ARGUMENT IN CAPITAL LETTERS MAKES ME SOUND ANGRY AND CORRECT! There has, and will be, people who do think black people are animals. There will be these people in the police, in schools, everywhere. These people aren't the problem. These people do not have hold of the majority of the opinion of the US, or the majority opinion of the police. The most I can imagine being common is a "like animals" comparison to refer to people in the ghettos, which isn't literally calling people animals. You are talking about situations that are the odd man out, the strange people, the people regarded as wrong, and only have support inside of their own little echo-chamber. These attitudes exist, but they are not the baseline. They are not common. They are not the definition. These people, with time, are going to disappear and fade away, these people are not the problem that causes the majority of issues black people face. YOU WEREN'T THERE MAN! Saying "you don't know" does not change an argument. It doesn't change the point. All the examples you point out can be shut down with actual argument. With actual, constructive, counter-points that, while they base themselves in "you don't know man!" are actually logical, and actually make sense. Say "YOU DONT KNOW" as much as you want, until you can back that up with the reason why things are different, simply saying "you are wrong" in a different way, will accomplish nothing. I am not telling you what it feel like to be black. I am not concerned about what it feels like to be black. No, I am assigning "treating people as inhuman" it's proper value, rather than dragging the term down to mean less than it is. And we are all better off for it. It's why we call them heroes. Secondly, I am talking about the idea that it's not someone's job to inform others, or to change the minds of others. I am not saying you have to become a well known or popular civil rights leader. And if you are in a situation where you are under personal threat to stand up, don't. There is nothing wrong with it. Those are the exact same thing. Morality is rule by the majority, and rule by force. You will follow these laws, or we will punish you. All ideas have to fight to become the majority, and in that fight they prove their worth. It is the "natural" mechanism society uses to stop things like scientology from becoming popular, while still allowing the things that actually benefit society to become part of it. Allowing change while filtering the shit. I don't know the majority of musicians. The only bands I have listened to in bulk in the last five years have been the Mighty Mighty Bosstones, and a bit of Greenday. And, yes, a society that is constructive is one that is better than one that is destructive. There is a good reason MLK became famous while Malcom X did not. MLK pushed for peaceful and understanding rebellion. Malcom X went for the angry, rebellious, positions. Being constructive does not mean telling people they aren't bad, it means telling people what they are doing needs to change, and holding that position, while not coming to hate the people in the process. The first line of that article is this: I was here thinking you were going to link to a police officer who thought all black people were animals, and deserved to be shot in the street. Instead, you link to one who doesn't understand the implication of what he saw as a joke, and doesn't understand the harm it can do. OK, going to address this first. Riots and protests are not the way to go about things. (well, yes, protests, but not ones over a federal case where the police officer was not found guilty, and not accompanied by riots coopted by people looking to loot homes and businesses) You are turning me into straw, it seems. I am one of those darn people who just fight for the middle ground while still being racist, I guess? "Why do those black people hurt themselves with their protests in the streets". "I felt so sorry for those poor black people with those MLK days". That isn't me, and never will be. It is not the onus of discrimination, but instead the onus of ending it. And it doesn't only fall to the oppressed, it falls to anyone who is aware, and believes it is wrong. There are probably black people out there who very much do not fall into that category. The only think that will bring about change in our society is a change in it's culture. Education, as much as you seem to hate it, is the thing that will cause people to change their minds. The same tactics atheism uses, are the tactics civil rights should use. Instead of protests against a controversial case, protests should bring awareness to things like the DOJ reports that very clearly show a systematic discrimination against black people in at least one town of the United States. Protests should bring minds to situations where they see and know what happens when they tell the jokes like that police officer told. The key to change is awareness and education. Make people aware of what is wrong, and tell them why it is. Do not tell people "you can't say this person isn't legitamate because you aren't black" instead tell them "The things that black people face exist regardless of wealth." (or similar). And change comes slowly, a protest isn't going to summon change like you summon a bird out of a hate. Protests set that little seed of doubt a person has in their worldview, and that seed will grow with the time and effort people put into it, but it will die the moment something happens to reinforce a person's worldview. I do look at this whole situation as I look at religion, as I see how action can be taken to change the views of those who are religious. Look at /r/atheism, and the reception it has gotten. Do you think they have been successful in changing minds? Their ranting, raving, insulting, and attacking, has accomplished nothing, and hurt their cause. Instead, a calm, honest, and open discussion among those who have yet to discuss these things in a way that encourages people to listen, and accept the ideas you are telling them will inspire change. No, it won't be fast. No, it probably won't happen this generation, and yes, people will always disagree, fight change, and so on. No process is instant, and no good thing takes no work to achieve. The most we can do is be open, honest, and kind. Again, kind doesn't mean you can't tell someone they are wrong, it just means you have to do it in a way that ensures they will be receptive to it. Plant seeds of dissent, don't smash the oppressors.THEY HAPPEN BECAUSE THEY THINK WE'RE LESS THEN HUMAN, HOLY SHIT.
