|
Nucleic Acids posted:Denying Trump is charismatic seems like it’s born out of a need to deny him having any qualities that could be considered positive. Hmm, I think you have a point. I wonder if this happens with any other combinations of groupings of posters and politicians.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 20:52 |
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Hmm, I think you have a point. I wonder if this happens with any other combinations of groupings of posters and politicians. Can you be more specific than that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:09
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Can you be more specific than that? Sure, I was talking about Joe Biden specifically, or Democrats generally. Sorry for the vagueness, it was a rhetorical device.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:10
|
|
|
Terminal autist posted:Charisma isn't really a quantifiable trait and this is a completely anecdotal video. I think a lot more relevant measure to judge charisma in modern times at least would be "engagement" and Trump certainly generates a lot more engagement than Biden for example. If you change the meaning of a word to a completely different concept maybe. But bad example, because the ultimate measure of political engagement is votes and Biden won by how many million? Trump is a meme, a train wreck, a spectacle. If you interpret that as charisma instead of part of the con then I guess he is charismatic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:12
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:Sure, I was talking about Joe Biden specifically, or Democrats generally. Sorry for the vagueness, it was a rhetorical device. I see. Which positive qualities do you feel are being overlooked or denied? \/\/\/that's a good comparison\/\/\/ Majorian fucked around with this message at 23:17 on Feb 5, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:13
|
|
|
Majorian posted:His base clearly doesn't agree. That kind of speaks to the flaw I'm seeing in your argument: Trump's charisma doesn't do anything for you. It doesn't do anything for me, either. But it clearly does something for a pretty sizable group of people, even if that group is shrinking. I'm going to compare it to Evangelism and much of modern Christianity in America where all too frequently, they interpret the Bible to mean whatever the hell they want it to mean. The Bible is not written in contemporary English, and can be hard to parse - but it isn't difficult for people to twist those seemingly incomprehensible words and phrases into whatever beliefs they hold, and want others to hold. Prosperity gospel is the easiest example off the top of my head - nowhere is that in the Bible, yet it is pretty drat popular. Similarly, yeah, Trump frequently says bizarre poo poo when he doesn't have a script. But that just gives his audience the opportunity to 'interpret' his words in whatever way they want. Example: Trump in 2005: "Grab em by the pussy!" Trump in 2015: "I will be phenomenal to the women. I mean, I want to help women." Interpretation: "He's grown as a person. Even if he said that back then, it was just boy's talk!" Trump: "Our country is in serious trouble. We don't have victories any more. We used to have victories but [now] we don't have them. When was the last time anybody saw us beating, let's say, China, in a trade deal? They kill us. I beat China all the time. All the time." Interpretation: "I don't pay much attention to trade, but this guy is rich, he must know what he's talking about. And of course he does well with China, he's Trump!" Trump: "I think the big problem this country has is being politically correct. I've been challenged by so many people and I don't, frankly, have time for total political correctness." Interpretation: "This guy is just like me! I don't understand what LGBTQ+ means, and I don't want to. I'm too busy for that poo poo. I like this guy, he's speaking my language." Trump: “I loved my previous life. I had so many things going. This is more work than in my previous life. I thought it would be easier.” Interpretation: "This guy is working way too hard. Why the hell are people giving him poo poo for playing golf? It's a tough job, but he's still doing it because he cares about our country. Because he cares about me."
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:14
|
|
|
Bottom Liner posted:If you change the meaning of a word to a completely different concept maybe. But bad example, because the ultimate measure of political engagement is votes and Biden won by how many million? Part of being a successful con artist is having a degree of charisma 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:17
|
|
|
Majorian posted:I see. Which positive qualities do you feel are being overlooked or denied? He’s been very good on LGBT issues and labor issues, IMO. There are also a lot of other things (like immigration) where despite being legit bad, many people are unwilling to acknowledge he is an improvement over Trump/Generic R (eg, family separation).
