|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:A voice can be dominant without being the most numerically represented voice. In fact that is pretty much "white dudes: the summary"
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 04:52 |
|
|
semper wifi posted:ok i didnt actually know who that guy was lol i just saw thiel on there conservatives.txt
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 20:44
|
|
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:One group makes the rules and decides who is allowed to post. Another registers, antagonizes the group for a few days before being banned. No one could reasonably cite the presence of trolls on stormfront as evidence that leftists dominate online, it's the same here. If trolls were decimating the ability of stormfront to hold and conduct conversations to the point even the people trying to run stormfront could not stop them then yeah, absolutely, that totally would be dominance. And is absolutely a thing that happens to tons of minority groups, even when they run the website.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
A Deacon posted:Social media tech companies recently just banned a lot of "alt-right" accounts. Now Facebook is doing this thing where anyone can label something "fake news." Google, Facebook, and Twitter were pretty open about supporting Hillary Clinton as well. This itself is fake news: TheGuardian posted:Facebook’s plan for combating fake news, a response to mounting criticism over the spread of misinformation, particularly during the US presidential election, is theoretically relatively simple. When enough users flag a news article they think is factually inaccurate, Facebook sends the link to a digital clearing house accessible to a handful of fact-checking organizations. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/16/facebook-fake-news-system-problems-fact-checking Users flag the fake news; they don't label it - fact checking organizations do so. So even if Reddit swarms a true article to label it fake, it won't get past the gatekeepers.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 20:47
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:Well, yes. But if "dominant" means "taking up the bulk of discussion," then, welp... ok i'll just write two bots to simultaneously poo poo out 500 pro minority posts per second on stormfront extolling the virtues of the urban black muslim gay single mom and 500 posts per second in your feminist facebook group about how all feminists are ugly unwashed butch lesbos with an overabundance of body hair and/or beta cucks in need of a good redpilling. that way i dominate both the left and right wing discussion
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 20:48
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Jeffrey of YOSPOS posted:One group makes the rules and decides who is allowed to post. Another registers, antagonizes the group for a few days before being banned. No one could reasonably cite the presence of trolls on stormfront as evidence that leftists dominate online, it's the same here. Trolls on Stormfront shutting down discussion is not exactly a common thing, though. Any niche group contains infiltrators and people trying to lock out conversation via subterfuge or spam, but it is considerably easier to execute in circumstances in which the evasion of bigotry is the objective of the community. blowfish posted:ok i'll just write two bots to simultaneously poo poo out 500 pro minority posts per second on stormfront extolling the virtues of the urban black muslim gay single mom and 500 posts per second in your feminist facebook group about how all feminists are ugly unwashed butch lesbos with an overabundance of body hair and/or beta cucks in need of a good redpilling. that way i dominate both the left and right wing discussion The former is not commonplace; the latter, even with your hyperbole, is.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 20:50
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:Trolls on Stormfront shutting down discussion is not exactly a common thing, though. Any niche group contains infiltrators and people trying to lock out conversation via subterfuge or spam, but it is considerably easier to execute in circumstances in which the evasion of bigotry is the objective of the community. So you're essentially saying that there are less liberals who can be bothered to go on a 72 hour mtn dew and cheeto powered shitposting spree in their mom's basement than there are right wingers who can be bothered to go on a 72 hour mtn dew and cheeto powered shitposting spree in their mom's basement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
Liberals don't stand out so much on the internet because saying nice things about people vanishes into the background hum of the world, but unloading a rifle of racial epithets and hate certainly sticks in the mind.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
blowfish posted:So you're essentially saying that there are less liberals who can be bothered to go on a 72 hour mtn dew and cheeto powered shitposting spree in their mom's basement than there are right wingers who can be bothered to go on a 72 hour mtn dew and cheeto powered shitposting spree in their mom's basement. There are shitposting cheeto masters on both sides, but slurs are considerably easier to post and more effective at drowning out conversation and driving away users, and infiltration and distracting in-fighting is easier to bring about when there is nuance to engage with. There is very little nuance on Stormfront (how can you hijack a conversation on white supremacy, really?).
