US Politics III

[Diemen]

If you want to be willfully obtuse about it, sure, stick to a dictionary definition. If you can't acknowledge that institutional racism is worse than simply individuals holding racist beliefs, then I don't know what to tell you.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

Would you believe ANY American white man if they say they have been oppressed? I'm guessing no. So whether I admit to being oppressed or not is of zero consequence, so why even ask?



Either way - I am expected to accept this thing called white privilege that I cannot possible see or experience or measure. I can only accept what others say about it.



If it cannot be objectively measured and discussed, then people can attach anything they want to it. Do you not see the danger in that? And how do we end this invisible force? What is the measure that we will declare victory? How could white people know the end of this so-called white privilege, if they don't even know it exists? That things are suddenly very shitty for them? How is that okay?



I would rather it be shitty for no race. Enforce the laws. No double standards. That is what gives stability to society. This is both measurable and practical.

I think it does have measurables, it's just a matter of if you're willing to listen?

You only believe it exists if a slur is used. So you have already admitted you're not willing to listen.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Diemen

If you want to be willfully obtuse about it, sure, stick to a dictionary definition. If you can't acknowledge that institutional racism is worse than simply individuals holding racist beliefs, then I don't know what to tell you.

Yes, I agree, that would be worse. The government should not give preferential treatment to any race.

[Vlad n U 2]

https://www.axios.com/9-of-americans...475534976.html

30 million. Almost 1 in 10. We have one here.

[shineon]

Aeon, I believe that your default mode is to fall back on the position that whites are being attacked (or will be attacked) by groups looking to gain acceptance and basic rights. This is an intellectually lazy defense which fails to take into consideration the complexity of the issue at hand. I believed you were better than that. Perhaps I was wrong.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by shineon

Aeon, I believe that your default mode is to fall back on the position that whites are being attacked (or will be attacked) by groups looking to gain acceptance and basic rights. This is an intellectually lazy defense which fails to take into consideration the complexity of the issue at hand. I believed you were better than that. Perhaps I was wrong.

I've admitted that I personally have not been oppressed (any more than any other working man). I've shared with you that I am strongly against oppression and racism. I would defend any group's right to "parade". When people commit crimes they should be punished the same as every race. When people discriminate against other races for jobs, schools, military ...etc, they should be punished. Those are good laws. No, they a great laws.

It seems that these beliefs of mine are not really that controversial, even with the Left. If you really look closely at my arguments, I'm not arguing anything close to "Nazism". I'm arguing that all men and women are equal before the law. That law, and the government that enforces it, should be colorblind.

Heck, even the ACLU defends the neo-nazis' right to speak and march...

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Vlad n U 2

https://www.axios.com/9-of-americans...475534976.html

30 million. Almost 1 in 10. We have one here.

There is a difference between saying something is "okay" and saying something should be "allowed."

[nbelcik]

Originally Posted by AEON

rac·ism

ˈrāˌsizəm

noun

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.



- the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.



Source: Google Dictionary

People who actually study race and racism do not agree with this definition.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

Yes, I agree, that would be worse. The government should not give preferential treatment to any race.

Has that been the argument in this thread?

Originally Posted by AEON

I've admitted that I personally have not been oppressed (any more than any other working man). I've shared with you that I am strongly against oppression and racism. I would defend any group's right to "parade". When people commit crimes they should be punished the same as every race. When people discriminate against other races for jobs, schools, military ...etc, they should be punished. Those are good laws. No, they a great laws.



It seems that these beliefs of mine are not really that controversial, even with the Left. If you really look closely at my arguments, I'm not arguing anything close to "Nazism". I'm arguing that all men and women are equal before the law. That law, and the government that enforces it, should be colorblind.



Heck, even the ACLU defends the neo-nazis' right to speak and march...

You're still arguing with a ghost. How is it that you still don't understand the discussion?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by nbelcik

People who actually study race and racism do not agree with this definition.

Well - that's a bit intellectually convenient isn't it? If someone disagrees with you - you can simply say, "According to MY definition of racism - only white people can be racist."