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:31
|
|
|
Mellow Seas posted:He’s been very good on LGBT issues and labor issues, IMO. There are also a lot of other things (like immigration) where despite being legit bad, many people are unwilling to acknowledge he is an improvement over Trump/Generic R (eg, family separation). Yeah, it's similar to Donald the Dove where if you even point out he was marginally better than most recent presidents it quickly becomes a lot of arguments about how he wasn't perfect so you can't even acknowledge unintentional good that came out of his presidency.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2022 23:35
|
|
|
Majorian posted:No, because they were trying to appeal to different audiences in different contexts. The reasons they failed while Trump succeeded was because they were unable to connect with those audiences as well as Trump could with his. Acknowledging that Trump had some level of charisma with his base isn't praising him any more than acknowledging that Hitler had some level of charisma with his base. Trump was able to connect with his audience because he said the things they wanted to hear. Bloomberg didn't, to the audience he wanted to connect with or to any other audience, really. Gumball Gumption posted:I mean you edited my post to remove all content and used it to tell me how Americans think even though you're not American. So yeah, thought the gimmicks were still going. Do you actually believe most Americans find Trump charismatic? No? Then what I told you is true, even though I am not American. quote:Anyways "Does Trump have charisma?"is overall a goofy argument since we have no real definition of charisma that we can agree on and is pretty much "you know it when you see it" and different people in the thread are seeing different things. Despite this there are people in history (and at present time) who virtually everyone agrees was or is charismatic even if they don't like them. For example, Hitler. So I'd say there is generally agreed definition of charisma that is met by some of the most famous people in the world. In specific contexts, sure - some people were charismatic only on stage, some in personal conversation. Trump has no context where he is charismatic to anyone who isn't a terrible person who likes what he says. Every speech is incoherent, every interaction no matter with who is completely awkward. He didn't get an entire nation behind him or even half of it, he applied to a specific subsection of people and it is extremely easy and we'll studied as to what about him applied to those people. It wasn't how he said it, it was what he said. Anyone with enough publicity could - and someone will eventually, and not very long from this moment - repeat it by saying the same things. Maybe he had charisma the past and he used that to gain said publicity, but he isn't charismatic anymore. DarkCrawler fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Feb 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 00:16
|
|
|
Elephant Ambush posted:While this is true, Republicans also agree with this. Broken clock twice a day, etc. Oh yah, totally. It could be the gop crowing about the stock-market recovery after the dive in 2020, or during the post-obama years. but given its date of a few days ago it seems targeted toward the Happy Talk & Biden Boom-Boom that they're trying to replicate itself into a Genuine Belief among voters. and who knows? Happy Talk might work, but at this point in the downward trajectory of approvals every hail-mary pass is gonna be executed. two weeks ago it was biden saying a swear to the fox news guy. Two weeks from now it'll be something else. (remind me of this post in two weeks.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 00:17
|
|
|
Trump is anti-charisma. Reagan was charismatic. Bush Jr is charismatic. Trump cannot be described as charismatic any more than Gilbert Gottfried.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 00:39
|
|
|
some plague rats posted:what? when did that happen Here: ozmunkeh posted:Mistaking their personal feelings for what they claim is objective truth about someone’s personality traits is basically peak shitlib and is how you end up with grillery clinton and mayo pete. Just garbage all the way down. Source4Leko posted:That there are liberals who still wont admit this is finally no longer surprising to me. Trump is incredibly charismatic and he's also a massive piece of poo poo. both are true. Ghost Leviathan posted:It's like I said before, liberals literally can't recognise charisma anymore, I blame years of being told they're meant to like Hillary until they believe it and they literally cannot recognise that everyone else doesn't see what they're told they see. Was a full on Emperor's New Clothes situation. And then there's you: some plague rats posted:Of course lifelong Dem partisans aren't going to find him charismatic, nothing he's saying is aimed at you! That's 4 different people who've decided that "person who disagrees with me is in group I don't like" rather than just arguing with the position. I'm not a lifelong dem partisan and I'm not a liberal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 01:05