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:08
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Liberals don't stand out so much on the internet because saying nice things about people vanishes into the background hum of the world, but unloading a rifle of racial epithets and hate certainly sticks in the mind. This is the crux of it, really. The truth is that center-left liberalism is by far the dominant social viewpoint on the internet, much like everywhere else. Far-right hysteria feels dominant because it's antagonistic to the norm. If the far right were really so dominant, we wouldn't bother talking about it, it would be normal.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
If you are going to blame internet comment sections for the method by which the far-right dominates the internet you should probably focus on the fact that most non-far right media sources have been ditching forums and comment sections. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...versation.shtml
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:14
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:This is the crux of it, really. The truth is that center-left liberalism is by far the dominant social viewpoint on the internet, much like everywhere else. Far-right hysteria feels dominant because it's antagonistic to the norm. If the far right were really so dominant, we wouldn't bother talking about it, it would be normal. I think we're into a semantics debate about what "dominant" means, maybe. I'd say soft center liberalism is definitely the prevailing viewpoint in terms of subscribers, so to speak, but that far right ideology is the loudest and can dominate discourse. It is, I think, possible to have a group with both anonymity and relatively little administrative content management that allows for a far-right oriented conversation to flourish, while I do not think the same is true of the left.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
nessin posted:If you are going to blame internet comment sections for the method by which the far-right dominates the internet you should probably focus on the fact that most non-far right media sources have been ditching forums and comment sections. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/2...versation.shtml The far right seems very patient in seeking out media they hate and commenting. The Guardian has written articles on the subject. This liberal paper is of no interest to the far right, but if you look at the comments section, there's a lot of them there (less since they beefed up their moderation and removed comments from contentious articles.) The alt-right must be doing it deliberately to try and "convert the heathen." As far as I know, liberals don't generally go to Stormfront and start posting messages of love and peace. Or maybe they do, I haven't been there!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:27
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:This is the crux of it, really. The truth is that center-left liberalism is by far the dominant social viewpoint on the internet, much like everywhere else. Far-right hysteria feels dominant because it's antagonistic to the norm. If the far right were really so dominant, we wouldn't bother talking about it, it would be normal. I suspect this also why trolls seem right-wing. Center-leftisim dominates. So, platforms that are vulnerable to trolls get filled with stuff that antagonizes center-leftists. If different things antagonized people, we'd see trolls posting different things. Bicyclops posted:I think we're into a semantics debate about what "dominant" means, maybe. I'd say soft center liberalism is definitely the prevailing viewpoint in terms of subscribers, so to speak, but that far right ideology is the loudest and can dominate discourse. It is, I think, possible to have a group with both anonymity and relatively little administrative content management that allows for a far-right oriented conversation to flourish, while I do not think the same is true of the left. Tumblr seems to be doing fine, as does twitter.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:Liberals don't stand out so much on the internet because saying nice things about people vanishes into the background hum of the world, but unloading a rifle of racial epithets and hate certainly sticks in the mind. Lol this is totally wrong. Just look at blowfish's avatar. Right-wing Internet users do not have a monopoly on getting worked up and lobbing personal attacks against other internet users. You only notice the right wing ones because they, unlike the left-wing ones, rile you up. silence_kit fucked around with this message at 21:41 on Dec 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:32
|
|
|
falcon2424 posted:
We have already discussed Tumblr, but is it your contention that Twitter is a vehicle for the far left, or that center left liberal discourse dominates Twitter?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
falcon2424 posted:If different things antagonized people, we'd see trolls posting different things. Don't think so. These guys are sincere. The results are reflected in the ballot box - the far right is booming all over the world right now.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:33
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Lol this is totally wrong. Just look at blowfish's avatar. Right-wing Internet users do not have a monopoly on getting worked up and lobbing personal attacks against other internet users. The association of politeness with left or liberal politics in this thread is extremely weird. I don't think anybody would confuse me calling someone a moronic Nazi for either right-wing or civil speech. Likewise, it's possible for a racist Stormfront poster to interact civilly with black posters on a hobby forum or a news article where they agree (i.e. "local man arrested for jerking off at preschool"), or for someone on the economic far-right to condemn overt racist posts. This discussion is hosed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
wizard on a water slide posted:The association of politeness with left or liberal politics in this thread is extremely weird. I don't think anybody would confuse me calling someone a moronic Nazi for either right-wing or civil speech. There's different sorts of politeness "I hate Nazis" is very different from "I hate Muslims." Both sides are not the same!
