|
Frosted Flake posted:Anecdotal but I like talking politics more with Conservatives because they will calmly and rationally try to make their point, and if I disagree they will make a counterpoint or respectfully agree to disagree. Yeah me too. I've had better luck talking to conservatives about far-left politics than liberals.
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 18:30
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:17 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The same way you sell "don't rob people, even if you feel disadvantaged and think you need the money"? Poor whites certainly don't have any problem moralizing about high crime rates among disadvantaged minorities, so why should it be an excuse for them? What is robbing people an analogy of?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:It's not an analogy. It's an example of how people willfully refrain from behaviors that would benefit them. So it is an analogy. Not robbing = not being racist. Its a terrible analogy for reasons that should be obvious.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:This is a valuable anecdote and we should do what with it exactly? Listen and accept that this is a thing he's experienced? Not make snide remarks or attacks on his character? Not every post needs to be replied to.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 18:48
|
|
|
Nevvy Z posted:I believe that that happened to you but plenty of other people have similar anecdotes about lovely conservatives and I'm not sure how that can guide our efforts except to maybe try and call out people being idiots or people being lovely about race but that doesn't get looked kindly on around these parts. Maybe don't focus on "calling people out" and focus on your own behavior instead? Just a thought.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
I'm not even being snarky. It is extremely important thing to think about how your actions are coming off towards the people you are interacting with. E: tone matters.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
When somebody says something racist to me in a discussion I tell them that I think they're wrong and I explain why that is.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:05
|
|
|
Pinch Me Im Meming posted:If you're a white cishet male and know the codespeak of white cishet males, then yes, tone matters. Barring that, outnumbering your opponents matter. Actually, anyone can have a productive discussion with anyone else who is willing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:11
|
|
|
Pinch Me Im Meming posted:The word you're looking for is "theoretically", not "actually". No. Anyone who is willing can have a productive conversation with anyone else who is willing.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:12
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:Realtalk though; someone calling you out for stupid poo poo like microaggressions or cultural appropriation (and actually calling you out and not just talking to you about it) doesn't invalidate anti-racism as a concept or platform. Acting like they do is just an excuse to discard an already uncomfortable truth about yourself. E: depends on what your conception of "anti-racism as a platform" is I guess.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:17
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:If you just jump through these hoops I might consider cops murdering small children to be wrong, or at least pretend to.- One of "The Kingfish's" conservative friends. If you put up with people's nonsense then you can persuade them to agree with you and support anti-racist policies. Literally what you just said.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:20
|
|
|
Brainiac Five posted:Obviously someone benefits from it. To think otherwise is to be willfully stupid. And you think that someone is all white people? What if it was actually some smaller and more powerful group of white people who benefit from racist policies?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:21
|
|
|
Talmonis posted:It depends. The phrase "this is why Trump was elected" is pretty indicative that the person posting it is dismissive of legitimate causes due to imagined or anecdotal College Activists. I understand that you feel this way, but it doesn't indicate that to me. To me it indicates a frustration with the type of bourgeois college activism which eats its own young.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
There's a difference between recognizing RW propaganda as false, and recognizing RW propaganda as influential.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:28
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:The question is, how do you stop assholes being assholes? They're clearly class conscious but opt instead to take an unhelpful method of activism. What can you do to stop them while respecting freedom of speech? I don't think they are class conscious actually. I think they were probably liberals.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
He's talking about white moderates who opposed direct action in support of the civil rights movement. The modern day equivalent is people who oppose BLM protests, not people who want to facilitate cross-ideological discussion.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 10, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Uh. This comes across as suggesting the second person is unreasonable and stupid. They probably are. Ignorant at the very least. But that doesn't mean they should be dismissed.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 03:38
|
|
|
Tone policing is good. You should be civil, even with people whom you disagree with.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 03:40
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:So the question is whether that person can only handle being baby-gloved, and if you believe so, on what basis? Its not about what that person can "handle" (whatever that means), it's about how 3rd party's view your interactions and how you should talk to people as a matter of principle.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 03:47
|
|
|
Don't try and shut down perfectly relevant topics of discussion. E: hosed up on the awful app The Kingfish fucked around with this message at 03:57 on Jan 12, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 03:53
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:Ah, you're talking about not necessarily talking to someone but talking so that other people can see how you talk at someone? Both are important. I have more political conversations with 3+ participants than with only two people. Online discussions are always both about the actual discussion and the way the discussion is likely to be perceived by third parties.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 03:58
|
|
|
Tesseraction posted:I agree, but your words seemed to suggest an intention not to argue with someone but to make points at them with a wry glance at the camera to say "look at this rear end in a top hat" with no intention of fostering a genuine challenge of ideas. You want to actually debate with them and present the best argument. However, people who want to have an argument with you are probably those least likely to actually change their beliefs. That's just the way that human psychology works. The real target for "conversion" in most debates are the people observing. That's why tone can matter.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 04:05
|
|
|
Koalas March posted:This is absolutely incorrect. take your armchair psychology elsewhere. It's not armchair philosophy, it's based on solid psychological research. I don't give a spicy poo poo about all the hearts and minds you think DnD threads have swayed. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 12, 2017 04:16
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:In your first example, you can easily fish for a reason to discount anyone's opinion. People often point out to how Martin Luther King and the Civil Rights Movement wore suits, etc. And how kids these days don't as if it diminishes the message at all. It's just a cheap way to discount opinions and stifle messages. Tone isn't about the message, tone is about how the message is being stated, and the goalposts can easily change at a moment's notice for what is the right tone. I think agree with literally all of this except your implied conclusion. It's obvious to any antiracist or feminist that the tone of the argument is irrelevant to the truth of the argument. But I disagree with your implied argument (implied because it seems to follow naturally) that because the tone of an argument is irrelevant to its content, tone is not something to consider when engaging in political debate. That MLK wore a suit was irrelevant to the fact that his antiracist message was correct. But I think it was one factor among many that led to the antiracist successes of that era. There were members of the civil rights movement who were extremely aware of tone and who recognized that tone is an important propaganda tool. I believe that tone was one strategy among many that allowed for the limited legitimization of the movement within American culture. Do you disagree with me when I say that tone is important to consider from the prospective of its propaganda value? E: I really hope this comes off as respectful because I mean it to be. I think this topic is of the upmost importance for the American left. I want to stress that I am posting entirely in good faith. The Kingfish fucked around with this message at 02:49 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:I don't think tone is as important as you are making it out to be. I think it's important to note, that non-violence in the face of brutality was what made the movement so effective. MLK failed to achieve his goals with the Albany movement because it lacked that element. Do you think you could flesh out the role you think tone played in the CRM? My understanding is that organizers were extremely conscious of what we would call tone. In fact I think they considered maintaining a certain tone to be an essential element of the nonviolent strategy.  These types of images were essential to the nonviolent propaganda message: black protestors acting the bigger man, remaining dignified despite the crude provocations of white racists. E: I ask you to explain what you think the role of tone was because it's possible we have different ideas of what tone means. The Kingfish fucked around with this message at 04:00 on Jan 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Immigrants drive down wages.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
??? As do immigrants.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 13:17 |
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:ok then make the mandatory minimum wage 15$ dollars an hour. that way everything is fair. Even if the least possible amount that anyone works for is a living wage, the working class still gets hosed over by immigrants. You can't bandaid over such a basic supply/demand antagonism with a higher minimum wage. It doesn't work. The Kingfish fucked around with this message at 00:21 on Jan 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jan 16, 2017 00:08
|
|