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Trump was able to connect with his audience because he said the things they wanted to hear. Bloomberg didn't, to the audience he wanted to connect with or to any other audience, really. Bloomberg didn't say anything different from Biden, though. Neither did most of the other Dem candidates for that matter. Part of why Biden got the nomination and Harris and Buttigieg and Klobuchar fell by the wayside was because, let's face it, as weird and creepy and demented as Biden can sometimes come off, he does have a level of charisma that those others didn't. There's also a reason why Bernie did better in 2016 and 2020 than, for example, Kucinich could have ever hoped for his own candidacy. One can't usually whip crowds into frenzies just by telling them what they want to hear. That's just not the way group dynamics work. Everything you're saying only demonstrates that Trump's charisma doesn't work with you. That's a good thing; you should feel relieved at that fact. But again, that doesn't mean that a large chunk of this country (enough to get him elected in '16 and possibly reelected in '24) doesn't find him very charismatic. quote:Despite this there are people in history (and at present time) who virtually everyone agrees was or is charismatic even if they don't like them. For example, Hitler. So I'd say there is generally agreed definition of charisma that is met by some of the most famous people in the world. Right, but that definition is, "Did a lot of people find this person to be charismatic in their own time and context?" Again, Hitler was often viewed as kind of a buffoon outside of Germany until he started conquering things. That didn't matter; enough people in Germany found him charismatic enough to do the things he inspired them to do. Majorian fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Feb 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 01:07
|
|
|
What's funny is that I think a lot of people saw Bernie as the Democratic version of Trump as this insurrectionist. But in terms of their appeal, I think Biden is in some ways closer to Trump. I don't think Trump would have won the election solely by calling Rand Paul ugly and talking about his dick on stage. Donald Trump is a criminal, swimming in debt, but one who spent years convincing people he was the ultimate businessman. Biden for what it's worth, isn't a poor little rich boy like Trump, but similarly, Biden took part in a lot of self-aggrandizement over the years. He was most famous for lying about poo poo and failing to become President, but was generally well liked so seemed like a good match for the young blood, Obama. Trump won for a mix of reasons, but being famous was a big one. I think if Biden had not been Obama's VP and spent the last twelve years as a senator everyone was waiting to retire, he also wouldn't have won.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 01:28
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:Trump was able to connect with his audience because he said the things they wanted to hear. Bloomberg didn't, to the audience he wanted to connect with or to any other audience, really. Except I do? I think the majority of people who voted for him think he's charismatic and I think there are many people, like the many people in the thread, who think he's charismatic even though it doesn't appeal to them and he's not someone they agree with. Sorry about the mind reading not going great, check out the cspam ufo thread for tips. ^^^Bernie actually makes a great counter example it parallel. A charismatic populist leader who was both very well liked and very hated who's now lost his audience because he wasn't charismatic enough to get over "My good friend Joe" with his audience. Gumball Gumption fucked around with this message at 01:33 on Feb 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 01:30
|
|
|
I think the issue people are running into is charismatic doesn't have a whole lot of similar commonly used words for it. There isn't really a separation like there is for intelligent and cunning where you have two very unique connotations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 02:24
|
|
|
Tbh, I hate the word "charisma" because I think it gets carted out to describe a quality ("people seem to like you") that is external and not really intrinsic. Is there a reason people like Trump or Obama? Is it the same reason? Charisma is not a magical quality or a spell that makes people take you seriously. Oration is a skill. Obama has it and Trump doesn't. Marketing is a skill. Manipulation is a skill. Even some of these are vague, but they're easier to diagnose than "charisma." I'm not going to police anyone's language but acting like the quality of 'being likeable' is intrinsic and universal is bizarre. People like Obama and Trump for radically different reasons, not the least of which are the ideologies, real or imagined, that they represented at the time of their candidacy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 02:26
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:^^^Bernie actually makes a great counter example it parallel. A charismatic populist leader who was both very well liked and very hated who's now lost his audience because he wasn't charismatic enough to get over "My good friend Joe" with his audience.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 02:47
|
|
|
Pure Liquid Ice posted:Trump is anti-charisma. Trump has the ability to grab control over attention and command a room through sheer bellicose brute force, but that does not make him charismatic. Not in the slightest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:03
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:Trump has the ability to grab control over attention and command a room through sheer bellicose brute force, but that does not make him charismatic. Not in the slightest. Really? In my mind, that absolutely makes him charismatic. To me, that's a textbook example of charisma.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:04
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Really? In my mind, that absolutely makes him charismatic. To me, that's a textbook example of charisma. You can be a loud attention grabbing boor without being charismatic. Trump has the charisma of an exploding potato. It's loud and makes you look in its direction to see the chunks flying, but there's no there there, especially after the explosion is finished.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:06