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:45
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:There's different sorts of politeness "I hate Nazis" is very different from "I hate Muslims." Both sides are not the same! I understand that and agree, but both are provocative to certain audiences, and both could be and are used to attack people and to troll. Liberals are just as capable of saying mean things to and about people as conservatives and fascists, and often do. Whether or not those things are more fair or accurate has little to do with whether or not they're "nicer", or less likely to provoke a fight if you say them in the right place.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
I don't think it's about politeness at all. There are always going to be people who prefer to yell bumper sticker slogans at each other and high five their ideological cohorts than have an actual discussion. The issue is that actually, really believed viewpoints that espouse "Get back in the kitchen" sort of mentality lend themselves fairly easily to one-liners and will more effectively evacuate other online posters than anything else. There's a reason that the only thing most people know about LambdaMOO is Mr. Bungle's interference, and it's because one person managed to essentially shut down the community until anyone could figure out what to do with him.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
falcon2424 posted:I suspect this also why trolls seem right-wing. I'd also say that going communist to center leftists is something that antagonizes the center left but there's very little communists in comment sections ironic or otherwise. I mean I saw some great mock ups of DPRK propaganda with Bernie edited in, but that was an exception rather than a rule. Instead there was a drive to distance/look respectable even on forums all for Bernie. Basically there does not seem to be a far left like there is a far right. Eimi fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Dec 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 21:53
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:We have already discussed Tumblr, but is it your contention that Twitter is a vehicle for the far left, or that center left liberal discourse dominates Twitter? I'm disagreeing with this: quote:I think, possible to have a group with both anonymity and relatively little administrative content management that allows for a far-right oriented conversation to flourish, while I do not think the same is true of the left. Left-oriented conversations can flourish on twitter or tumblr. The spaces aren't dominated by the far-right. As a semi-aside: I'm not sure why the claim seems to be drifting from: "the far-right dominates" to "there is no equivalent far-left". Those seem like they're totally separable.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
wizard on a water slide posted:The association of politeness with left or liberal politics in this thread is extremely weird. I don't think anybody would confuse me calling someone a moronic Nazi for either right-wing or civil speech.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
falcon2424 posted:
I think because many of the assertions that the far-right does not dominate rely on the assertion that the far left is equally dominant in derailing discussion (and a natural assumption, if things trend toward centrist liberalism, is that both extremes would involve vocal minorities who overpower conversation, an assumption I don't think bares out, for the reasons already stated).
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 22:23
|
|
|
Eimi posted:I'd also say that going communist to center leftists is something that antagonizes the center left but there's very little communists in comment sections ironic or otherwise. I mean I saw some great mock ups of DPRK propaganda with Bernie edited in, but that was an exception rather than a rule. Instead there was a drive to distance/look respectable even on forums all for Bernie. Communists don't antagonize center-leftists. New York Times: A Young Publisher Takes Marx Into the Mainstream quote:“Bhaskar’s a really remarkable — I want to say kid, but that sounds condescending,” said the MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who gave Jacobin a shout-out in Rolling Stone last June before inviting Mr. Sunkara onto his show. (Mr. Sunkara skipped part of his college graduation to appear.) “He’s got the combination of boastful assurance and competence of a very good young rapper.” And, even when the center-left does get annoyed at the far-left, the response is generally divided between people going "Tone! Incrementalism!" and people responding "Punching Up! Vision!" falcon2424 fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Dec 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 22:32
|
|
|
You don't end capitalism incrementally. ^ An example of far left criticism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:This is the crux of it, really. The truth is that center-left liberalism is by far the dominant social viewpoint on the internet, much like everywhere else. Far-right hysteria feels dominant because it's antagonistic to the norm. If the far right were really so dominant, we wouldn't bother talking about it, it would be normal. I honestly think that for a lot of people the actual opinion they hold is something like "you know, white people actually are superior to black people if you got right down to it, but it's rude to say that" and similar far right stuff but with modulation through "but don't be mean about it". Or people that see equality as a luxury thing, like if we have the time and money we should let people have rights but if there is budget cuts only the straight white whatever men REALLY have inalienable rights and just are nice enough to give them to others when they can or whatever. I think lots and lots and lots of people have very bigoted core worldviews but are well meaning and nicer about it than nazis.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I honestly think that for a lot of people the actual opinion they hold is something like "you know, white people actually are superior to black people if you got right down to it, but it's rude to say that" and similar far right stuff but with modulation through "but don't be mean about it". Or people that see equality as a luxury thing, like if we have the time and money we should let people have rights but if there is budget cuts only the straight white whatever men REALLY have inalienable rights and just are nice enough to give them to others when they can or whatever. Sure, and I'd go so far as to say that's my majority experience of the american south, and a minority experience of northeastern cities. Not so much on the west coast except Arizona and northern california. But I think urbanization has been slowly chipping away at that mentality as far as the prevailing american narrative goes. It's an easy position to hold when you live in the boonies or a gated community, it's much harder when you actually have neighbors and co-workers and people you see on the subway every day that aren't white or straight.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 23:21
