Jump to content

US Election 2016: DO NOT MY FRIENDS BECOME ADDICTED TO WATER


Kalbear

Recommended Posts

Just now, Bold Barry Whitebeard said:

No I haven't.  But dismissing a racial grievance, I'm told, is a microagression and a grievance in itself.  Now you're the one making meta posts.

You amaze me with your rhetorical jujitsu. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do blame the illiberal left to some extent for the rise of Trump. Whether they intended to or not, they do make white males* feel besieged and under attack by the mainstream media and academia. You can't really push identity politics for every group except one and expect that one group to never develop their own identity politics. Even if that group, on average, has numerous social and economic advantages.

 

*a group I am not a member of. It's stupid that I feel like I have to point this out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

I do blame the illiberal left to some extent for the rise of Trump. Whether they intended to or not, they do make white males* feel besieged and under attack by the mainstream media and academia. You can't really push identity politics for every group except one and expect that one group to never develop their own identity politics. Even if that group, on average, has numerous social and economic advantages.

 

*a group I am not a member of. It's stupid that I feel like I have to point this out.

If asserting the rights of traditionally underprivileged people is "making white males feel besieged", is it then incumbent on black people to find a more white-guy-centered approach to demanding equality?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TrackerNeil said:

And I feel stupid to have to rebut it. If asserting the rights of traditionally underprivileged people is "making white males feel besieged", is it then incumbent on black people to find a more white-guy-centered approach to demanding equality?

You could certainly be less of an asshole about it. College kids telling people born in trailer parks from broken homes to check their privilege was never going to do anything other than piss them off.

And yes, it probably is, if only for tactical reasons. In the same way that attacking police officers (even if the attacks were legitimate and justifiable) has possibly led to an increase in murders.The mere existence of Donald Trump as a viable candidate for President has done irreparable damage to our democracy, far more damage than good the social justice movement has accomplished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

You could certainly be less of an asshole about it. College kids telling people born in trailer parks from broken homes to check their privilege was never going to do anything other than piss them off.

And yes, it probably is, if only for tactical reasons. In the same way that attacking police officers (even if the attacks were legitimate and justifiable) has possibly led to an increase in murders.The mere existence of Donald Trump as a viable candidate for President has done irreparable damage to our democracy, far more damage than good the social justice movement has accomplished.

I'm going to leave off the flippancy for a moment to take this comment a bit more seriously. Yes, there is a certain annoying self-righteousness to the way some liberals talk about inequality, but let's not lose sight of the big picture here. The fact that some white guys feel besieged is a mere pebble next to the mountain of discrimination and bigotry that black people routinely report.

I don't know how much an impression this will make, but if some straight guy told me, "Hey, your demands for equality make me uncomfortable," I wouldn't be very concerned as to my tone. Instead, I'd be thinking, "Wow...this guy holds his sense of personal comfort as equivalent to my sense of human dignity." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a fair point, I think, that the conversations around privilege have caused some problems. The connotations aren't good for starters, but mostly it's tough to get any traction on change for most people if you're just yelling at them. And for a lot of people that's how privilege conversations start.

That isn't trying to diminish anger or say that anger doesn't have a right to be said. It's pointing out that anger -especially anger at specific people for actions they probably didn't take and certainly didn't intend to take - is probably not that successful in convincing them to change their mind. It is helpful in signalling others and showing that it is okay to speak their mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

If asserting the rights of traditionally underprivileged people is "making white males feel besieged", is it then incumbent on black people to find a more white-guy-centered approach to demanding equality?

It's gone beyond asserting rights and demanding equality.  Black pride, gay pride, hispanic pride etc are all things to be lauded and celebrated.  White pride is racism.

A black person voting for someone who champions black rights is a given.  LGBT are expected to vote for those who champion their cause.  Hillary is the female-friendly candidate.  But the second someone steps forward as championing white people, it's racism.

You keep circling back to equality, but really, it's identity and the idea that white americans don't have one, or should be ashamed of theirs.  That is what makes white males feel besieged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Kalbear said:

That isn't trying to diminish anger or say that anger doesn't have a right to be said. It's pointing out that anger -especially anger at specific people for actions they probably didn't take and certainly didn't intend to take - is probably not that successful in convincing them to change their mind. It is helpful in signalling others and showing that it is okay to speak their mind.

I don't disagree--in fact, I've talked about this--but it drives me crazy when the conversation shifts from the valid complaint to the tone of the complaint. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TrackerNeil said:

I don't know how much an impression this will make, but if some straight guy told me, "Hey, your demands for equality make me uncomfortable," I wouldn't be very concerned as to my tone. Instead, I'd be thinking, "Wow...this guy holds his sense of personal comfort as equivalent to my sense of human dignity." 

Therein lies the difficulty. I have this idea that people should be treated equally regardless of gender, sexual orientation, or skin colour. As such it is downright infuriating when Random Minority Politician says he wouldn't want his daughter marrying a white guy* - and all sorts of people (who should know better) jump to his defence with the claim that brown people can't be racist.

*This happened here several years ago.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Bold Barry Whitebeard said:

It's gone beyond asserting rights and demanding equality.  Black pride, gay pride, hispanic pride etc are all things to be lauded and celebrated.  White pride is racism.