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Really? In my mind, that absolutely makes him charismatic. To me, that's a textbook example of charisma. I'd almost call it anti-charisma: He is a charismatic person to people who have never experience charisma. Yes, he has charisma, but let's be honest its probably the most awful sort of charisma experienced. He's "charismatic" because he constantly says or does things that would be outright gaffes for anyone else but the people who find him appealing are the sort that desire someone who is willing to do and say those things.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:07
|
|
|
The Dictionary posted:cha·ris·ma Dungeons and Dragons posted:Charisma (Cha) No matter which way you slice it, Trump has charisma. It's the charisma of a boorish oaf, but it's charisma nonetheless, unless Red MAGA doesn't count as devoted to him now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:11
|
|
|
Hitler's speeches also look absurd and comical to modern audiences, if someone did exactly what he did today they'd be a joke. The only reason we consider him charismatic is because we know about the hysterical reaction of the crowds that went to see him.  E: also worth pointing out that Hitler's charisma did not work on most people, not even most Germans. The NSDAP never even cracked a 40% vote share VitalSigns fucked around with this message at 03:17 on Feb 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:13
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I'd almost call it anti-charisma: He is a charismatic person to people who have never experience charisma. Yes, he has charisma, but let's be honest its probably the most awful sort of charisma experienced. Yeah, I agree with that. People can have really weird types of charisma that affect groups in unexpected ways. Nixon was famously awkward when giving speeches to big crowds, but to smaller groups he was supposedly incredibly compelling. No one's saying that Trump can string together an intelligent sentence or anything, or that he's a great speechmaker. Neither of those things is a requirement for a person to be charismatic. What does make Trump charismatic is that through his bizarre speeches and proclamations, he's able to inspire large groups of people to go out and do big, crazy things that they wouldn't otherwise do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:15
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I'd almost call it anti-charisma: He is a charismatic person to people who have never experience charisma. Yes, he has charisma, but let's be honest its probably the most awful sort of charisma experienced. Is this about Biden or Trump? At some point people have decided that charisma is a positive character trait and that’s the brick wall they’re coming up against wrt Trump’s charisma.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:17
|
|
|
the_steve posted:No matter which way you slice it, Trump has charisma. It's the charisma of a boorish oaf, but it's charisma nonetheless, unless Red MAGA doesn't count as devoted to him now. So you'd say Hillary is charismatic too?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:19
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:So you'd say Hillary is charismatic too? By this standard, literally anyone capable of filling up a moderately sized room and then talking for any length of time without people walking out in droves is charismatic.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:22
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:So you'd say Hillary is charismatic too? She's charismatic with certain demographics of people, yes. She wouldn't still have a cult of personality around her if she didn't. The problem for her was that her charisma was more limited than I think she realized. nine-gear crow posted:By this standard, literally anyone capable of filling up a moderately sized room and then talking for any length of time without people walking out in droves is charismatic. I mean, kind of? Carnival barkers are charismatic to some degree. But I think it's more than that. It's not just commanding attention; it's inspiring people to do things that they wouldn't already do, purely through the force of your personality. Majorian fucked around with this message at 03:25 on Feb 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:23
|
|
|
If you're at that level of politics you have some charisma. Even Pete is charismatic, it's just a charisma that mostly works on your grandmother and drives people his own age far away.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:27
|
|
|
nine-gear crow posted:By this standard, literally anyone capable of filling up a moderately sized room and then talking for any length of time without people walking out in droves is charismatic. Yes, that's pretty much how charisma works. There are people who make their living doing that very thing, it's an entire industry. They say words, and people listen and then buy their merchandise. And that's not even getting into televangelists.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:35
|
|
|
Majorian posted:She's charismatic with certain demographics of people, yes. She wouldn't still have a cult of personality around her if she didn't. The problem for her was that her charisma was more limited than I think she realized. Also I think that she and her team underestimated Trump because he's an obvious buffoon and therefore they totally missed the effect his charisma had on a lot of people Remember her team tried to boost him in the primary because they thought that either he or Ben 'zzzzzz' Carson would be easiest to beat. Some Dems are even still doing it, hoping he gets nominated again because they think it'll be a cakewalk
