|
ErIog posted:I think once the internet pile-on starts it's easy for them to otherize their detractors while being welcomed by idiot racists. So I think, in some ways, large internet responses to stuff like that might end up just entrenching that person in their bad opinions. If you need a special class to teach you simple things like "hey maybe you shouldn't try to argue about how slavery has its merits", then you pretty much earned that dogpile and need your life ruined. Unless your argument is that white people are incapable of treating others with respect unless they are coddled and handfed in a way no one else is, which is basically asking for a privilege for white people.
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 12:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:08 |
|
|
gfsincere posted:If you need a special class to teach you simple things like "hey maybe you shouldn't try to argue about how slavery has its merits", then you pretty much earned that dogpile and need your life ruined. Unless your argument is that white people are incapable of treating others with respect unless they are coddled and handfed in a way no one else is, which is basically asking for a privilege for white people. Yeah, see, this kinda poo poo is just dumb. Like, it actively works against your goal of making people less awful, because as it turns out, publicly mocking people right to their face tends to make people entrench their beliefs. Because why would I want to be on the side of the person who thinks my life should be ruined? Instead of public mockery, the teacher should talk to them. Because that's the whole point of college: Making dumb mistakes so you can learn from them before you go into the real world, a process more commonly called education.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 13:33
|
|
|
The goal isn't rehabilitation you lily, it's punishment.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 13:53
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:
I generally try to give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to quick pictures like this. I've had debate and ethics classes where you were required to take the poo poo side of an issue as part of a "you need to commit to winning even if you don't agree" sort of lesson and classes where you would be dinged for not putting in at least a token "here's the other side arguments about my issue" as part of a report. It wouldn't shock me at all if this was just an unfortunate required slide that gets taken out of context with a picture and the rest of her powerpoint was about how slavery was just the worst. That said, white folks can be pretty dumb about this poo poo so it wouldn't really shock me if she was just oblivious either.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
gfsincere posted:If you need a special class to teach you simple things like "hey maybe you shouldn't try to argue about how slavery has its merits", then you pretty much earned that dogpile and need your life ruined. Unless your argument is that white people are incapable of treating others with respect unless they are coddled and handfed in a way no one else is, which is basically asking for a privilege for white people. uh you realize there are plenty of classes where you make someone argue a position they don't support so they can practice arguing a position like who knows if that's what is going on here but punishing people for wrongthink based on a context-less photo of a school assignment is really dumb, especially when we're talking about a high schooler who is pretty much doomed to be a dumbass for a while
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 16:11
|
|
|
it's really flat out terrifying that we live in a world where people can take a picture of you and upload it to the internet without your permission when you say/do something dumb and then there's a non-zero chance complete strangers will find you and make your life hell because of a snap judgement they made about how awful you are if you're thinking "yeah well we need to punish racists" this cuts both ways, remember harambe mom boner confessor fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:Except I doubt he actually said that. Reich for all intents and purposes says he had that conversation: https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1311195112226415 Now whether or not it actually happened or he embellished a bunch, well... who knows. Popular Thug Drink posted:uh you realize there are plenty of classes where you make someone argue a position they don't support so they can practice arguing a position I had a class in college where we were given a topic to research to discuss in the following week of class. And then the day of we'd randomly get assigned to one side of the debate or the other. So we had to know both sides, since you didn't know if you'd defend the pro or con of it. I'm halfway wondering if that's what she had to do. seiferguy fucked around with this message at 16:28 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 16:25
|
|
|
Scruff McGruff posted:I generally try to give people the benefit of the doubt when it comes to quick pictures like this. I've had debate and ethics classes where you were required to take the poo poo side of an issue as part of a "you need to commit to winning even if you don't agree" sort of lesson and classes where you would be dinged for not putting in at least a token "here's the other side arguments about my issue" as part of a report. It wouldn't shock me at all if this was just an unfortunate required slide that gets taken out of context with a picture and the rest of her powerpoint was about how slavery was just the worst. On the other hand given that there are still neoconfederate assholes saying that "blacks were better under slavery" of course it is going to be taken to be referring to racialized American-style chattel slavery, so people are going to be uneasy about it being a thing that we can have a balanced discussion about as if each side is a purely theoretical thing. It'd be like having a "is segregation always bad?" theoretical debate, where we talk in big picture terms about religious communes and allowing a native population to retain its culture as if the term doesn't have racially loaded connotations. It's understandable that people might get upset. Public humiliation of individuals for this kind of thing does do harm though. Writing a letter to the school administration asking for it to be struck from the list of theoretical debate topics might be better.