|
CroatianAlzheimers posted:Here's a good start - A Caucasian's Guide to Black Neighborhoods It's odd how much that reminds me of home.
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 01:10 |
|
|
Is there some millionaire white guy with nothing better to do that spend  every ten minutes to drop redtext burns on black posters?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 18:17
|
|
|
 well that's a bunch of horrible racist/misogynist shite I didn't know was a common thing w/r/t interracial attraction.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
The Shortest Path posted:How else would you pronounce it? Mel-ay-nee-a? That is literally how I have been mentally pronouncing the name, and trying not to pronounce it as "melanoma"
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 22:01
|
|
|
That thing looks super comfy.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:So is this becoming the red text thread courtesy of one man on a crusade to prove everyone right about white fragility? Don's secretly been spending all his offtime browsing SA.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
negromancer posted:It's funny watching white people on this site try to explain Trumps victory as anything other than a vote on white supremacy. There isn't a SINGLE issue that Trump is better on for any subgroup, except ONE: Eh, I mean, looking at it in the context of the rest of the world I don't really find "white people are just inherently awful and that explains everything" to be sufficient. Yes white supremacist is an entirely accurate descriptor of Trump and his policies but the fact that last election America voted for a black president suggests that unless you transplanted a rather large amount of the electorate's brains in the intervening 4 years, white supremacism might be a symptom more than an immutable cause.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Personally I find the fact that both Obama and Trump campaigned on platforms promising vast societal change and a glorious tomorrow, while Hilary campaigned on "let's keep doing what we're doing" to be a bit more compelling. I wrote a big post on it in UKMT which is more focused on similar trends in UK politics recently but ultimately this election Trump is the revolutionary change candidate while Hilary is the conservative, and while people should be directing their anger at the rich white fuckers who are loving over everyone in the country, because one rich white fucker grabbed the mic and gave a very impassioned performance about the need for sweeping societal changes to fix why your white arse isn't having a good time right now (and that change involves blaming everyone else except the rich white fuckers in charge) then we get populist white nationalism winning the election. I think that the fact that quite so many people are willing to go along with, or have internalized the belief that multiculturalism is the problem in this election is because there's a very loud voice saying that, and at the same time saying he's got the solution to all your economic problems too. It doesn't really diminish the problem because either way you've still got a country full of racist fuckheads, I just don't think that alone explains the result, certainly not when it has so many parallels across the world. Moderate leftism is struggling because it hasn't met all of its promises, and people are getting sick of it. But I worry that viewing it more as a moral issue about some people just being irredeemable fuckheads will let the right win more support with its other populist policies, and get even more people buying into the loving lovely racist bullshit along the way. For every one you crush, two more pop up. As unfair as it is I think the left is going to have to start pushing more radical economic policies if it's going to be able to keep selling its social progressivism. Obama won on the promise of change, and while his presidency did some great changes for America, if America is going to keep them, the dems kinda need to appeal to butthurt white people too, even though they're obviously not the most in need or deserving of help. Some of them are lovely loving people at heart, some of them are lovely loving people by circumstance, unfortunately all of them have votes and can gently caress over decent people if they use them the wrong way. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Nov 9, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:02
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:it's almost like the gop tried to play black folks, lant@s, and asians against each other (and muslims) and it worked Are you saying this in terms of design, or in terms of the individual voters? Because I don't entirely see how a latinx person voting to gently caress over black people is white supremacy? Even if the person contriving to get them to do that is doing so because they're a huge white supremacist. So by design, yes, individually, I don't follow?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
AriadneThread posted:part of white supremacy is divide and conquer That would be by design, then. I'm not sure I'd call said latinx person a white supremacist though, just a selfish prick. And yeah rural white people coming out in all their racist force is a thing here too. It's just if the racism was a constant and the only thing that mattered to them you'd think they'd have voted againt Obama more. But Obama (and Trump, perversely) was offering hope for a lot of people with his campaign, while Hillary wasn't, really. Obama had the benefit of actually being right about things though, while the hope Trump offers is rooted in making GBS threads all over half the country.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
