Know your Enemy: Steve Bannon by Amy Goodman

Page 7 of 13 [ 207 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 13  Next

Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1021
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

04 Feb 2017, 5:05 pm

adifferentname wrote:
What did Bannon say that was racist? Is there a link to the entire interview somewhere?

Bannon's thought processes about race aren't provided in that video. What little we can glean about his thought processes about culture seem to be in-line with my own. Am I a racist too? Or is there a world of difference between being proud of your race and being proud and protective of your culture?


I don't know if you are a racist, but if you think races and culture are the same thing, then yes, you are. That you can hear Bannon telling Trump about Silicon Valley's Asian problem and not understand it as racism is cause for concern.

Quote:
British culture is one of tolerance, of acceptance for difference, of liberty and equality under the law. Any large-scale immigration that threatens those values, or worse, is downright hostile to those values, is going to face opposition from me and other Brits. That has nothing to do with race, skin colour, ethnicity, etc and everything to do with ideology. A culture is best defined by its thoughts, customs and attitudes, the artistic and intellectual characteristics, etc, and not by the colour of its constituent parts.
As long as the culture isn't expressing its love of liberty by shouting "wogs out" I'm all for it. I am an Anglo American and love both cultures and their liberal traditions passionately.

Quote:
What he is doing is arguing that integration is better for America than multiculturalism and segregation.
No, he is not.

1965, the end of that period of explicitly racist immigration policy, was also near the end of segregation. Integration was exactly the opposite of what was going between 1924 and 1965, until it was broken by the civil rights movement. Sessions and his fellow travelers have been complaining about the success of that movement ever since.

You seem to have been misinformed about the history of race in America in rather profound ways.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,998
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

04 Feb 2017, 6:00 pm

adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Then pray tell, what is your position that I have so wrong?


adifferentname wrote:
1: You want me to defend a position that I have not espoused. Provide a quote of me justifying racism.
2: You implied I said Breitbart was "behaving like racists". Again, quote me doing so.
3: What percentage of Breitbart readers behave like racist trolls? What is the extent of the problem? Show evidence to support your answer.
4: Explain why you used hyperbole and rhetoric in a bid to misrepresent me instead of taking the time to concoct a reasonable argument.


This is an opportunity to engage in productive discourse, Bill. If you require a safety net, be assured that it would be impossible for you to disappoint me.


Then, please, answer the question. If I'm wrong, then simply enlighten me, instead of being overbearing, anal, vindictive, and showing signs of penis envy, as some in the past have done.


I haven't wronged you though, and yet I get the same evasion, the same weaselly implications - I can think of no better way to describe insinuation posed as rhetorical questions, especially when preceded by:

Quote:
Are you serious?!?!?!


Yes, I'm serious. I'm also consistent, reasonable and fair (amongst many other flaws). And when others repeatedly demonstrate their unwillingness to be likewise - especially when they opt to become personal, attempt to psychoanalyse me or project their internal narrative in-between the lines of text I've written - I'm disinclined to consider them in complimentary terms.

Quote:
Seriously, if you want to have a productive discourse, instead of scoring points, then let's speak amiably.


The trouble is, Bill, I'm highly dubious that productive discourse is possible with you. You might consider answering that 4 point response I've made to be the entry fee to Club Reasonable. When someone repeatedly ignores your arguments in favour of implying you're Hitler, Satan, etc, refusing to further engage becomes the reasonable position.


1- As I'm not an anal personality type, I don't go digging for quotes that may or may not be taken out of context . But suffice to say, you've defended the Alt Right, and it's well known that many of them are white nationalists and trolls. On another thread, you've maintained that straight white males are open season for discrimination against. That's patently ridiculous. I'm a white, straight male, and I have never been discriminated against for my race. Such arguments as yours have been used constantly by Alt Right white nationalists. At the very least, such arguments are racially inspired.
2- I didn't say you said they were acting like racists, but rather, you said maybe if they were, it was because they had been kept out of the "dialogue." They were kept out of the dialogue on race, or sexual diversity, or any other regarding pluralism, because they already have a regressive, reactionary position meant to keep out anyone who isn't a straight white male.
3- I don't think even Breitbart knows how many of their readers are racist trolls. But the fact that that Milo guy with the unpronounceable last name, who was chased out of his speaking engagement by protesters, a Breitbart shiv himself, is able to mobilize an army of racist trolls to harass anyone from Leslie Jones to trans Americans, shows there are probably quite a few. When has Breitbart ever asked their readers not to behave so badly?
4- I used hyperbole? You've defended the Alt Right, along with taking absurd race based positions that straight white men are just as much discriminated against as are blacks, LGBT persons, Latinos, women, etc. You say you don't share the ideals of the Alt Right, but then you parrot their ideals. If you don't share their ideology, how about some condemnation of it?
There, I answered your four points. I doubt it'll do any good.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

04 Feb 2017, 6:16 pm

Adamantium wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
What did Bannon say that was racist? Is there a link to the entire interview somewhere?