Do I really have to pull out the numerous, NUMEROUS texts and emails found amongst police that LITERALLY call Black people animals?
The Telemundo guy that compared Michelle Obama to an ape from Planet of the Apes? That's not Reddit, Bio, you can't really cover that shit up!
BUT YOU DON'T FUCKING KNOW AND YOU NEVER WILL.
It's like telling me all about riding a rollercoaster when you've never been on one in your life.
Okay, so you are being purposefully facetious
Every person that's stepped up to make change got shot
. Acceptance is not "proving that my gayness is the right morality." It's "fucking accept my gayness and stop being a bigoted piece of shit."
Ah, the Common perspective. The rapper, since I'm ABSOLUTELY SURE you've never heard of him. All "hug the white people so they feel better about themselves, that'll fix things." Maaaaybe in hell.
[You'd probably lose that bet.](http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/30/gates.police.apology/_
The Boston police officer who sent a mass e-mail in which he compared Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. to a "banana-eating jungle monkey" has apologized, saying he's not a racist.
I authored," Barrett said on CNN. "I am not a racist. I did not intend any racial bigotry, harm or prejudice in my words. I sincerely apologize that these words have been received as such. I truly apologize to all."
Alright, well you've bitched enough. What's your idea of fixing and accomplishing things, Bio?
The riots aren't enough? The protests aren't enough?
Asking to be treated like an equal, to not get stopped for walking, or eating, or breathing while Black, that's too much for you?
It doesn't accomplish anything? Then what does? Because you need to stop putting the onus of discrimination on the people that have been systematically oppressed.
___________________________________________________________________________________________ I recognize that the costs/benefits analysis of this discussion does not support my efforts in answering you, but I'm going to try. I further recognize that there's likely to be a swamp of death-by-1000-cuts line-by-line parsing so that larger issues can be ignored in favor of minutiae, but I accept that. In amongst several thousand words of cross-purpose antagonism, there's this shining, rhetorical lodestone that sweeps away all the chaff, all the bluster, all the willfully ignorant sophistry so I'm gonna fish it out, run it under the tap and put it under the light because by damn, you might just understand. HERE IT IS: The less horrible the majority acts, the fewer heroes the minority has to sacrifice. You seem quite positive and honorific about the sacrifices oppressed groups have made to lessen their oppression. However, you lack sympathy for the idea that sacrifices should not be required. To you, it's an abstraction: the onus is on the oppressed to rise up and demand their fair share. To 8bit, he's 21 times more likely to get shot by a cop than you. This accounts for the unsympathetic reception you've received: The white person's role is to accept the mild inconvenience of vigilance towards racism. The black person's role is, according to you, martyrdom. The issue is compounded by the ready evidence of martyrdom amongst the black community and the scarce evidence of its effectiveness. Rodney King was 23 years ago. Detroit was 25 years before that (and then 25 years before that). The Emancipation Proclamation was 150 years ago - your arbitrary cut-off of when we started treating blacks as "human". Yet it's still substantially harder to thrive as a minority in the United States than as the majority. Minorities definitely serve to benefit the most from equal treatment. From a "rational markets" perspective, the onus of transformation is on them. But rational markets are pure evil from an ethical standpoint: if I'm seven times less likely to go to jail and 21 times less likely to get shot over it, isn't the onus on me to do something about it? Particularly when all I have to do is not be a douche and accept that sometimes I should go out of my way to be sensitive to people different than me? "No process is instant, and no good thing takes no work to achieve." Yes. Absolutely. But holy fuck. There are people in trenches and people in lawn chairs and sometimes it's good for the soul to recognize which one you are and pick up a spade. Or at least grab an extra beer from the fridge if you're going there anyway.Every person that's stepped up to make change got shot, lol. I've done my part.
