U.S. Politics: Having a Good Time

[polishgenius]

24 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said:

Show me a person that has been a bit reflective on what has been discussed the last few hours regarding race / racism.

This whole conversation has literally been Maithanet, Tywin and others reflecting on stuff. Even Mother Cocanuts is at least asking questions: whether she'll be open to the answers she's getting I dunno but she'll be far less likely to be with you screaming See! You're a racist! at her at every turn.

[James Arryn]

4 hours ago, mormont said:

It really isn't.

And if it were, well, too bad. If your allegiance to the idea of equality is so flimsy that it can be destroyed by someone denying that white people are victims of racism, I would suggest your allegiance was only paper-thin anyway. The problem is not that someone pissed you off. The problem is that you were never really onside in the first place. You were just willing to pretend, as long as nobody rocked the boat. You were never going to back real change, because that involves boat-rocking.

 

I'm struggling to understand this. 

Not so much the point about 'if that's all it took', I get that and agree with it. If that pushed you into the 'openly racist party' camp, you have at least a high bigotry tolerance, let's say. But not coming down on people who say white folk can't experience racism seems pretty fundamentally wrong to me. 

[Bonnot OG]

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

 

The US politics thread is typically about current events in US politics. When (like we usually do) we diverge from specific events to general talking about things like racism or political systems or slavery or the hilliness of the Ottoman empire, we usually create another topic to allow those who want to talk about general events to not get swamped. I'd recommend creating a topic about "Racism in the US" or something like that. 

A lot of current events in US politics is tied to race, especially the horrible decisions and policies that are coming from this administration since they are trying to erase a black president from history by undoing what ever he did. And this administration being in power is also tied to race since racists put them into the white house thanks to a racist and archaic system like the electoral college which gives ridiculous amounts of power to former slave states. 

 

[Kalbear]

Just now, Morpheus said:

The Republican Party as an institution continues to fully support a racist President who has sympathy for white supremacists and neo Nazis. So, yes they do in a way support these things as long as they stand by their man, despite openly and meekly disapproving some of his comments. If they aren't going to meaningfully address the problem, they are part of a problem. Do they all harbor racist sentiments in their hearts? Who is to say? But as long as they feel that politics, alliegence to party, and holding on the presidency are What is most important to them, they have to be held accountable for at least tacitly endorsing the worst aspects of the face of their party.

Yep.

Put it another way: if they have a choice between Trump and another candidate, are they going to vote for Trump? If they are, they're aiding white supremacy fairly directly, even if they are doing it for other reasons. It means to me that they're willing to support that. Maybe that isn't why they're doing it (though polling suggests a full third of the US pretty much does) but it ultimately doesn't matter why, only that they are. I'm positive plenty of Germans didn't support killing all the Jews, but they went along with it. 

[Kalbear]

1 minute ago, James Arryn said:

 

I'm struggling to understand this. 

Not so much the point about 'if that's all it took', I get that and agree with it. If that pushed you into the 'openly racist party' camp, you have at least a high bigotry tolerance, let's say. But not coming down on people who say white folk can't experience racism seems pretty fundamentally wrong to me. 

The more PC and slightly more accurate statement is that white people cannot experience racism in the US like minorities do. And comparing those things is unfair when talking about the kind of racism that minorities experience, and tends to derail discussions completely into a 'see, me too!' kind of thing. 

[Bonnot OG]

5 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

This whole conversation has literally been Maithanet, Tywin and others reflecting on stuff. Even Mother Cocanuts is at least asking questions: whether she'll be open to the answers she's getting I dunno but she'll be far less likely to be with you screaming See! You're a racist! at her at every turn.

Could you point to where I have been screaming she's a racist at every turn? 

 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 hour ago, Zorral said:

Um, the statement with which somebody has problems with, explicitly states "THESE white guys," which in terms of quantification, within the context of the discussion of a mass murderer, does NOT say all white guys, but rather, these particularly white guys who commit mass murder. 

Had I come in here discussing Islamic terror and I made a statement that contained the phrase "the problem with these Arabic guys" how do you think that would be received here? 

[James Arryn]

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

The more PC and slightly more accurate statement is that white people cannot experience racism in the US like minorities do. And comparing those things is unfair when talking about the kind of racism that minorities experience, and tends to derail discussions completely into a 'see, me too!' kind of thing. 

I mean, it hits people as individuals, whatever their group. Some groups are more likely to have many individuals who experience it and more likely to experience it to greater degrees, but it's all intellectual cancer, imo. The root problem is the conflict between those who benefit from the status quo vs. those who don't...eh, I'll sidestep that tangent. 

But adopting racist attitudes to combat racism is like cancer on cancer; you might beat some racictS with it, but racisM wins. 

[King Ned Stark]

That seems unfair to Manhole, who seems from all the posts I've read over the years like a democrat/liberal.  Defending freedom of speech isn't nazi-sympathizing, in my opinion.

Trump may be racist, but equating him and the Republican Party to nazi sympathizers, seems to be jumping the gun by a fair margin.  Equating these hillbillies to the third Reich who hijacked Germany and threatened the world with the German war machine may be a bit early as well.  Remember when Obama won the election, and those on the far right decried we'd become a socialist state?  The constitution is a fairly good shield to socialism/fascism if we protect it properly (which I think is all Manhole is defending).