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Sure, and I'd go so far as to say that's my majority experience of the american south, and a minority experience of northeastern cities. Not so much on the west coast except Arizona and northern california. But I think urbanization has been slowly chipping away at that mentality as far as the prevailing american narrative goes. It's an easy position to hold when you live in the boonies or a gated community, it's much harder when you actually have neighbors and co-workers and people you see on the subway every day that aren't white or straight. I think the south is certainly where you'd go to find it expressed really loudly and directly, but I do think that is the dominant narrative in US culture. I think it's baked into the default worldview people are raised in. I'm sure I'm not immune either. It's very deep in american culture and even the english language. Like even talking about "race" at all is only done through the lens of the race classification systems that white supremacists made up. Talking about gender is only done from the perspective of the western gender dichotomy even if you are talking about stuff outside of it, etc, etc.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
One of the things I have seen in a community that is half alt-right/half-exiled progressive is that the constant calls for ideological purity and hatred of the Cis White Male as well as differing levels of value that people place racism/sexism issues on creates a lot of exiles in the progressive community. People who suddenly lost a lot of friends because of their view on allowing Milo Yiannopolus to speak, or other thorny issues radical progressives scream about. The tension between the rule of law/freedom of speech/how harmful speech is/presumption of innocence and progressive ideology is also a thing that gets people tossed out of progressive circles. The circular firing squad of the left makes a lot of political exiles that join up with right-leaning groups that are in strict opposition to the radical progressives. Gamergate ended up making a whole lot of these mixed communities, opposed to the absurd demands of the far left. These groups end up getting the disillusioned young people who see the absurd demands made by the radicals on the left and go the other way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
Pharohman777 posted:One of the things I have seen in a community that is half alt-right/half-exiled progressive is that the constant calls for ideological purity and hatred of the Cis White Male as well as differing levels of value that people place racism/sexism issues on creates a lot of exiles in the progressive community. People who suddenly lost a lot of friends because of their view on allowing Milo Yiannopolus to speak, or other thorny issues radical progressives scream about. The tension between the rule of law/freedom of speech/how harmful speech is/presumption of innocence and progressive ideology is also a thing that gets people tossed out of progressive circles. I think that is the thing though, the social norm, conversations on line can go really far right without much real complaint until really really far extremes, but if anyone ventures beyond the very very shallowest steps towards the left you immediately get this sort of crybaby "if you think about it most racism is against whites and everyone hates men! I am disengaging in this conversation". Like what is "radicals" is basically anything one inch left of the center while the right gets to go 90% of the way to literal nazis before typical internet conversations start to say "woah, whats this".
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Owlofcreamcheese posted:I think lots and lots and lots of people have very bigoted core worldviews but are well meaning and nicer about it than nazis. Yeah, this is was what I was getting at with my earlier post. You don't obviously see most people expressing it like neo-nazis, but discussions about public assistance, protests, police issues, etc often get people revealing some of their more nefarious views. Groups like "common sense conservatives" may not be readily labeled as "far right," but they're a hell of a lot closer to the far right than even the center left. I've even seen a few people who self-identify as a democrats expose themselves on topics like drug testing for welfare or "riots" by certain groups. As far as the original question goes, I don't think the far right dominates online discourse in the sense that places like stormfront are controlling the narratives, but I do think a significant portion of the population holds views that are in line with those of the far right just beneath a thin veneer of civility. Social media is the perfect medium to bring it all out, though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Pharohman777 posted:One of the things I have seen in a community that is half alt-right/half-exiled progressive is that the constant calls for ideological purity and hatred of the Cis White Male as well as differing levels of value that people place racism/sexism issues on creates a lot of exiles in the progressive community. People who suddenly lost a lot of friends because of their view on allowing Milo Yiannopolus to speak, or other thorny issues radical progressives scream about. The tension between the rule of law/freedom of speech/how harmful speech is/presumption of innocence and progressive ideology is also a thing that gets people tossed out of progressive circles. I mean, it's also possible that when people say "hey maybe we should change our behavior to include voices other than white men", or "milo yiannopolus is a horrible troll and we don't want him anywhere near us" or "why are you talking about gamergate? nobody was talking about gamergate" that's not radical or progressive, it's just a normal reaction to your belief system. It's possible that you're the