And we are all better off for it. It's why we call them heroes.
Hah, still remember how to quote on this site. Been a while. This statement is an obvious one, it is like saying "if the sky was red, fewer people would need large planes with which to paint the sky" It doesn't change that sacrifice is required to inspire change. People have to stand up for what they believe in if they want to inspire progress. I am not saying this must be black people, but I would guess that the vast majority of people who care enough about the issues facing black communities are black themselves. In an ideal world, nobody would ever have to work a day, make any sacrifices, or ever do anything. That isn't this world. In 150 years we have gone from treating a group of people as less than human to having large and society wide discussions on how we are not properly giving them access to resources, and that they are being targeted more often by police. I understand that it still isn't truly "right". I understand that there is still more to go, and I understand the frustration around the lack of progress in change in recent years. However, change is something that is slow, especially when regarding culture. These events have and will continue to chip away and cause progress towards a more equal and better society. Yes, because if you don't, nobody else is going to. This isn't a matter of what's fair, it's a matter of what works. All this talk about how white people should be doing more, and this is what you say is all people have to do? This is nothing. This is the bare minimum I would expect from anyone out there. What I talk about when I mean "going out to change the world" I mean heading out and protesting, hitting the streets, yelling, making noise, making yourself heard and in the public eye. Real activism. You doing this isn't going to stop police, it's not going to stop the KKK, it's not going to stop cultures in Charleston from stirring up a massive identity around fear and hatred. It's lazy, and that's what I mean. The vast majority of people are lazy, and aren't going to stand up or try to cause change. Doing that is left to those motivated to do so.The less horrible the majority acts, the fewer heroes the minority has to sacrifice.
However, you lack sympathy for the idea that sacrifices should not be required.
The Emancipation Proclamation was 150 years ago - your arbitrary cut-off of when we started treating blacks as "human". Yet it's still substantially harder to thrive as a minority in the United States than as the majority.
if I'm seven times less likely to go to jail and 21 times less likely to get shot over it, isn't the onus on me to do something about it?
Particularly when all I have to do is not be a douche and accept that sometimes I should go out of my way to be sensitive to people different than me?
So I'm done with you because you still haven't given me anything that doesn't strike me as garbage spewing from the never-ending wardrobe that is your mouth, but this: Is proof to me you know nothing. MLK was a radical. He's been White-Washed in such a way that people like you parrot the "he was about peace" blah-blah-bullshit. Read and weep, bro. And since you're so big on MLK, here, read my favorite quote from him! I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.And, yes, a society that is constructive is one that is better than one that is destructive. There is a good reason MLK became famous while Malcom X did not. MLK pushed for peaceful and understanding rebellion. Malcom X went for the angry, rebellious, positions. Being constructive does not mean telling people they aren't bad, it means telling people what they are doing needs to change, and holding that position, while not coming to hate the people in the process.
I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
I'm genuinely surprised that everyone hadn't done this long before this thread.