If I'm missing something very obvious to you then I would appreciate an explanation because I feel like "I vote for this thing that empowers white people because I am white and like being more powerful than not white people" and "I vote for this thing that empowers white people and fucks me over because I am not white but I hate this other not white person" are different things. Like they have the same effect but in terms of individual motivation they seem like they'd be different.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Positing black people as the one true other that must be crushed under the boot heel of whiteness or else is pretty much a cornerstone of white supremacy, and it continues to stand because it's very good at getting other groups to play along in the hopes that one day they will be deemed "white" and receive the attendant privileges. It's pretty basic divide and conquer. I... guess? Like I can entirely accept that is a thing but I have difficulty seeing that as the primary motivation of a POC voting Trump. Especially when he's been going after lots of different POC as his scapegoat. Like I don't see how you hear "I'm going to build a big wall to keep all the mexicans out" as a latinx person and thing "yes if I vote for this guy I will finally be accepted as white" but "I'm poor and the last 8 years have done nothing for me so gently caress it I'm voting for the guy who's going to do something even if he hates me" I at least can. And I think that probably applies to some of the white vote too. Koalas March posted:anything that promotes, establishes and entrenches white supremacy is white supremacy. By design, yes, I concur. But the point I guess I am trying to make is that the motivations that all of those individual groups and people are experiencing are surely different? Like I don't think that everything that supports white supremacy is done so out of the conscious motivation of "gently caress everyone else let's give everything to whitey!" And so to attack the entire edifice of white supremacy it would be necessary to knock out all the pillars supporting it, and finding actual real solutions to the problems that the rich, powerful, and white have convinced otherwise natural allies that they are caused by each other, or at the very least convincing people of what the actual cause of those problems is.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:The thing people are saying is that "identity politics" and lack of focus on "economic" as well as Hillary Clinton were the reasons that she lost. She could be the most careful and competent stateswoman in the world but ultimately her promise was to continue Obama's administration, and thus relies on you thinking that's a good thing for you to begin with. That trump is an idiot with no plan or hope of doing anything doesn't matter, he says he knows what he's doing and can fix it. That exact difference is what lost the Brexit referendum in my country, exactly that. The leave side made up absolutely everything against the manifestly better organized status quo, and they won, because the status quo hasn't been doing people much good here. Were there any justice then yes, she would have won, because she is a formidable politician and by all accounts a far better person to run the country than Trump, but reality just isn't what matters to voters at the moment, it's all what they perceive. The UK has lost two votes recently despite the truth of which is the better option being pretty loving obvious, but the side that won talked a better talk, while being utterly void of substance. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 21:56 on Nov 9, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2016 21:51
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:They really seem to think that they can change these people into something decent if we make them financially secure and give them more patience. That if we just took time to pay more attention, they'd learn to act like adults and reject their beliefs. We're all painfully aware at how well that works by now. You might be able to salvage enough to win an election which is a better position to effect actual change from than having control of none of the branches of government, however. As much as I enjoy the thought of punishing the deserving, it doesn't really do anyone much good to lose on that platform.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 00:34
|
|
|
there wolf posted:We won with Obama and somehow we still got Trump. People don't suddenly start being less racist because they're more financially secure. That might, might, reduce conflicts, but that's only a bandaid until bad time come around again which they always will. We need to put our energy into efforts that specifically target ending racism and reducing the burden of oppression on black people. You got trump because Obama did not deliver for the people who voted Trump today, and because Clinton didn't show any sign of wanting to. Whether Obama didn't deliver because the democrats weren't overly concerned or because of the legislative deadlock is something someone with more knowledge of the minutiae of his political platform will have to decide, but a political party being elected on a promise of radical change, failing to deliver to a portion of their core demographic (in this case, the impoverished, particularly white) and then losing when promising more of the same in the face of a right wing populist adopting the same message of radical change is exactly how the UK went in the past two decades, to the letter, and the thing about it is there's gently caress all you can do about it without being in government. Because the power of the state is absolutely overwhelming and when it is pushing against you, you're going to lose. Obama offered the promise of change and fought two superb campaigns on it. You can offer a change from poverty to poverty stricken white people without at all compromising any of the work that is owed minority groups, and I would argue that building common cause between both groups is a very very good idea, as well as being necessary if you're going to run a successful campaign without sacrificing what makes you worth voting for. We need to do it here as well. gently caress racism and gently caress poverty, it makes no sense to me to say you have to pick one or the other. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 01:35 on Nov 10, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:17