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:35
|
|
|
If "being openly racist" was actually a cheat code to becoming president, I feel like it would not have taken Joe Biden until 2020 to achieve his lifelong dream
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:41
|
|
|
Charisma
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:42
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:The thing can be defined a bunch of ways, I've given you one definition. I think there's some miscommunication. When I say I don't think you understand racism I don't mean that you can't give definitions and terms and studies that you've read, I mean that all of this stuff has not come together to form an actual understanding of how racism works, what's actually going on in people's heads that results in what is then perceived as racism. Jaxyon posted:My theory of what causes it is people needing to blame others for things they don't like. I think this theory doesn't make much sense. Did the europeans who began slave trading with africans blame the people they enslaved for things they didn't like? Or were they not racist yet? Jaxyon posted:How did most people agree to use those particular words almost exclusively on women? Was there a meeting? Nope, no meeting needed. The words are used to describe women because they are words that are meant to communicate a type of voice and type of behavior found in women, that's the imagery they're meant to bring up when shared with others. They got their meanings the same as other words got theirs. Jaxyon posted:How do you think sexism presents itself? Can you give me some examples? I think what's commonly called sexism is the result of particular ideas about different roles for men and women, ones where women are expected to be confined to work and behavior that's considered low-status by the person perceiving sexism. So somebody might not think a woman should be the boss of a company or perhaps even work outside the home for whatever reasons are given for the difference in roles, i.e. women have a more gentle and caring nature or they're weak or whatever. Jaxyon posted:I don't think lives have one defining feature, however I do believe that being born into a white supremacist is a major part of any non-white persons life. Being a black person in America means you have to deal with oppression every day, while to whites it's far more academic. "we are placed into different roles by the people around us" is describing white supremacy. Again without you calling it that, just dancing around it. Oh I think I see now, you're saying that what sorts people into different roles is white supremacy? I disagree because this sorting is something that has happened throughout the world and all of human history. Even the most egalitarian hunter/gatherers expect different behavior and give different tasks to men and women. Jaxyon posted:Do you think being oppressed means you don't fight againt oppression? Do you think Black Lives Matters looks at the reality of black lives not mattering as much as white ones and says "well we don't matter, better not say anything"? This is a bizarre question. You're asking why oppressed people don't just roll over and accept it. Let me ask a different question to clarify the original question: do people in oppressed groups have worse lives? People said petercat's dad had it "better" than if he was black, but does this mean he would have a better life? Why would people be happy about having a worse life? Jaxyon posted:Some people do say they have white pride, they tend to be racist. Because white isn't an ethnicity, it's not a culture, and the people saying that are often saying that in opposition of black pride and culture. I'm not talking just about pride celebrations, I mean people saying things like "I'm ____ and proud" or "I'm glad I'm ____". This isn't something you hear white people say unless they're white supremacist, but you say white supremacy is the water we fish are swimming in, telling us that certain people are better just because of their skin color, and yet most of them don't actually say they fee that way. Why do you think that is?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:43
|
|
|
TheIncredulousHulk posted:If "being openly racist" was actually a cheat code to becoming president, I feel like it would not have taken Joe Biden until 2020 to achieve his lifelong dream Biden's not openly racist, he's covertly racist. Open racism being a plus in politics is more of a recent thing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:45
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:Biden's not openly racist, he's covertly racist. Timeless Appeal fucked around with this message at 03:58 on Feb 6, 2022 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 03:49
|
|
|