The extremist on the left and right are trying to turn this into a zero sum game (if you're not with us you're against us), whereas a more centrist government would likely be better for all around.  

[polishgenius]

4 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said:

Could you point to where I have been screaming she's a racist at every turn? 

 

How is it that you hyperbolise all the time* but when I do it you suddenly lose all knowledge of the concept?



*note: this does not mean you literally hyperbolise literally constantly.


You replied to both Cocanuts and Maithanet with variations on the claim 'yes, white people are all racist'. Apart from linking one video explaining a bit further that you're now refusing to engage with Cocanuts back on, and one aggressively snarky response to Seli, you've left the heavy lifting of actually explaining to people you're deliberately putting in less of a mood to listen what white privelege and the misbalance of power in the US are and how they work to Dr. Pepper, Kalbear and others.

[Kalbear]

6 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

I mean, it hits people as individuals, whatever their group. Some groups are more likely to have many individuals who experience it and more likely to experience it to greater degrees, but it's all intellectual cancer, imo. The root problem is the conflict between those who benefit from the status quo vs. those who don't...eh, I'll sidestep that tangent. 

But adopting racist attitudes to combat racism is like cancer on cancer; you might beat some racictS with it, but racisM wins. 

Yeah, this isn't constructive.

Racism as experienced by white people is not the same as racism experienced by minorities. It has nothing to do with statistical value; it has to do with things like PoC being hired less than white people based entirely on their name, or the amount of violence that black people experience from the police. To put it in perspective for you, this is much like saying that First Nation peoples have the same experience in Canada as the Quebecois. They simply don't, saying that it's all individual trauma ignores the point and dismisses the issue, and makes it hard to actually solve any problems. 

[James Arryn]

2 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Yeah, this isn't constructive.

Racism as experienced by white people is not the same as racism experienced by minorities. It has nothing to do with statistical value; it has to do with things like PoC being hired less than white people based entirely on their name, or the amount of violence that black people experience from the police. To put it in perspective for you, this is much like saying that First Nation peoples have the same experience in Canada as the Quebecois. They simply don't, saying that it's all individual trauma ignores the point and dismisses the issue, and makes it hard to actually solve any problems. 

I defitely think you mistook my point, which was in no way saying white people in white countries face remotely the same level of racism.

[Mother Cocanuts]

28 minutes ago, Week said:

"Most people" - any analytic response is not what my question was getting at. Clearly, though, you're going to continue to dodge.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina-crosleycorcoran/explaining-white-privilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html

So your evidence for what "most people think" is the anecdote of a columnist?

24 minutes ago, aceluby said:

So you're just going to deny that systemic racism just doesn't exist?

I made no denials. I just want you to answer the question I posed: which advantage do white homeless people have?

 

19 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

All white people benefit from white supremacy in some way. 

What are some of the ways in which white people benefit from white supremacy?

23 minutes ago, Dr. Pepper said:

All white people benefit from white supremacy in some way.  This isn't the same as saying all white people are racist. 

Yes it is. By benefiting from white supremacy, you're tacitly suggesting that whites are racist by proxy. The stipulation discrimination + power only works if every member of the group you determine to be "supreme" functions as a cohesive, monolithic unit. If not, then you must admit that there's something other than whiteness that produces supremacy.

40 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

You would be in the minority then, as the welfare queen meme wasn't about a white woman.

That may have been true in the 80's, but it's 2017 and most people have a personal computer.

44 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

They did answer it. You just didn't understand the answer.

Also, while it's true that the majority of homeless are white, minorities are far more overrepresented in homeless shelters. Especially families, where minority families are actually a larger majority than white people. 

Useless semantics. "Over represented" only has significance to arguments which assume black homelessness only affects the black demographic and white homelessness only affects the white demographic.

[Kalbear]

4 minutes ago, James Arryn said:

I defitely think you mistook my point, which was in no way saying white people in white countries face remotely the same level of racism.

No, I got it. The point is that it isn't about the level. This isn't about degrees, and that appears to be what you're missing entirely. It is that the way that minorities in the US experience racism is entirely different from how others do, and point of fact each minority experiences racism largely differently from other minorities, and all of them experience it differently if they're women.

And saying 'racism is bad and we should fight ALL of it' ignores that completely. It elides it. Because, honestly, fighting police brutality and oppression has a very different kind of tactic if you're going for fighting it vs. minorities (especially black people) and if you're wanting to fight it in general. Hiring prejudices are very different. Simple interactions are very different. 

And saying 'all racism is bad' is akin to saying 'all lives matter'. Yes, it's true, and it completely derails the conversation. 

[King Ned Stark]

@Kalbear, serious question, or anyone who wants to field it, as admittedly I'm not as well versed in some of the nuances of these topics.  2 years ago, my daughter's high school had college visitation day, but she was was not allowed to visit the university she wanted to because she wasn't a minority.  That's what the students were told.  Is that fair game, bigotry, racism?  