Bannon's thought processes about race aren't provided in that video. What little we can glean about his thought processes about culture seem to be in-line with my own. Am I a racist too? Or is there a world of difference between being proud of your race and being proud and protective of your culture?


I don't know if you are a racist, but if you think races and culture are the same thing, then yes, you are. That you can hear Bannon telling Trump about Silicon Valley's Asian problem and not understand it as racism is cause for concern.


You directly quote me saying that there is nothing about his thought processes about race, but that we can glean a "little" about his thought processes about race, yet you feel it appropriate to make the implication I've underlined?

If you aren't capable of understanding simple concepts in plain language then you aren't qualified to tell me or anyone else what we should or should not ourselves glean from an ambiguous statement which made no explicit or implicit suggestion that Bannon views Asians as inferior, that he dislikes them because they look different, etc.

Quote:
Quote:
British culture is one of tolerance, of acceptance for difference, of liberty and equality under the law. Any large-scale immigration that threatens those values, or worse, is downright hostile to those values, is going to face opposition from me and other Brits. That has nothing to do with race, skin colour, ethnicity, etc and everything to do with ideology. A culture is best defined by its thoughts, customs and attitudes, the artistic and intellectual characteristics, etc, and not by the colour of its constituent parts.
As long as the culture isn't expressing its love of liberty by shouting "wogs out" I'm all for it. I am an Anglo American and love both cultures and their liberal traditions passionately.


The culture, or a disgruntled minority within it? I advocate for the right to free speech and would rather live in a society where people are free to shout "wogs out" than one in which they are not. Currently that's something of a blurred line in the UK, but that's immaterial to the debate.

Quote:
Quote:
What he is doing is arguing that integration is better for America than multiculturalism and segregation.
No, he is not.

1965, the end of that period of explicitly racist immigration policy, was also near the end of segregation. Integration was exactly the opposite of what was going between 1924 and 1965, until it was broken by the civil rights movement. Sessions and his fellow travelers have been complaining about the success of that movement ever since.

You seem to have been misinformed about the history of race in America in rather profound ways.


I didn't offer a single one of my thoughts on the matter. This is another comprehension failure on your part. I provided you with my opinion of what Sessions was arguing for, not what I believe about the "history of race in America", as you put it.

You've picked out two points to argue from my entire post, and each required you misconstrue what I said either through error or by design. I'm choosing to go with the former solely on the basis that you've done the same to Bannon regarding what he said - and what he most certainly did not say - in that video. That said, it's becoming increasingly tiresome seeing my words twisted out of context by people on this board who seem utterly incapable of viewing any perspective but their own with compassion.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,998
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

04 Feb 2017, 6:16 pm

Adamantium wrote:
Steve Bannon is a racist.

The key section starts at 2:09. It rather makes me like Trump more and Bannon less.



In addition to this evidence of Bannon's thought processes about race and culture, Bannon has praised the Immigration Act of 1924 including the Asian Exclusion Act and the National Origins Act. Bannon and his pal Sessions think the racism of that era was just great and want to bring it back:

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/post/jeff ... breitbart/

This stuff flows from the same eugenic wellspring as the racial purity laws of Germany under the National Socialists: panic over the Yellow Peril, The Passing of the Great Race, racial hygiene theories and all the other pseudoscientific evil of that period.

Today we have people who know they can't openly embrace that discredited ideology, so they skirt around the edges, saying they like the policies and not discussing the ideology. "We are just nationalists, not white nationalists."

I don't buy it.

The man is a racist and usually does a passable job of pretending he is not, just like his buddy Sessions.

Regarding triumphalist pronouncements about "the left" I would suggest that those on "the right" take a pause. Trump barely won this election with less than 50% of the vote and many of those voters are not remotely on board with the whole program of extremists like Bannon.