Jizz Festival posted:I think there's some miscommunication. When I say I don't think you understand racism I don't mean that you can't give definitions and terms and studies that you've read, I mean that all of this stuff has not come together to form an actual understanding of how racism works, what's actually going on in people's heads that results in what is then perceived as racism. Where do you get that idea? It sounds like more of a endpoint you're trying to manifest, as you started this conversation with the idea that you somehow wanted to understand racism more than other posters on this board. And you've arrived at that conclusion with me, which sounds like you're just confirming biases. quote:I think this theory doesn't make much sense. Did the europeans who began slave trading with africans blame the people they enslaved for things they didn't like? Or were they not racist yet? Europe has spent hundreds of years before that point otherizing people who looked different and then blaming them for when things were bad. Blaming the jews for things vastly predates the slave trade. Once you've decided that people who are different are lesser than you, and the cause of bad things, it's a small jump to say it's OK to own other people or even your duty to own other people to correct their badness. Though slavery didn't start with the transatlantic trade, people were enslaving that well before even people who looked like them. But I do agree that "blaming others" isn't all of it, like I said it's complex. I'm not going to put together a grand unifying theory of racism in my words because it's not something that is well done by a simple statement. You have stuff like: 1) Fear 2) Otherization 3) Jealosy 4) Scarcity of resources 5) Ignorance etc all of which tie to together in a way that causes people to treat poorly people who don't look like them. Which I've gone into previously and given you several different resources that discuss it in vastly more detail. quote:Nope, no meeting needed. The words are used to describe women because they are words that are meant to communicate a type of voice and type of behavior found in women, that's the imagery they're meant to bring up when shared with others. They got their meanings the same as other words got theirs. Do you think language doesn't convey unconscious bias? You keep using longer sentences to explain how unconscious bias works in an attempt to explain how it's something different from unconscious bias. quote:I think what's commonly called sexism is the result of particular ideas about different roles for men and women, ones where women are expected to be confined to work and behavior that's considered low-status by the person perceiving sexism. So somebody might not think a woman should be the boss of a company or perhaps even work outside the home for whatever reasons are given for the difference in roles, i.e. women have a more gentle and caring nature or they're weak or whatever. Again yes that's sexism. Do you think using gendered insults isn't sexism? Do you think "shrill" and "bossy" aren't insulting? quote:Oh I think I see now, you're saying that what sorts people into different roles is white supremacy? I disagree because this sorting is something that has happened throughout the world and all of human history. No, I think you're again dancing around talking about white supremacy in explicit terms. You're talking about "roles" in socities and I'm talking about limitations. A black man in America has far less doors open to him in terms of education, social support, career and economics. That's not a "role" he's being asked to play, that's white supremacy building walls around what he can be. That some manage to succeed in spite of those walls doesn't mean they don't exist. quote:Even the most egalitarian hunter/gatherers expect different behavior and give different tasks to men and women. I'd suggest you talk to an anthropologist because that's not broadly true. You can't really make broad statements about hunter/gatherer cultures because they're so diverse and many of them did not divide tasks into gendered roles. Some did, some didn't. That's mostly an out of date a belief based on old research. quote:Let me ask a different question to clarify the original question: do people in oppressed groups have worse lives? People said petercat's dad had it "better" than if he was black, but does this mean he would have a better life? Why would people be happy about having a worse life? Statisticially speaking, all other things being equal, a black person has a tougher life than a white one. White privilege means that while you might be poor and white, you're not poor because you're white. Meaning given two equally impoverished dirt farmers, the black man faces all the same challenges PLUS all the negative affects of racism. The white man isn't getting denied opportunities due to his skin color, even if he's getting denied opportunities. At the same level of income, white people have multiple times the wealth of black people. "Why would people be happy about having a worse life?" What does this mean? Are you asking how people can possibly find any happiness in life if they are being oppressed? quote:I'm not talking just about pride celebrations, I mean people saying things like "I'm ____ and proud" or "I'm glad I'm ____". This isn't something you hear white people say unless they're white supremacist, but you say white supremacy is the water we fish are swimming in, telling us that certain people are better just because of their skin color, and yet most of them don't actually say they fee that way. Why do you think that is? White people don't like to admit that they're benefiting from a bunch of unearned privilege's and how they participate in the ongoing injustices that benefit them and hurt others. They don't often admit out loud that they consider others lesser, they just behave in a way that indicates they do. White people would vastly prefer to avoid the entire subject of going into racism in detail, and will spend lots of time and energy making it clear that racism, which they can't deny exists, only exists in the most blatant and undeniable forms like a KKK member who says he hates the n-words, so that way they don't have to engage with the fact that they don't have an issue with how police treat black people and still think that policing isn't racist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 04:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 20:52 |
|
|
i hosed up and used charisma as my dump stat
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2022 04:15
|
|