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:Problem is those people can and will continue to cheerfully gently caress themselves just because they know people of color are going to get it worse. Left to their own devices, or to the rhetoric of the populist right, yes they will, or at least they will vote credulously on the assumption that POC are the root of their problems, because they're idiots. Which is why a key focus of the dems from now on needs to be ending this lie, by hammering into them the real reason they're being hosed, without reservation.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:47
|
|
|
Buschmaki posted:I started reading D&D during election night and like, are the people here just genuinely racist? I still think the old subtitle was better.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:How do you do that to people who are eager to swallow Drudge and Brietbart as the only trustworthy sources of news? They have been well trained to deny facts unless they come from their idols. He'll, even that isn't a guarantee since they're ready to turn on said idols when a louder liar comes up to tell them what they want to hear. With difficulty. We have the same problem with the press here. Broadly, given that history didn't start 20 years or so ago and the left in our respective countries have actually won things sometimes, you use all your resources to hammer home the message. This year Clinton seemed to spend most of her funding on portraying the message of being the heir to Obama, a perfectly reasonable position to appeal to any reasonable voter, but not, ultimately, as effective as Trump's bombastic stream of endless populist bullshit. Basically it's entirely possible for otherwise fairly mundane people to vote for some absolutely idiotic poo poo because it sounded like a good idea at first glance. See: Brexit, last UK general election. But populism isn't inherently bad, it's entirely possible to say actual correct things in a populist way, it's just the only people really using it right now are the right, the centre/left are the status quo at the moment, they're the conservatives, the stagnant, hated old order that is holding us all down, the right is the party of change and hope assuming you don't have the perspective to see how loving stupid their policies are and how many people they're willing to gently caress over to enact them. Or maybe some people do have that perspective and don't care, because poverty and punishment are not conducive to empathy and fellow feeling, it makes people vicious and spiteful more than not. But the democrats do still have resources, and they can use them to say "You and POC have common cause, you both suffer at the hands of the same people, the wealthy and powerful will exploit and throw away you both the moment it suits them, and they will turn you against each other and laugh all the way to the bank. If you want to be free of oppression, look to everyone else who suffers at the hands of the people who hurt you, and fight them together, with us." And that's entirely true. Hating and lusting for the pain of your enemies is 100% fine as far as I'm concerned, you don't need to stop people from doing that, just point them at the right enemies.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Policy wise it's rarely both, and usually neither, and that's criminal, the sooner politicians realise the need for both the better.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 10, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
I'm glad Koalas March is a mod and it's a good thing you did Lowtax.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Dexo posted:...And I'll be goddamn if my rims ain't too. Why is that song still in my head after eight years.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 04:40
|
|
|
You look silly enough as a morris dancer without putting blackface on to further out yourself as a person who likes making bad decisions. Also yeah Cornish people are weird because I've never heard of anyone doing it otherwise.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 15:29
|
|
|
there wolf posted:Oh I know. I just point that out because it's the big argument for why it should be o.k. and one that's easily dismantled by pointing out that the context has changed significantly since pagan times. No one does the Roman salute anymore either, even though it didn't start as a symbol of fascism. I suppose in defence of Cornwall it's a bit isolated down there and they may only have seen a black person in woodcuts and may not not be aware of the events of the previous several centuries.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2017 15:36
|
|
|
420 Gank Mid posted:Mansa Musa went on Hajj in the 1330's That's still the best story.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 18:37
|
|
|
Googling "Egyptian ethnography" takes me to a lovely document written in 1846 by some sort of insane, possibly murderous phrenologist who spent an absurd amount of time taking the calipers to every skull he could get his hands on, and seems very keen to say that the super civilized Egyptians were definitely not black. Why is that the main result?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 18:58
|
|
|
Fluffdaddy posted:The things that archeologist and other scientific minds of Victorian England and the other European empires did to so many ancient sites around the world is pretty loving horrendous, so it doesn't surprise me a phrenologist had to get his two cents in too. Well he's listed as an MD but, well, the whole thing is just him looking at hundreds of skulls and measuring them all and using that to make sweeping inferences about Egyptian history... "I have in my possession, seventy-nine crania of Negroes born in Africa, for which I am indebted to Doctors Goheen and McDowell, lately attached to the medical department of the Colony at Liberia, in Western Africa; And especially to Don Jose Rodriguez Cisneros, M.D., of Havana, in the island of Cuba." Why the gently caress do your friends have that many loving skulls lying around and why did you ask them to send them all to you you loving freak?!