Most Americans are not on board for this just as most people on "the left" are not the simpering idiots you focus on in your caricatures of them. Hubris isn't just for people named Clinton.


Obviously, Bannon's interests revolve so much around an America based on racial exclusiveness that he would rather see America's economic and scientific fortunes fall by the wayside to preserve said racial exclusiveness.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

04 Feb 2017, 7:10 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
1- As I'm not an anal personality type, I don't go digging for quotes that may or may not be taken out of context. But suffice to say, you've defended the Alt Right, and it's well known that many of them are white nationalists and trolls. On another thread, you've maintained that straight white males are open season for discrimination against. That's patently ridiculous. I'm a white, straight male, and I have never been discriminated against for my race. Such arguments as yours have been used constantly by Alt Right white nationalists. At the very least, such arguments are racially inspired.


Provide the quote I asked for, Bill. All you've done is provided a flimsy justification for not doing so.

Quote:
2- I didn't say you said they were acting like racists, but rather, you said maybe if they were, it was because they had been kept out of the "dialogue." They were kept out of the dialogue on race, or sexual diversity, or any other regarding pluralism, because they already have a regressive, reactionary position meant to keep out anyone who isn't a straight white male.


Again, provide the quote I asked for. It shouldn't be difficult to find if it exists.

Quote:
3- I don't think even Breitbart knows how many of their readers are racist trolls. But the fact that that Milo guy with the unpronounceable last name, who was chased out of his speaking engagement by protesters, a Breitbart shiv himself, is able to mobilize an army of racist trolls to harass anyone from Leslie Jones to trans Americans, shows there are probably quite a few. When has Breitbart ever asked their readers not to behave so badly?


Just as you have no idea how many Breitbart readers are racist trolls, you have zero evidence that Milo Yiannopoulos orchestrated any targeted harassment of anyone. Your argument is a near verbatim echo of the "leftist"-media narrative of Yiannopoulos.

Why should Breitbart seek to influence its readers' behaviour one way or another? The idea that news outlets are supposed to act as your moral compass is completely bonkers.

Quote:
4- I used hyperbole?


Indeed you did.

It's time for the quick-fire fisking round. Hold onto your hat.

Quote:
You've defended the Alt Right


Defended them how? By explaining who they are and what they stand for? By not agreeing with the narrative presented by Hillary Clinton, spread by "left"-leaning media and swallowed uncritically by Liberals across the USA?

Is that the same as agreeing with them? As being sympathetic to their ideological perspective? What precise crime am I committing other than offending your clearly tender moral sensibilities and exercising objectivity?

Quote:
along with taking absurd race based positions that straight white men are just as much discriminated against as are blacks, LGBT persons, Latinos, women, etc.


Again, quote me doing precisely this. Fact is Bill, last time you made that same argument I took the time to explain why you were wrong. This time I'm taking it a step further, and I'm going to call it what it is. You're lying. You're deliberately putting words in my mouth that I did not speak. You've repeated the same lie multiple times. You have the audacity to pour a slurry of melodramatic moralistic woo all over this board then lie about what I've said.

If you can't respect the integrity of my posts, at least have some for yourself. Own your sh*t, Bill.

Quote:
You say you don't share the ideals of the Alt Right, but then you parrot their ideals.


What are the Alt-Right's ideals, Bill. Your entire understanding of the Alt-Right is that it's whatever CNN tells you it is. But here's another fun challenge for you. I'm perfectly content to stand by everything I've said on here, even stuff I posted 7 years ago. I invite you to take as much time as you deem necessary to go through my entire post history and compare my political philosophy throughout to my philosophy now. The challenge? Find a position I support now that I didn't support prior to Trump announcing his candidacy.

Quote:
If you don't share their ideology, how about some condemnation of it?


To what end? The main criticism I have of the Alt-Right is in the manner in which they choose to express their views, but I'll defend to the death their right to do so - because it's my right, your right and everyone else's right too.

Quote:
There, I answered your four points. I doubt it'll do any good.


You gave barely acceptable answers to two of them. As I predicted, I'm neither disappointed nor surprised.