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it's really flat out terrifying that we live in a world where people can take a picture of you and upload it to the internet without your permission when you say/do something dumb and then there's a non-zero chance complete strangers will find you and make your life hell because of a snap judgement they made about how awful you are This scares me too. We're all potentially at the whim of the court of public opinion. People are also very reluctant to change their mind about something later if the initial image /rumor triggers a strong emotional reaction. This photo will still be on the Internet when that girl applies for college, when she has a job interview, hell a decade later it could be dredged up.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 16:54
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:I had a class in college where we were given a topic to research to discuss in the following week of class. And then the day of we'd randomly get assigned to one side of the debate or the other. So we had to know both sides, since you didn't know if you'd defend the pro or con of it. I'm halfway wondering if that's what she had to do. probably not, tho it's possible, because i dont see most public schools in america assigning "defend slavery" as a topic. most likely this is just a dumb sheltered teen. but if anyone is going to take mass anonymous criticism from the internet to heart it's a 17 year old girl for sure
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 17:03
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:
Why a fluoride stare? Because by bringing up conspiracy theories now all your friends argon. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 17:34
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
No, they're actually looking at your gross and rotting teeth. Fluoride is good and awesome.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 18:13
|
|
|
KillerJunglist posted:Why a fluoride stare? Because by bringing up conspiracy theories now all your friends argon. What a noble pun you did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 18:40
|
|
|
KillerJunglist posted:Why a fluoride stare? Because by bringing up conspiracy theories now all your friends argon. Dameius posted:What a noble pun you did. If anyone deserves to be judged by the court of public opinion, it is you two.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
Cerepol posted:If anyone deserves to be judged by the court of public opinion, it is you two. They'll have a hard time getting a bond for bail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:35
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:They'll have a hard time getting a bond for bail. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
From cradle to grave man. I didn't know their were any recorded quotes of Republican Jesus.
DrKrankenwagen fucked around with this message at 20:23 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
Measure of a Man is a good episode when it comes to arguing for what you don't believe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:21
|
|
Have you seen my apex seals? I seem to have lost them.
|
Jesus literally made more fish to give them to poor people. I don't think he taught them how he did it. (Also I don't believe Jesus said that phrase anywhere in the Bible.)
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
oneforthevine posted:Jesus literally made more fish to give them to poor people. I don't think he taught them how he did it. He did cry though. Is that really a man you want to follow?
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
He did with different phrasing but it also had nothing to do with "gently caress the poor! get a job!" etc Edit: actually I was way off with my recall of that whole phrase Arcteryx Anarchist fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Sep 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:29
|
|
|
DrKrankenwagen posted:From cradle to grave man. I didn't know their were any recorded quotes of Republican Jesus. I think he's getting mixed up with Jewish theories of charity: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzedakah
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Capfalcon posted:Yeah, see, this kinda poo poo is just dumb. Like, it actively works against your goal of making people less awful, because as it turns out, publicly mocking people right to their face tends to make people entrench their beliefs. Because why would I want to be on the side of the person who thinks my life should be ruined? I don't know what's dumber: The fact that you believe white people are incapable of being not horrible unless someone (and lets be real, you're basically asking the oppressed to teach their oppressor not to be oppressive as if that's okay like we owe white people that) teaches them. Or white people just basically get to be horrible poo poo stains until college when they get enlightenment on basic poo poo like "it's not okay to own other people". If I have to take time out of my day to teach you basic humanity, you deserve to have your life ruined, period.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:uh you realize there are plenty of classes where you make someone argue a position they don't support so they can practice arguing a position I'm betting dollars to donuts this isn't a law school classroom, which is probably the only appropriate setting I could see this topic being appropriate for, as you may have to defend what you morally feel is indefensible. More than likely the girl picked the topic on her own and was just being terrible. Forgive me for not giving the benefit of the doubt after 400 years of this kinda poo poo going on.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
A quick google search says it is an old Chinese proverb and not in the Bible. The religious right is bad with understanding money and religion, go loving figure.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:41