outlier, that a lot of your behavior and ideals are based on a perceived threat to your own privilege and hegemony, that you're the one with fringe beliefs and what you describe as "the absurd demands of radicals" are actually centrists trying politely to explain that they don't want to listen to your poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Sure, and I'd go so far as to say that's my majority experience of the american south, and a minority experience of northeastern cities. Not so much on the west coast except Arizona and northern california. But I think urbanization has been slowly chipping away at that mentality as far as the prevailing american narrative goes. It's an easy position to hold when you live in the boonies or a gated community, it's much harder when you actually have neighbors and co-workers and people you see on the subway every day that aren't white or straight. I'd say that is true, but the south is becoming increasingly urbanized. I'm an Arkansan, and the little farming communities and hill towns are literally dying. As this pushes people to larger cities, said cities are becoming more racially insensitive, rather than the people migrating becoming less insensitive. Yes, there is more interaction, but that seems to somehow make it worse rather than better. It seems that people tend to pigeonhole others into whatever stereotype they believe, rather than observe that they were wrong all along.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 05:23
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:Sure, and I'd go so far as to say that's my majority experience of the american south, and a minority experience of northeastern cities. Not so much on the west coast except Arizona and northern california. But I think urbanization has been slowly chipping away at that mentality as far as the prevailing american narrative goes. It's an easy position to hold when you live in the boonies or a gated community, it's much harder when you actually have neighbors and co-workers and people you see on the subway every day that aren't white or straight. I think if you went to non-urbanized parts of Oregon and Washington, you'd find people who'd agree that white people are better than black people just as easily as you would in the south. You'd probably have to get people drunk in Portland to get them to say something like that, but it's not an accident that Portland's black population is a tiny percentage of the population and most black families live in one neighborhood.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 05:31
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:This itself is fake news: I don't know how this is considered a good thing. Gatekeepers can't be completely non-partisan and places like PolitiFact already lost their credibility by using poo poo like a 'truth-o-meter' (which is subjective) and having a scorecard. If you don't see the opportunity for them to use those tools like a weapon to silence any opposition to the official line, you haven't been paying attention. Just look at the way most of the media buried the Podesta emails. Or PolitiFact rating Hillary wanting open borders (a thing from one of her leaked speeches) as mostly false because "It’s not clear at all what she meant, experts agreed." (because experts can't agree on what open borders means and HIllary said that she was only talking about energy and she didn't say it with a specific timetable so  )
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 05:34
|
|
|
BarbarianElephant posted:The far right seems very patient in seeking out media they hate and commenting. The Guardian has written articles on the subject. This liberal paper is of no interest to the far right, but if you look at the comments section, there's a lot of them there (less since they beefed up their moderation and removed comments from contentious articles.) The alt-right must be doing it deliberately to try and "convert the heathen." As far as I know, liberals don't generally go to Stormfront and start posting messages of love and peace. Or maybe they do, I haven't been there! Stormfront has an Opposing Views section for the pro-love and peace people to argue with the Neo-Nazis. I read a bit of it a few years back, and my impression was that, unfortunately, the kind of well-meaning liberals idealistic enough to argue with Neo-Nazis aren't very good debaters. (Tangent time: I know of two other forums with Opposing Views sections: RevLeft and the Flat Earth Society forums. Though in the case of the Flat Earth Society, I'm pretty sure the "dominant" Flat Earthers are mostly trolls, or at least engaging in devil's advocacy as a form of debate practice. Sincere Flat Earthers do exist (people can believe some really stupid things) but they're almost exclusively either religious fundamentalists or paranoid shizophrenics, whereas the Flat Earth Society forums are suspiciously full of otherwise reasonable Flat Earthers.)
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
Call Me Charlie posted:I don't know how this is considered a good thing. Gatekeepers can't be completely non-partisan and places like PolitiFact already lost their credibility by using poo poo like a 'truth-o-meter' (which is subjective) and having a scorecard. I guess I'll bite. Who are "they" in this scenario, what's "their" agenda and what motivation do "they" have to silence opposition? Do you have evidence to support your claim that Politifact has "lost their credibility" other than your opinion?
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 07:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 04:52 |
|
|
Hollywood posted:I'd say that is true, but the south is becoming increasingly urbanized. I'm an Arkansan, and the little farming communities and hill towns are literally dying. As this pushes people to larger cities, said cities are becoming more racially insensitive, rather than the people migrating becoming less insensitive. Yes, there is more interaction, but that seems to somehow make it worse rather than better. It seems that people tend to pigeonhole others into whatever stereotype they believe, rather than observe that they were wrong all along. I'll maintain the assertion that urbanization helps people at least acknowledge racism, there's evidence to support that. Of course, I don't think someone moving from a rural to an urban environment will change overnight. It might even get worse before it gets better, but hopefully it won't take generations for the effects to be seen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 20, 2016 07:05
|
|