A Discussion Thread About Racism in America

AquarianRising

AquarianRising

Well-known member
ynnest said:
I encourage you to start looking at your own behavior before you start projecting that pattern on others. Communism and rightwing extremists are part of this set up duality war which is why the energy that those who are part of it carries projects this unsettling and negative energy wherever they are trying to settle their presence.

Y
Click to expand...

You're saying that my remarks about people spamming a board with meme images in an attempt to win by volume of argument rather than quality are causing an opposing force that is driving the individual in question to engage in more such misconduct.

I understand, but I don't entirely agree. Opposition will always exist. It's not on me to accept that sort of blatant abuse of free speech, nor is the perp obliged to conduct him- or herself more appropriately. But if there is to be a reduction of the fracture in society, the extremists you refer to are going to have to understand that it's their extreme positions and expressions that cause their opposition to take the extreme position they do. Dialing back their conviction and presumed moral authority would let the "other side" relax a little, too.

But since self-correction requires self-restraint and extremism is axiomatically opposite to the required conservatism, I just wanna know where the mute button is. Pretty innocuous request, I thought.
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
AquarianRising said:
You're saying that my remarks about people spamming a board with meme images in an attempt to win by volume of argument rather than quality are causing an opposing force that is driving the individual in question to engage in more such misconduct.

I understand, but I don't entirely agree. Opposition will always exist. It's not on me to accept that sort of blatant abuse of free speech, nor is the perp obliged to conduct him- or herself more appropriately. But if there is to be a reduction of the fracture in society, the extremists you refer to are going to have to understand that it's their extreme positions and expressions that cause their opposition to take the extreme position they do. Dialing back their conviction and presumed moral authority would let the "other side" relax a little, too.

But since self-correction requires self-restraint and extremism is axiomatically opposite to the required conservatism, I just wanna know where the mute button is. Pretty innocuous request, I thought.
Click to expand...

Go to User Control Panel. Find "Edit ignore list". Put in the username of whoever you're going to block.
 
AquarianRising

AquarianRising

Well-known member
demetraceres said:
I have never seen it that way. Are revelations of the atrocities against native population a reflection of a communist ideology? It's possible, but we have also the opposite situations, the revelations of China atrocities against Tibetans, for example. In both cases the genocide was accompanied by the new social order. Some call it progress.
Click to expand...

And what do you, personally, intend to do about it? Write your governor or senator? Life *****, but sometimes you need to let people deal with their own problems. At a national/international level, we've got plenty of cr@p to deal with in our own neighborhood. You can have all the empathy you want for tragedy in other places, but there are people here at home with just as many problems. Where's your info graphics and memes on drug abuse or genetic defect research? How about foster kids owned by the state and moved around from home to home until they're old enough to get into real trouble?

I'm not interested in seeing that stuff, since I've got a lot on my own plate already. I'm just saying it's kinda flippant to disregard your own national or local issues in favor of distant or international issues. Or, for that matter, to generate non-issues to distract from real issues. Pay-wage gaps, for example. If someone wants to persue a philanthropic agenda, I applaud the effort. But people need to remember to keep it real and get their own houses in order first, you see?

As to how it's a "communist ideology", that is simply because a communist believes that all people are of identical value and everyone should get exactly the same. Including empathy and "activism" which is a term often used mistakenly. It implies action, and "raising awareness" requires little to no actual effort. Any mook with a microphone can scream at a crowd all day about white privilege and sexism. Real activism is about addressing the issue directly. Most people won't even acknowledge a soapbox activist, which describes the vast majority of those who identify as such.
 
D

demetraceres

Well-known member
david starling said:
The takeover of Palestine by mostly Europeanized Semites known as "Jews", who believe that they are returning to their ancient homeland (from which they were expelled by the Romans, and prevented from returning by those of the then new, Islamic religion), is often compared by Progressives in the U.S., as equivalent to the takeover of North America by Christian Europeans.
Click to expand...

This is the comparison? The origin of the conflict seems very different to me, as it has escalated from the nationalists movements among the Jews and among the Arabs, both claiming Palestina their homeland. Besides tiny Jewish minorities have remained in Palestina regardless Jewish expulsion by Romans.

The takeover of North America was on the other hand the clash of the two priviously unknown worlds (the Viking episode was practically unimportant). Historically speaking I don't see this comparison very accurate, but no doubt the whole situation is very tragical for the Palestinians for a long time now. The never ending question of the conqueror and the victim.

In Europe, predominantely far right groups claim that recent "invasion of Islam" has put us in the position of Native Americans. That this situation is practically the same. It would be interesting to hear the opinion of somebody who is Native American.
 
AquarianRising

AquarianRising

Well-known member
demetraceres said:
This is the comparison? The origin of the conflict seems very different to me, as it has escalated from the nationalists movements among the Jews and among the Arabs, both claiming Palestina their homeland. Besides tiny Jewish minorities have remained in Palestina regardless Jewish expulsion by Romans.

The takeover of North America was on the other hand the clash of the two priviously unknown worlds (the Viking episode was practically unimportant). Historically speaking I don't see this comparison very accurate, but no doubt the whole situation is very tragical for the Palestinians for a long time now. The never ending question of the conqueror and the victim.