A black person voting for someone who champions black rights is a given.  LGBT are expected to vote for those who champion their cause.  Hillary is the female-friendly candidate.  But the second someone steps forward as championing white people, it's racism.

You keep circling back to equality, but really, it's identity and the idea that white americans don't have one, or should be ashamed of theirs.  That is what makes white males feel besieged.

Perhaps it's because in recent history they could be killed for trying to assert their rights.  Perhaps they feel they have to vote that way to protect the hard fought rights they have gained.  White people don't need a damn champion, we have plenty of people championing white people and their causes.  When the white nationalists and the white genocide assholes feel that Trump is the man to support and actively support him, you're probably on the wrong side.  When a party uses racially charged code words and blames Obama for the fact that Chicago has the violence it does,  then you don't get the benefit of the doubt as to your intentions. 

White dudes who feel besieged are small minded assholes who don't like the idea of these groups having the ability to assert their rights and privileges.  They don't like that they get roasted for having retrograde ideas about how society should be.  They can have their ass backward views, but now they get challenged on it and they can't handle that. They cannot and will not acknowledge that they benefit from their status as white men.  I see it on Twitter with women who report on sports.  These women deal with so much bullshit from retrograde assholes who cannot accept a woman reporting on their sports heroes.  Even when it is just reporting the facts in a case, they deal with misogyny on a level I never imagined.  So I could care less about their fragile feelings. 

The majority culture of our country is white, so these assholes are just whiny because other cultures get some spotlight.  If their ego is so dependent on being at the top of the heap, then fuck them.  I say this as a straight, white male, part of said group.  I recognize the opportunities I receive by being a white male and I am man enough to admit it.  I don't hide behind bullshit identity politics or the idea the being white is something to be ashamed of.  I am ashamed of the history of oppression perpetrated by white people in this country.  I can also acknowledge that while I am not personally guilty of this, I have a responsibility to make amends .  So I say to these weak minded white men, grow the fuck up and act like the adults you claim to be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

I do blame the illiberal left to some extent for the rise of Trump. Whether they intended to or not, they do make white males* feel besieged and under attack by the mainstream media and academia. You can't really push identity politics for every group except one and expect that one group to never develop their own identity politics. Even if that group, on average, has numerous social and economic advantages.

 

*a group I am not a member of. It's stupid that I feel like I have to point this out.

'Develop' their own identity politics?

Dude, white males don't have identity politics in the same way that fish don't have water. White male identity politics is the way the entire Western world has been organised and run for centuries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, White Walker Texas Ranger said:

I do blame the illiberal left to some extent for the rise of Trump. Whether they intended to or not, they do make white males* feel besieged and under attack by the mainstream media and academia. You can't really push identity politics for every group except one and expect that one group to never develop their own identity politics. Even if that group, on average, has numerous social and economic advantages.

 

*a group I am not a member of. It's stupid that I feel like I have to point this out.

Except the problem is what makes straight/white/male people feel "under attack" is the simple act of not being in the majority or in a position of privilege. There's no way around that feeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[mod hat]

 

Let's keep the discussion topical to U.S. election. Protracted discussion on privilege and such should probably go find its own home.

 

 

[/mod hat]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kalbear said:

On that note, Jerry brown endorsed Clinton today. Which is more interesting based on history and the 1992 campaign.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/31/politics/jerry-brown-endorses-hillary-clinton/index.html

I think the more important endorsement today came from North Korea, endorsing Trump

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/may/31/north-korea-praises-trump-and-urges-us-voters-to-reject-dull-hillary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/30/2016 at 3:56 AM, Vastet said:

No, it's mostly in-party bs that has her in the lead. Take away the super delegates, many of whom voted before the race even started, and Hillary has literally 0 chance of forcing the party to accept her as nominee.

No. It's mostly her 3-million vote lead, if you take away super delegates. 

[ETA]: Super delegates that, according to Sanders, are totally corrupt and immoral.

Unless they can help him win, in which case, they're totes legit. 

Quote

Bull. Trump makes Sanders look like a saint. Nothing in Sanders past is so bad it would hurt his chances. The very fact people have to time travel almost 50 years to find something objectionable is hilarious. And completely ignores the fact that his comments were quite in line with beliefs of the day. You don't have to do any time travel to find a plethora of objectionable comments and actions for the other candidates.

No one doubts the bolded is true. My point is, Trump would have absolutely zero problems looking like a total hypocrite and bringing up the skeletons from Sanders past (which are, admittedly, few) to throw dirt on him--skeletons that are, for the most part, unknown to the electorate at large. 

Even more damning--Sanders' tax plan, which would raise taxes on the middle class. (not saying it's wrong, but it would and that's hugely unpopular)

Quote

And this isn't Westeros. Noone cares about illegitimate children.

Except all across the culturally conservative South and Midwest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, alguien said:

No. It's mostly her 3-million vote lead, if you take away super delegates. 

[ETA]: Super delegates that, according to Sanders, are totally corrupt and immoral.

Unless they can help him win, in which case, they're totes legit.  

This is still an argument by people? Seriously. The math has been done. Hillary owns the pledged count by ~250 votes and she has more than 3 million vote lead. None of the math is Sanders favor or ever has been no matter how many times he says it is. I'll just add this John Oliver segment for anyone that believes Sanders would be ahead of Hillary without superdelegates.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...