Dank meme. What browser do you use to make the checkboxes display such? I've not seen that before. EDODITOT: Dodanonkok momemome. Wowhohatot bobrorowowsoseror dodo you usose toto momakoke tothohe cochohecockokboboxoxesos dodisospoplolay sosucochoh? I'vove nonotot soseenon tothohatot bobefoforore.
He was about "peace", non-violent protest specifically. MLK is known for the message of standing up for what you believe in without attack. He was a radical in his time, I do not even begin to deny that. See, I know of this speech, and I it is actually one of the speeches from MLK that I remembered the most. Notice he talks about order. He is talking about people who act as the quotes I gave above, people who would say "why don't those poor black people just stop protesting". I am not calling for an end to protesting. I am not saying that people shouldn't be angry, and shouldn't try and fight for what they believe in (and by fight I do not mean violent fighting). He didn't stand to demean, to attack, or to push others down or tell them they were horrible. He stood for raising awareness for a cause through protest. Through educating people, through planting said seed in their mind that something is wrong. That something needs to change.Is proof to me you know nothing. MLK was a radical. He's been White-Washed in such a way that people like you parrot the "he was about peace"
I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice
Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.
Also, I live in NC and I often travel to remote parts of SC for work. That video of the guy in Alabama isn't a "one off" unusual experience. It's very much real, prevalent and an everyday experience for many people because of the amount of pigment in their skin. Edit: Based on your profile, which says, "hide, hide from the dissenting opinions." I have to assume that you purposefully try and take the counter-argument. Which, is essentially the definition of trolling, right? Because if you find that you are always holding the opposite opinion of those around you, you can pretty much come to one of three conclusions: 1. I'm in the wrong place 2. Everyone else is crazy 3. I'm trollingLike a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all its ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light, injustice must be exposed, with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion before it can be cured.
-The first part of healing the metaphorical boil is admitting it exists, is very much real, very much ugly and has roots well below the surface of the skin. From what I gather from this conversation, you're seeing a benign freckle where 8bit sees, through first hand experience a big nasty malignant boil.
As you know I live in MI and have my whole life. I've also spent a significant amount of time in NC, because I have family there. I would say that both places have a lot of racists, but there are qualitative differences in the way racism manifests itself in the two places. In MI, there are groups who feel comfortable among themselves being racist, so that when there are only friends around, the racist guys let their guard down, but you rarely see it in public. In NC, I've had conversations with people whom I never met before that will say things like (and this is a direct quote), "I'm not really a fan of the blacks." There, it's taken as axiomatic (at least in the small towns) that whites can commiserate over their mutual distaste for all things non-white, even among complete strangers. I'm never really sure how to act in that case. Of course your heart immediately goes to wanting to stand up for humanity, but your head reminds you that all you're going to accomplish is to make things more difficult for yourself. In the above example I was talking to a guy who runs the surveying for Henderson County, NC--the only guy--and I was trying to help my dad get a variance because the builder built his house two feet too close to the property line. So you have a choice between shrugging off the comment, or saying how you feel and making poor old dad tear down his freshly framed house because you've pissed off the one guy who can do anything about it. I'm a pragmatist and a coward, so I took the easy way. However, I think that's how racism propagates itself so easily. People like me (who don't feel racist, and try to be conscious of not acting so) who tolerate actual racists for the sake of expediency. The message received by the racist in that case is probably one of tacit agreement, and any budding racists see this behavior as acceptable and perhaps even positive, because it shows that "we" have a club, and that when in this club a friendly chat about the weather and baseball is all you need to get your variance approved (for example). If you're not in the club, you're taking down the damn house.I live in NC and I often travel to remote parts of SC for work. That video of the guy in Alabama isn't a "one off" unusual experience. It's very much real, prevalent and an everyday experience for many people because of the amount of pigment in their skin.