[kiwilad]

I think this discussion does raise a really interesting conundrum. AEON is adamant the right to free speech, to parade, be maintained. Even if those parading are nazis extolling some of the most horrific ideas humankind's ever had.
Yet history (albeit in other parts of the world) seems to suggest the best time to tackle these ideas is while they are still part of a small movement. And because of the nature of these ideas, and the effect these ideas seem to have on the people extolling them, tackling them with dialogue doesn't work.
So what do you do?

AEON is right, I think, that legally speaking that 'parade' shouldn't have been met with violence. But for anyone to ignore the gravity of that 'parade' - in a historical sense and then extrapolating that out into future possibilities - is either ignorant or vile.

Also, violence towards those exercising free speech became a hallmark of Trump's pre-election rallies. His supporters man-handling and punching protesters, Trump encouraging violent action against anti-Trump protesters etc.

The 'all-who-aren't-nazi' group probably should be utterly meticulous in ensuring they don't initiate any violence towards the alt-right over the coming months. Instead meet these parades with absolutely massive numbers.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by mama cass

Mother of two black and three white kids' post on racism is a must read

argumentum ad passiones

[Diemen]

It's not a good look when you're quicker to defend those who want to air their racist views than those who describe how racism impacts their lives.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by kiwilad

I think this discussion does raise a really interesting conundrum. AEON is adamant the right to free speech, to parade, be maintained. Even if those parading are nazis extolling some of the most horrific ideas humankind's ever had.
Yet history (albeit in other parts of the world) seems to suggest the best time to tackle these ideas is while they are still part of a small movement. And because of the nature of these ideas, and the effect these ideas seem to have on the people extolling them, tackling them with dialogue doesn't work.
So what do you do?

I agree, it is a challenge. But the white nationalist movement won't grow unless there is more violence against it. We are not 1920's Germany, we are a relatively prosperous nation with more than a few micro-cultures with access to ALL sides of any argument (which is a GOOD thing). Simply put - Nazi Germany rose from the conditions of that people and that time. In the US, there will never be anything like a Nazi Germany. What is more likely, is an ANTIFA "cleansing" of non-approved ideas...

Originally Posted by kiwilad

AEON is right, I think, that legally speaking that 'parade' shouldn't have been met with violence. But for anyone to ignore the gravity of that 'parade' - in a historical sense and then extrapolating that out into future possibilities - is either ignorant or vile.

Again , 100 percent agree. I am in full support of orderly counter-protesting, writing articles that counter white nationalist ideology, videos showing the opposite POV...etc. America is healthy enough for debate. When people start starving - well then, it truly is anyone's game at that point (hello Neegan). Until then, I seriously believe most of our societal issues can be handled by debate (man, I do miss Christopher Hitchens!)

Originally Posted by kiwilad

Also, violence towards those exercising free speech became a hallmark of Trump's pre-election rallies. His supporters man-handling and punching protesters, Trump encouraging violent action against anti-Trump protesters etc.

Agreed. All violence at these political event (Left or Right) are unacceptable.

Originally Posted by kiwilad

The 'all-who-aren't-nazi' group probably should be utterly meticulous in ensuring they don't initiate any violence towards the alt-right over the coming months. Instead meet these parades with absolutely massive numbers.

There are very, very few white nationalist. And of that few - even FEWER are willing to risk their careers by being televised waving a frikin' nazi flag (I wouldn't be surprised if we find out there is at least one or two "plants" just to make it seem more nazi - but that is ONLY a theory, I'm not sticking by it) ...

And you are SO right. If the White Nationalist (all 200 of them) would suffer a PR nightmare if they attacked a group of seriously peaceful counter-protesters. But ANTIFA would never allow that to happen....seriously, they are the Left's worst enemy...

Our common worst enemy are the corrupt career politicians. Both Republicans and Democrats are getting rich by passing laws and regulations that benefit the companies that pay for their campaigns - and then they break every insider-trading law imaginable to turn a $200,000 a year job into $500,000,000 of wealth.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Diemen

It's not a good look when you're quicker to defend those who want to air their racist views than those who describe how racism impacts their lives.

I realize that. I realize I am skating on thin ice here (at least on this subject). I tend to play devil's advocate because deep down, I am a brat. At the same time, there is validity to what I am saying and I sincerely believe that NO racism (as defined by the dictionary) is better than "qualified" racism.