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
I was gonna say that's Egyptians fighting Nubians, with Ramses being in the chariot.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 19:47
|
|
|
I think I remember reading that the lighter coloured pigments deteriorated over time so the whole thing sort of went dark and less colourful than it probably was when it was new. I think oil paintings do the same thing as well as their varnishing having odd effects as it ages too, which is part of why a lot of them look all lovely and dark, not just a fondness for tenebrism. It's still gorgeous either way but I know that supposedly Greece loving loved its psychadelic paint jobs on everything they could take a brush to as well, it's just that none of it survives because fixing pigments really well is a quite new invention. Either way though the artists are obviously making choices in their use of colour even if it's not perfectly preserved. Case in point: Isis(?) and Horus in that top image. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Casting black people to play white historical figures is a great idea if only because of the apparent existential crisis it gives some people.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I certainly wouldn't claim ancient Egyptians were white, because lol they were not - but, for instance, would you consider modern Egyptians to be black? 'Geographically part of Africa' and 'black people' are not automatically the same thing, and that photo up thread shows (light brown) Egyptians fighting (dark brown) Nubians, which would seem to imply the Egyptians saw a difference. Likewise, there are paintings of them fighting/conquering pale skinned guys from the Mediterranean which would imply the Egyptians saw a difference between themselves and white people, too. I mean, yes, definitely, in the sense that the Express is in fits of apoplexy about the prospect of letting even a single one into the UK. I guess that's part of why the crazy phrenologist is so weird to me. People spend some serious loving time trying to write in elaborate scientific backstory for a concept that is pretty heavily determined by the need for an excuse to be a dickhead to people arbitrarily. OwlFancier fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 20:30
|
|
|
Who the gently caress freaks out because you saw a black guy carrying a crowbar. Maybe he needs to use a crowbar you loving idiot?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
BRAKE FOR MOOSE posted:That will also heavily discourage reporting of actual crimes. I recognise most of this thread is already institutionally discouraged from reporting but that's not how it's supposed to work. It's a terrible solution. If you just called the police to arrest someone without a reason, I would think there would be some punishment for you wasting police time. If she called the police based on him getting into a car while being black, that should constitute the same thing. There is no reason why someone getting into a car carrying a common tool should elicit calling the police.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2017 18:36
|
|
|
HotCanadianChick posted:Hoteps just can't stop hoteppin'. That's pretty great.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2017 22:23
|
|
|
Paramilitary Egyptologists.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2017 03:43
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:In honor of Martin, I present in it's entirety: It's like the polar opposite of galtse. Pretty loving great piece of writing that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
I think people forget that King was a Christian as well as a revolutionary and that he did a pretty drat good job of both. He's very clear about the importance of resisting and opposing injustice and the role of unilateral action in doing that, he just has a very Christian understanding of how it's appropriate to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 6, 2024 01:10 |
|
|
Charismatic would work in that he has a very genuine charisma, the word gets applied to a lot of people but I think if there's any politician in recent years that merits it, it'd probably be Obama.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 21:37
|
|