EzraS
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Sep 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 27,828
Location: Twin Peaks

04 Feb 2017, 7:49 pm

Based on overall observation here and elsewhere, "racist" (and all its variants) seems to pretty much be used the way "witch" was back in the 17th century. Simply being a republican seems to pretty much put someone in the racist category, because that means they support the racist GOP. Racist, bigot, misogynist, homophobe, xenophobe, fascist etc. And those pointing and saying, racist/witch! calling themselves social justice warriors.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

04 Feb 2017, 7:53 pm

Convenient, facile opinions are rarely notable.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 41,998
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

05 Feb 2017, 12:49 am

adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
1- As I'm not an anal personality type, I don't go digging for quotes that may or may not be taken out of context. But suffice to say, you've defended the Alt Right, and it's well known that many of them are white nationalists and trolls. On another thread, you've maintained that straight white males are open season for discrimination against. That's patently ridiculous. I'm a white, straight male, and I have never been discriminated against for my race. Such arguments as yours have been used constantly by Alt Right white nationalists. At the very least, such arguments are racially inspired.


Provide the quote I asked for, Bill. All you've done is provided a flimsy justification for not doing so.

Quote:
2- I didn't say you said they were acting like racists, but rather, you said maybe if they were, it was because they had been kept out of the "dialogue." They were kept out of the dialogue on race, or sexual diversity, or any other regarding pluralism, because they already have a regressive, reactionary position meant to keep out anyone who isn't a straight white male.


Again, provide the quote I asked for. It shouldn't be difficult to find if it exists.

Quote:
3- I don't think even Breitbart knows how many of their readers are racist trolls. But the fact that that Milo guy with the unpronounceable last name, who was chased out of his speaking engagement by protesters, a Breitbart shiv himself, is able to mobilize an army of racist trolls to harass anyone from Leslie Jones to trans Americans, shows there are probably quite a few. When has Breitbart ever asked their readers not to behave so badly?


Just as you have no idea how many Breitbart readers are racist trolls, you have zero evidence that Milo Yiannopoulos orchestrated any targeted harassment of anyone. Your argument is a near verbatim echo of the "leftist"-media narrative of Yiannopoulos.

Why should Breitbart seek to influence its readers' behaviour one way or another? The idea that news outlets are supposed to act as your moral compass is completely bonkers.

Quote:
4- I used hyperbole?


Indeed you did.

It's time for the quick-fire fisking round. Hold onto your hat.

Quote:
You've defended the Alt Right


Defended them how? By explaining who they are and what they stand for? By not agreeing with the narrative presented by Hillary Clinton, spread by "left"-leaning media and swallowed uncritically by Liberals across the USA?

Is that the same as agreeing with them? As being sympathetic to their ideological perspective? What precise crime am I committing other than offending your clearly tender moral sensibilities and exercising objectivity?

Quote:
along with taking absurd race based positions that straight white men are just as much discriminated against as are blacks, LGBT persons, Latinos, women, etc.


Again, quote me doing precisely this. Fact is Bill, last time you made that same argument I took the time to explain why you were wrong. This time I'm taking it a step further, and I'm going to call it what it is. You're lying. You're deliberately putting words in my mouth that I did not speak. You've repeated the same lie multiple times. You have the audacity to pour a slurry of melodramatic moralistic woo all over this board then lie about what I've said.

If you can't respect the integrity of my posts, at least have some for yourself. Own your sh*t, Bill.

Quote:
You say you don't share the ideals of the Alt Right, but then you parrot their ideals.


What are the Alt-Right's ideals, Bill. Your entire understanding of the Alt-Right is that it's whatever CNN tells you it is. But here's another fun challenge for you. I'm perfectly content to stand by everything I've said on here, even stuff I posted 7 years ago. I invite you to take as much time as you deem necessary to go through my entire post history and compare my political philosophy throughout to my philosophy now. The challenge? Find a position I support now that I didn't support prior to Trump announcing his candidacy.

Quote:
If you don't share their ideology, how about some condemnation of it?


To what end? The main criticism I have of the Alt-Right is in the manner in which they choose to express their views, but I'll defend to the death their right to do so - because it's my right, your right and everyone else's right too.

Quote:
There, I answered your four points. I doubt it'll do any good.


You gave barely acceptable answers to two of them. As I predicted, I'm neither disappointed nor surprised.