|
|
|
It's also pretty loving paternalistic when it comes to social welfare. People know how to loving fish. It's just that all the finishing holes are owned and you have to apply for a fishing job at minimum fish wage to actually engage in the act. And gently caress you if you're the wrong color and end up last hired and first fired.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Ron Jeremy posted:It's also pretty loving paternalistic when it comes to social welfare. People know how to loving fish. It's just that all the finishing holes are owned and you have to apply for a fishing job at minimum fish wage to actually engage in the act. And gently caress you if you're the wrong color and end up last hired and first fired. I can personally attest to the notion that not everybody can fish, and in fact it's possible to be completely terrible at fishing. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:51
|
|
|
gfsincere posted:I'm betting dollars to donuts this isn't a law school classroom, which is probably the only appropriate setting I could see this topic being appropriate for, as you may have to defend what you morally feel is indefensible. I had at least two classes in high school that had debates similar to the one mentioned above where you would get assigned a topic and had to prepare to defend either side of that issue and you don't know which you're going to have until the day of. Sometimes the topics are very much one sided, which is part of the point, you have to try and think of what others would argue that you wouldn't normally because you're clearly on one side of what feels to be an issue that has been settled. This sort of thing isn't some sort of weird thought exercise relegated to the echelons of grad school, it's a pretty normal scholastic exercise any time after 9th grade. It's also not uncommon for research projects to require you to include a section on the other sides arguments in support of whatever the topic is. A lot of students try to pick topics that are very easy to argue one side of, like slavery, to make the project easier on themselves without considering that it means they'll have to include at least a slide/paragraph on what proponents would say so it gets kind of awkward.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
It's good practice for learning how to be persuasive. If your idea of the other side is just a bunch of straw men, you're just going to talk past them, and when you finally talk to someone who has spent a lot of time arguing the other side, you're going to be unprepared. It's very easy to argue against "Some people were nice to their slaves," it's much harder to argue against "Slavery is an undeniably hideous practice that has no place in the year 2016 where mechanization can easily fill the void for menial labor. However the economic reality of 1600-1800 there was no real alternative." If you're on the pro side, you ought to be prepared for pragmatic and difficult arguments. You won't learn anything if you're just rebutting the same canned arguments.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Dirk the Average posted:They'll have a hard time getting a bond for bail.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Stato-Masochist posted:Do you have a source for labor's share of the cost percentage? I don't doubt that's what it is, but I'd like to see how the evidence has determined that. I'm admittedly ignorant on the numbers here. Seems I had the cost of labor incorrect, likely had them messed up in my head. Looks like for agriculture somewhere between 17 and 44 percent my bad, but that still means the images information is dumb.
|
|
#
?
Sep 22, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
KillerJunglist posted:Why a fluoride stare? Because by bringing up conspiracy theories now all your friends argon. Jesus loving Al-Nazareth.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Aeka 2.0 posted:A quick google search says it is an old Chinese proverb and not in the Bible. The religious right is bad with understanding money and religion, go loving figure. Myth. Although it is commonly attributed to an old chinese proverb, as well as an old Indian tale, an Italian saying, an Aboriginal phrase, and a biblical teaching, there's no evidence it or any similar phrases were ever said or written before white people came up with it. The earliest recognisable usage of the phrase comes from the 19th century british romance novel Mrs. Dymond.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 00:47
|
|
|
"God helps those who help themselves" is another saying a lot of people think is in the bible but isn't. Along with "Kill all fags, destroy Islam, abortion is for sluts, and don't let Obama take my guns."
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:11
|
|
|
Twelve by Pies posted:"God helps those who help themselves" is another saying a lot of people think is in the bible but isn't. https://quran.com/13/11
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Thats not Allah helps those who are already successful, its Allah helps those who change their personality and outlook for the better. But IANAI
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
My wacko uncle says that fluoridation calcifies the pineal gland. He posts a lot about the fluoride stare, and contrails. He's super liberal though, which was cool until he bailed in favor of Stein.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
Bast Relief posted:My wacko uncle says that fluoridation calcifies the pineal gland. He posts a lot about the fluoride stare, and contrails. He sounds like a typical Stein supporter though 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 04:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:08 |
|
|
Thump! posted:He sounds like a typical Stein supporter though Oh totally. It's just that or awhile we could agree on environmental policy and economics, and I could forget about some of his nuttier beleifs. Once Bernie was off the table, he's gone back to being really wacky again. Otherwise he's a super chill dude to smoke a bowl with, and really kind and supportive. Just don't get him going about some of that truly ignorant poo poo you find at the fringe.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2016 05:02
|
|