Some choose to call me a racist. by Wulfenstar

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Some choose to call me a racist.

POSTED BY: WULFENSTAR
UPDATED: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 17:39
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 5489
PAGE 4 of 4

Saturday, September 26, 2009 5:56 PM

Lemme share this bit with you..

When I was just a kid, and we're talkin single digits here - I had a reputation for being a violent, uncontrollable little punk.

Never mind that the three incidents which sparked it were all clear cut self defense, never mind that the folks busting my chops for it knew and admitted that they were, and were completely justified, THAT is how they saw me.

And so, it became the path of least resistance, in a scuffle, or an incident, to throw the blame in my direction, which at the time was done soley on a rep everyone knew was false, and yet built that rep up worse despite me being innocent of everything but borrowing a textbook to assist with my homework, which I returned the next day, but nope...

Every effort to show I wasn't like that was considered a lie and a trick, cause "all children are lying manipulators" don't you know (hisss), and of course I was somehow at fault for everything that went wrong even if I had nothing to do with it - how the HELL can you be accused of doing something when you're not even at school cause you're sick at home with chicken pox ?

And so, if I was *GOING* to hang for this, if forever and ever, I was GOING to be considered a violent, uncontrollable little savage, no matter what I did, no matter how I tried so show otherwise, AND was gonna get in worse trouble for trying cause that made me a "liar" and "manipulator"...

Well what the hell do you THINK I did about it ?

And on that note, I am done with this thread - you do what you will, just remember the seeds you plant someday have a harvest, all too often a bitter one.

-Frem

PS - That's also the LAST time I'll ever take profanity from you without responding in kind, Siggy - you've done lost my personal respect with your behavior some time ago, and I did advise you, if you wanna go 2-for-2 with even being treated decently, we can go there too.

Act like Rappy, I'll treat ya like Rappy, and I am as good as my word.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 26, 2009 6:10 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Whatever, Frem.

You make space for some peeps personal issues, but not for others? How do you know that Rue doesn't have the same issues as you? Or Wulf?

You don't. But that doesn't stop you from assuming, and that is where you made a mistake.

I happen to know more about Rue's personal background than you do, which is why I jumped in to defense. If YOU can't see a cry for help.. or at least fairness... you're not as smart as you think you are. So. No. In fact I really DON'T care what you think about me, or what you think about anyone else for that matter. I listen, I learn, I admire some peeps quickness and others' tenacity and your life experience, but I don't get my self-respect from you. It's not because you haven't been down a hard row, but I just don't trust your judgment over mine. Sorry dude.

And now, I really WILL move on.

Peace.

ETA: You'll notice that Wulf has not YET apologized to Rue despite the fact that many have asked him to?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 26, 2009 6:53 PM

CHRISISALL

Well, MY take on humanity is that we *need* enemies to define ourselves.
I like Frem & Signy, but like anti-matter, they cancel out themselves.
Too bad.
George Bush, where are you when we need you?

I'm gonna watch Serenity now, to clear my head, and remind me to BELIEVE.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 26, 2009 8:29 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

No, we don't cancel out entirely Chris. Frem and I, I think we're heading approximately 45% to each other, somewhat the same direction. Not to worry. I bear him no ill will, truly.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 4:37 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Well, MY take on humanity is that we *need* enemies to define ourselves.
I like Frem & Signy, but like anti-matter, they cancel out themselves.
Too bad.
George Bush, where are you when we need you?

No, Frem & Signy DO NOT cancel each other out. They're both people with passionate beliefs and viewpoints, which are USUALLY in alignment, but OCCASIONALLY come into direct opposition. And when that happens, sparks fly. In Hollywood, they'd be in a romantic comedy together!

And yes, I *AM* deliberately trying to lighten the mood a bit. I don't like it when Mommy and Daddy fight.

And George Bush is no doubt hiding under a desk in an elementary school somewhere. Where else would he be? "Clearing brush"?

Mike

The percentage you're paying is too high-priced
While you're living beyond all your means;
And the man in the suit has just bought a new car
From the profit he's made on your dreams

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 5:41 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Heh! Spencer and Hepburn!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 6:10 AM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Heh! Spencer and Hepburn!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 6:35 AM

DREAMTROVE

MD

I don't think there would be a Klan rally to go to, and no one would get strung up at one, if there were, this is historically like expecting SS to arrest you for being jewish because you're in Germany. IOW: a dead idea for over 1/2 a century.