Well, that's the time and effort that I'm going to give you, take it or leave it. You choose to call me a liar for my perception of what you stated, but have not refuted me by presenting me with what are supposed to be your real views.
I'll just state these to points:
Milo of the unpronounceable last name clearly led wave after wave of neckbearded bigots to harass everyone from Leslie Jones to trans people. Why do you think that reprobate was banned from twitter? That is just a simple fact - as in opposite of alternate facts.
Sure, the Alt Right has the right to say what they want, but they don't have the right to bully people. And sure, they have the right to say as many outlandishly racist, homophobic, and transphobic sh*t they want, but the rest of us have the exact same right to counter them, and to expose them for what they are.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1021
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

05 Feb 2017, 1:03 am

EzraS wrote:
Based on overall observation here and elsewhere, "racist" (and all its variants) seems to pretty much be used the way "witch" was back in the 17th century. Simply being a republican seems to pretty much put someone in the racist category, because that means they support the racist GOP. Racist, bigot, misogynist, homophobe, xenophobe, fascist etc. And those pointing and saying, racist/witch! calling themselves social justice warriors.


Garbage.

A person who says "there are too many blacks here" or "there are too many Asians in Silicon Valley" is a racist.

Seems like every apologist for prejudice against people of different races is now claiming that racist doesn't mean anything.

But it does. And everyone knows what it is, despite the efforts of some to baffle us with bull.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1021
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

05 Feb 2017, 1:03 am

adifferentname wrote:
Adamantium wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
What did Bannon say that was racist? Is there a link to the entire interview somewhere?

Bannon's thought processes about race aren't provided in that video. What little we can glean about his thought processes about culture seem to be in-line with my own. Am I a racist too? Or is there a world of difference between being proud of your race and being proud and protective of your culture?


I don't know if you are a racist, but if you think races and culture are the same thing, then yes, you are. That you can hear Bannon telling Trump about Silicon Valley's Asian problem and not understand it as racism is cause for concern.


You directly quote me saying that there is nothing about his thought processes about race, but that we can glean a "little" about his thought processes about race, yet you feel it appropriate to make the implication I've underlined?
It's the logical conclusion:

What Bannon says in the video is plainly racist. I find your attempts to recast them in some other terms to be disingenuous. He thinks there should be fewer Asians in the tech industry an uses statistics pulled from the rear orifice of a bull to support his anti-Asian position.

If you want to argue that it's his love of his culture rather than his racism that's behind this, you'll have to explain how his explicitly racial comments are really about culture.

Quote:
Quote:
What he is doing is arguing that integration is better for America than multiculturalism and segregation.
No, he is not.
Quote:
I didn't offer a single one of my thoughts on the matter.

Sure you did. You claim that Sessions is pro-integration and anti-segregation. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
What you claim Sessions is arguing, despite his actual words, represents and injection of YOUR thoughts.

Perhaps you are confusing his mention of "assimilation" with the idea of "integration" ???

The 1930s, 40s and 50s in America was not a time for either. The racism was open and extreme. Nostalgia for it is repellent.


_________________
Don't believe the gender note under my avatar. A WP bug means I can't fix it.


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

05 Feb 2017, 1:13 am

Adamantium wrote:
There is a lot of good insight into his methods and history there.


Did you like the part where he was buying supercomputer time on the cheap to dig up dirt on the Clintons from the dark web? Say what you will about the guy's personal beliefs, he's a fascinating character.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

05 Feb 2017, 4:40 am

Adamantium wrote:

I was on the fence about the issue but that sold it for me. I also find it scary that Jeff Sessions is against immigration in general. I'm more sympathetic when xenophobia is expressed in relation to radical Islam as I think that it is at least a real threat (though grossly exaggerated by American conservatives IMO). I'm more disturbed by these statements that any, presumably non-European, immigration somehow erodes "our" culture. THAT kind of ideology I do view as racist.

It's funny watching the Trumpettes react with indignation over this. It seems they might not even realize that THEY themselves are racist.



adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

05 Feb 2017, 8:04 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
Well, that's the time and effort that I'm going to give you, take it or leave it. You choose to call me a liar for my perception of what you stated, but have not refuted me by presenting me with what are supposed to be your real views.


I didn't refute your misrepresentative claims because they're not my words, Bill. They're yours. I'm not obliged to defend any position I do not hold, especially one that you cannot demonstrate that I hold or have expressed. If you want your claim to stand, bring on the quotes.

