist.
There are thousands of other things about any individual that you could choose to focus on.
By choosing race you are denying the individuality of another fellow human being.
I ain't a race
I am a unique individual human being
Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.
OK. You don't strike me as being an especially stupid person, nor do you come across as (broad spectrum) ignorant, so what's going on here? Are you simply being dishonest? . The clip is not even a full minute long--did you actually listen to the whole thing, or just pick up the bit at the end where he says, "stop talking about it?"
Did you somehow miss the broader context of the notion of "Black History Month" being discussed? You know, that whole thing about separating "black history," whatever the fuck that is, from history or American history, in general. Freeman says, "Black history is American history." Period. He doesn't want a "Black History Month." So, stop talking about it.
Separate names with a comma.