In Europe, predominantely far right groups claim that recent "invasion of Islam" has put us in the position of Native Americans. That this situation is practically the same. It would be interesting to hear the opinion of somebody who is Native American.
Click to expand...

I agree that the Islam/Israeli conflict and the initial habitation of N.A. by Europeans are a bit different in tone. However, it should also be recognized, I think, that history is written by the bold and the victorious. I don't think there's any question that there were a$$holes behind the spread of "American" culture as time went on, but what I think the progressives tend to forget is, first, that there were a lot of good people who didn't have a say in how far the colonization was pushed, and second, that we're talking something like 150 years or so since the last native American tribe was sort of put in a specific territory and locked there. What was the home of a native American 150 years ago is now an American's home. The modern native has never lived in territory "owned" by U.S. citizens for over a hundred years.

So unless we're talking about forcibly evicting hundreds of millions of people and scrunching them all into tiny, over-packed cities on the East coast ('cause there ain't anywhere else for them to go) or outright euthanizing them and their kids, this argument doesn't even have any room for debate. Did U.S. politicians and pioneers take a lot of land from indigenous people? Yup. But now is not then, and the circumstances and demographics have changed. There's no reason the N.A. tribes can't join the U.S. citizenry and make their votes matter in our culture.

But I'm not even going to entertain the idea of wiping out hundreds of millions of human beings so a scant ten million or so N.A. humans can have more land than their numbers require. Besides, they're having almost as much trouble with in-fighting as our own government, at this point. The local N.A. casino was shut down for like half a year or some sh*t a year ago because the various factions couldn't decide of the distribution of profits or whatever. Not that it inconvenienced me at all; I don't gamble.
 
D

demetraceres

Well-known member
AquarianRising said:
I agree that the Islam/Israeli conflict and the initial habitation of N.A. by Europeans are a bit different in tone. However, it should also be recognized, I think, that history is written by the bold and the victorious. I don't think there's any question that there were a$$holes behind the spread of "American" culture as time went on, but what I think the progressives tend to forget is, first, that there were a lot of good people who didn't have a say in how far the colonization was pushed, and second, that we're talking something like 150 years or so since the last native American tribe was sort of put in a specific territory and locked there. What was the home of a native American 150 years ago is now an American's home. The modern native has never lived in territory "owned" by U.S. citizens for over a hundred years.

So unless we're talking about forcibly evicting hundreds of millions of people and scrunching them all into tiny, over-packed cities on the East coast ('cause there ain't anywhere else for them to go) or outright euthanizing them and their kids, this argument doesn't even have any room for debate. Did U.S. politicians and pioneers take a lot of land from indigenous people? Yup. But now is not then, and the circumstances and demographics have changed. There's no reason the N.A. tribes can't join the U.S. citizenry and make their votes matter in our culture.

But I'm not even going to entertain the idea of wiping out hundreds of millions of human beings so a scant ten million or so N.A. humans can have more land than their numbers require. Besides, they're having almost as much trouble with in-fighting as our own government, at this point. The local N.A. casino was shut down for like half a year or some sh*t a year ago because the various factions couldn't decide of the distribution of profits or whatever. Not that it inconvenienced me at all; I don't gamble.
Click to expand...

I hope you do realize that you have a discussion with some political/ideological groups in USA, I guess, because your answer has nothing to do with my post. Besides it was not my attention to attack or criticise you, I was only interested in particular questions.

The comparison with Native Americans is also politically important in my culture, by the way (i don't mean Islam this time).
 
JUPITERASC

JUPITERASC

Well-known member
demetraceres said:
I'm sure natural resources have played the great part in it, but anyway - China claims that historically and politically Tibet is part of China, so from China's point of view Tibet has been undergoing radical changes typical for entire state.
Click to expand...
hqdefault.jpg


DKfpbSeXoAAbzG5.jpg
 
Y

ynnest

Well-known member
AquarianRising said:
You're saying that my remarks about people spamming a board with meme images in an attempt to win by volume of argument rather than quality are causing an opposing force that is driving the individual in question to engage in more such misconduct.

I understand, but I don't entirely agree. Opposition will always exist. It's not on me to accept that sort of blatant abuse of free speech, nor is the perp obliged to conduct him- or herself more appropriately. But if there is to be a reduction of the fracture in society, the extremists you refer to are going to have to understand that it's their extreme positions and expressions that cause their opposition to take the extreme position they do. Dialing back their conviction and presumed moral authority would let the "other side" relax a little, too.

But since self-correction requires self-restraint and extremism is axiomatically opposite to the required conservatism, I just wanna know where the mute button is. Pretty innocuous request, I thought.
Click to expand...


I generally agree with your argument about the memes.

Y
 
D

david starling

Well-known member
The first BLACK Ops President was Eisenhower, who used the CIA to overthrow the democratically elected President of Iran for the Oil Corporations, a huge mistake as it turned out. Nixon was the second BLACK Ops President, training death squads in Central and South America on behalf of Corporations. The Drug Cartels are the results of Richard Nixon's "War on Drugs", which has led to a major upsurge in human trafficking. Singling out a President's BLACK Ops policies based on his Race, is Racism.
 
Last edited:
Top