The standard of evidence for someone's opinion is really simple, Bill. Anything I tell you is true or false about my opinion is coming from the ultimate authority on what those opinions are. If you wish to prove otherwise, you'll need compelling evidence. Where's yours? All you have is a repeated lie that you cannot substantiate. So yes, I'm going to call you out for your repeated lies and misrepresentation. If you don't like it, show me the goods or stop doing it. Simple, right?

Quote:
I'll just state these to points:
Milo of the unpronounceable last name clearly led wave after wave of neckbearded bigots to harass everyone from Leslie Jones to trans people. Why do you think that reprobate was banned from twitter? That is just a simple fact - as in opposite of alternate facts.


Provide evidence that he led, incited, encouraged or otherwise caused people to troll Leslie Jones. I'd settle for either A: direct quotes of him doing so or B: criminal charges of "harassment" as you've labelled it.

Quote:
Sure, the Alt Right has the right to say what they want, but they don't have the right to bully people.


Only if they do something that constitutes a crime, Bill. When they cross that line, give me a call, I'll be right alongside you. Until then, they have the same rights as you do to express your views, no matter how dishonest, mean, impolite, etc.

Quote:
And sure, they have the right to say as many outlandishly racist, homophobic, and transphobic sh*t they want, but the rest of us have the exact same right to counter them, and to expose them for what they are.


If you want to "expose them for what they are", I suggest you take some time to learn precisely what that is. You have a knack for the libellous, so I'd steer clear of the front lines.

Or you can join the "punch a Nazi" brigade. I really don't care either way.



jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

05 Feb 2017, 8:22 am

Adamantium wrote:
EzraS wrote:
Based on overall observation here and elsewhere, "racist" (and all its variants) seems to pretty much be used the way "witch" was back in the 17th century. Simply being a republican seems to pretty much put someone in the racist category, because that means they support the racist GOP. Racist, bigot, misogynist, homophobe, xenophobe, fascist etc. And those pointing and saying, racist/witch! calling themselves social justice warriors.


Garbage.

A person who says "there are too many blacks here" or "there are too many Asians in Silicon Valley" is a racist.

Seems like every apologist for prejudice against people of different races is now claiming that racist doesn't mean anything.

But it does. And everyone knows what it is, despite the efforts of some to baffle us with bull.

I saw this a lot in Texas. People will admit that racism exists in the abstract, maybe. Some won't, but among those who will, they balk at pointing the finger at any actual racists. Somehow, we have racism without any racists, but Implicit Racism is also a lie.

The most generous explanation that I can field is that this resistance to calling out racism is rooted in politeness. Never underestimate the potency of Moms or the repressive force of politeness. Also, don't underestimate the value of politeness. It's enough to make my head spin, as an aspie.

I wish I could agree that everyone knows what it is, but I've spent a lot of effort in trying to elicit boundaries to no avail. I feel like the right wants to move the boundaries, feels them moving, and wants to see how far it can go. As I've noted, this looks really dangerous to me, like that scene from Rebel Without a Cause. Didn't end well for anyone, in that case.

Edit: the metaphor really holds up, if memory serves. The real racist goes over the cliff, and the Trump supporter bails out before then, but has to live with the knowledge of the consequences of the deadly, super-fun, big-league macho game they played.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,242

05 Feb 2017, 9:03 am

He's another person who can't stand people of color having success, judging by his comment regarding Asians running businesses. He's obsessed with maintaining white European culture because he can't imagine that it's not actually purely white or purely European. He'd probably badmouth the Huns too, even though as some recent scholars have argued (such as Hyun Jin Kim) European culture is to a large extent Hun culture. He's looking at the world through Eurocentric glasses.

And plus, he is gross to look at. Good God. He needs to keep himself clean-shaven or get some electrolysis if he can't be bothered to (he can afford it).


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


jrjones9933
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,144
Location: The end of the northwest passage

05 Feb 2017, 9:13 am

This just in: Draft executive order proposes taking government benefits from immigrants and redirecting them toward inner city communities.

It's genius. I can write the America First defense myself, and it's simple and sounds brilliant.

Only when you get into the facts do the problems become obvious:

It's a tactic to split the opposition.

Immigrants get hardly any benefits, despite loud and repeated claims to the contrary.

Trump has no clue about inner cities, obviously. The money will probably go to broken windows policing.


_________________
"I find that the best way [to increase self-confidence] is to lie to yourself about who you are, what you've done, and where you're going." - Richard Ayoade