My first trip to the south was for a wedding in Chattanooga Tennessee. I was walking by myself enjoying the view when a woman who must have been close to 80 years old asked me if I was visiting. I said yes and she said well, you must go see all the beautiful bridges etc. It was a lovely conversation and she was really proud of her town. I thought to myself, "what a lovely woman," and then she told me to stay away from a particular part of town, pointed in its direction and said "because of all the niggers." My jaw dropped, I honestly did not know what to say. I can't remember if I just slowly walked away or if I said something along the lines of, "well I'm not a racist so that will be fine." -I was gobsmacked. So, to your point, it's much more on the sleeve in the south, which is not to say that it is any more or less prevalent.
-
In my opinion - and not to be rude in my disagreement with you, TNG - I think the purpose of that statement or the backing behind it is as follows: bioemerl gets blocked/hushed/muted a lot, and it makes him really bitter. The profile statement is a passive aggressive attempt to make people feel bad when they navigate over to his profile after they have chosen to block/hush/mute him. - I mean, I realize I'm analyzing here, but we tell people what we want them to know and how we tell them is part of that. He sees himself as the honorable dissenting opinion and we who find him completely intolerable are "hiding," synonymous in feel with "denying" "choosing not to see," "willful blindness" etc, as opposed to I don't know maybe human people who have the right to choose what other human people we want to interact with or not. - Or what opinions they think are worth investing time with, and not. - It's like "Oh, sorry you're so bitter about the fact that most people don't like your shitty opinions man, I see why you had to put it in your profile. Because your pretty skin is so thin and sensitive." - I mean, thenewgreen - sorry I've edited this like a billion times - I do think bioemerl can be considered a troll - I guess that I just like to believe the best of people. i do think that your conclusions are valid and that your point in general is valid. So I start off disagreeing with you, but I'm not really. I guess the difference is in whether or not you believe bioemerl is consciously trolling or not. I try not to believe that of people, so I see him/that statement as bitter, passive-aggressive, and impotently hacking away at a keyboard. But, if he is consciously trolling, that might actually make me feel a little better about his intellect, although not so much how he chooses to spend his time. I stand by the fact that that statement is designed to make people feel bad for hushing/muting/unfollowing him, which is a bitter betsy "no one likes me and I want to shame you for not liking me" move. To me it just reeks of that. it's like the people who say "I think hubski is elitist" in their profiles. If that's the most important thing you have to say about yourself to every other hubski user, then really, why are you here? You can be elitist and still come here and have a fun time. But you think your personal feeling that it's elitist is the way you want to introduce yourself to everyone else on the site? Seriously, at that point, you're trying to insult people and piss them off. Based on your profile, which says, "hide, hide from the dissenting opinions." I have to assume that you purposefully try and take the counter-argument.
I come to places where people have views that oppose mine and argue with them wherever I can. I love arguments. I tend to encourage and try to cause arguments with the posts I comment on and the places I discuss. I try to find places like this, where views are so different, and comment on them so that I may slowly try and ensure that any views I hold will be shifted to a more neutral point of view. A person who lives their life only agreeing with other people, never bothering to challenge their views, is going to have views that are very weak, and very false. I have to assume that you purposefully try and take the counter-argument.
quick question.
So if I send you death threats with utterly disgusting suggestions, I'm just someone joking around without understanding the implications?
Mhm. I guess police should never ever take death threats seriously in ANY circumstance.
That logic is severely flawed, buddy. Also: I am not telling you what it feel like to be black. I am not concerned about what it feels like to be black. That's the first step in understanding discrimination. Right there. Empathy. Which you seem to have VERY little of.
But yeah other than that bye felicia.
I would likely laugh in your face, be a bit worried about it, and forget it about a week in. If you provided some form of substantial evidence of having an address, being able to do harm, etc, then I would call the police and follow their instructions. I have and will continue to try to pry apart my emotions and thoughts on what actions are moral/immoral, right/wrong, etc. The moment I base my actions and words on empathy is the moment I fail to take a moment and observe a situation objectively.So if I send you death threats with utterly disgusting suggestions
That's the first step in understanding discrimination. Right there. Empathy. Which you seem to have VERY little of.