[Bonnot OG]

17 minutes ago, polishgenius said:

How is it that you hyperbolise all the time* but when I do it you suddenly lose all knowledge of the concept?



*note: this does not mean you literally hyperbolise literally constantly.


You replied to both Cocanuts and Maithanet with variations on the claim 'yes, white people are all racist'. Apart from linking one video explaining a bit further that you're now refusing to engage with Cocanuts back on, and one aggressively snarky response to Seli, you've left the heavy lifting of actually explaining to people you're deliberately putting in less of a mood to listen what white privelege and the misbalance of power in the US are and how they work to Dr. Pepper, Kalbear and others.

All white people are racists. I don't have to engage people just because you want me to haha. 

Once I saw Cocanuts spewing bullshit I see racists push all the time I said fuck it, not bothering with a lost cause. 

I have zero patience now a days to deal with fragile white people and explaining white privilege to them, especially when someone else was already going through it earlier with them. 


But hey, instead of whining, how about you pick up some of the sack then eh? Or do you just let other people do the heavy lifting while you sit on the fence and wag your finger at people? 
 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

1 hour ago, Kalbear said:

Yes, it's absolutely fair and accurate. Why is it not? It might be offensive, but again, I'm sorry that you feel that you deserve an apology for being called a nazi sympathizer when you sympathize with nazis. Maybe...stop sympathizing with nazis so much?

When Tywin said that most white people are highly unlikely to experience institutionalized racism and you responded with that, yes, I assume you were using that as a counterexample to how a white person did experience institutionalized racism. Otherwise why would you respond? 

It's not at all fair. It's a call for non-violence made in support of Free Speech. It has nothing to do with Nazis. Nazis are the extreme example that is floated here to justify violence and the glorification of violence, and to justify the blocking of speech. That's always been my position. You just keep right on equating that to nazi-sympathizer and apologist if it makes you feel superior. Never asked for an apology, I've asked Dr. Pepper to stop referring to me in that way, but clearly the desire to not be offensive towards others in the name of political correctness does not apply to those who disagree with her. 

Tywin said that most white people are highly unlikely to experience institutional racism (and I agree) but that doesn't mean they are incapable of experiencing racism. So a brick to the side of the head doesn't qualify?  

[Maithanet]

3 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Racism as experienced by white people is not the same as racism experienced by minorities. It has nothing to do with statistical value; it has to do with things like PoC being hired less than white people based entirely on their name, or the amount of violence that black people experience from the police. To put it in perspective for you, this is much like saying that First Nation peoples have the same experience in Canada as the Quebecois. They simply don't, saying that it's all individual trauma ignores the point and dismisses the issue, and makes it hard to actually solve any problems. 

I would never compare the racism that I have experienced as a middle class white person to that of any other person, particularly a person of color.  I am aware of both my privilege in terms of rarely having to confront racial barriers and my inability to fully understand another person's experience and the challenges they've faced.  However, when someone says "white people aren't experiencing racism", it is both disorienting and offputting, like someone is claiming that they know better than me what my life has been like. 

Which is why I brought up the whole issue of whether racism must include an institutional element, because I feel it does not and should not.  The explanation that what white people experience is prejudice, not racism, strikes me as a distinction without a difference. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

40 minutes ago, Sword of Doom said:

Says the guy that pushes false equivalences like antifa are just like the nazis, ignoring the whole racial hatred the nazis have going for them and how they want to systematically exterminate people of color, the disabled, the lgbtq community, jews etc. 

 Never said Antifa was "just like nazis". I said I found it somewhat hypocritical that a movement that names itself Antifascist engages in tactics that are clearly fascistic. 

[Kalbear]

2 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

I made no denials. I just want you to answer the question I posed: which advantage do white homeless people have?

They're more likely to have better chances to get jobs, to get into drug rehab, and less likely to be jailed for the same crimes.

2 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

What are some of the ways in which white people benefit from white supremacy?

What language is your entertainment in? If you find a book, what are the chances that it's translated into English? If you watch a movie, what are the chances that it has English subtitles or dubs? 

If you go to any random store, what are the chances that the makeup in it has colors that work with your skin? 

If you go to a barber shop, will they have people who can take care of your hair?

If you use a soap dispenser, what are the chances that it works for your skin color?

2 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

Yes it is. By benefiting from white supremacy, you're tacitly suggesting that whites are racist by proxy. The stipulation discrimination + power only works if every member of the group you determine to be "supreme" functions as a cohesive, monolithic unit. If not, then you must admit that there's something other than whiteness that produces supremacy.

This doesn't make sense at all. I benefit from being a US citizen, but that doesn't mean that I am America First or think that way. I benefit strongly from being a white heterosexual man in the US. That does not imply that I am necessarily sexist, racist, or a bigot.

2 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

That may have been true in the 80's, but it's 2017 and most people have a personal computer.

I'll let you search for the term 'welfare queen' then. 

2 minutes ago, Mother Cocanuts said:

Useless semantics. "Over represented" only has significance to arguments which assume black homelessness only affects the black demographic and white homelessness only affects the white demographic.

No, it means that it's a bigger problem for black populations than white ones. It is far from being useless; it's actually predictive.