Probably black people encounter more prejudice due to cultural barrier than skin color, but there really isn't that much, and I thought the origins of "racism" sort of betray that this is not what it's about.

It's interesting to look at people, and the genetics, and where the connections really lie

A black girl from the Sudan

Is a closer genetic relative to a white girl in Germany

Than she is to a black girl in Togo

Very clear racial differences to the colorblind.

Genetically speaking, the Irish are closer relations to the pakistanis than they are to the English, The Japanese are closer to the Finns than to the Mongols, and this girl is 100% Chinese:

The concept of "race" is a very loose one, and often one we associate with a handful of superficial characteristics. But "subconscious" racism, as I said, may be more seriously connected with an unintentional analysis of facial features that may expose some underlying truths about the way humans interact, rather than socially created biases. I think there's very little overt anti-black racism, aside from Wulf, but there might be a lot in the subconscious. White viewers may very the Sudan and Somali girls in a different light than their west african counterparts. (The same probably applies to Halle Barre and Beyonce Knowles, who, IIRC, are 1/4 black, vs. someone like Macy Grey or Tracy Chapman.)

I guess I'm saying I think there are two things going on here:

1. A strong cultural bigotry. (take an american indian, and have them speak Spanish, and they will be discriminated against in a way that they wouldn't if they just spoke Cherokee or Navajo)

2. An unconscious genetic recognition of similarities and differences that may be more potent, and a door under which Obama could have slid without recognition.

Conscious racial descrimination based solely on appearance exists, but maybe not enough to effect an election. This isn't South Africa. Remember, in US history, sure, there was a lot of this, not just against africans, but also asians, native americans, and even Irish. Prior to the revolution, it was okay to have Irish slaves, and there was a lot of anti-Irish discrimination for a long time afterwards. Now, Irish Americans out-number English-Americans about 2:1

Quote:
Although it's not quite the same with Jewish people, who may identify/or be identified as Jewish culturally or ethnically and not follow any particular doctrine. Jewish people for all intents and purposes have been considered a race - although I agree that it's not accurate.

This is because the zionists push this idea that jews are a race. Most jews are of polish/ukrainian descent, and so there's a "look" that some people think of as "jewish" which is not semitic. There are also some semitic jews, they look someone like arabs to me, and I might confuse the two, to the absolute anger of both. But yes, most jews are no easier to spot on appearance as christians, less than fundamentalist christians because of the manner of dress.

Quote:
all African Americans are lazy, all Jews are stingy, all Muslims are terrorists, all Christians are idiots.

Yes, this is the sort of opinion. I don't think people think of blacks as lazy. If they have a negative stereotype it's 'violent.'

Re: Dawkins, I really agree. I think he's not aware of how he comes across.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 9:27 AM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
I don't like it when Mommy and Daddy fight.

Me either.

Frem:
"Signy, you spin me about. I wish you was elsewhere."
Signy:
"I was..."

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 9:46 AM

HKCAVALIER

Signy: "You're my knight in shining armor..." (it's a Hepburn reference)
Frem: "I just don't know how to quit you!"
HK: My deepest apologies to all.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 1:11 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
MD

I don't think there would be a Klan rally to go to, and no one would get strung up at one, if there were, this is historically like expecting SS to arrest you for being jewish because you're in Germany. IOW: a dead idea for over 1/2 a century.

I was really just trying to illustrate a point - not present an accurate portrayal of what happens in the US today.

Quote:
It's interesting to look at people, and the genetics, and where the connections really lie

I agree it is interesting, but I don't think that it has much to do with the discussion on racists, who tend to lump everyone in together with the broadest possible stereotype - the fact that they don't distinguish difference, subtle or not so subtle is what makes them racist.

Quote:
I guess I'm saying I think there are two things going on here:

1. A strong cultural bigotry. (take an american indian, and have them speak Spanish, and they will be discriminated against in a way that they wouldn't if they just spoke Cherokee or Navajo)

2. An unconscious genetic recognition of similarities and differences that may be more potent, and a door under which Obama could have slid without recognition.

Conscious racial descrimination based solely on appearance exists, but maybe not enough to effect an election. This isn't South Africa. Remember, in US history, sure, there was a lot of this, not just against africans, but also asians, native americans, and even Irish. Prior to the revolution, it was okay to have Irish slaves, and there was a lot of anti-Irish discrimination for a long time afterwards. Now, Irish Americans out-number English-Americans about 2:1

I don't know - some of the stuff around Obama seems pretty overt to me - although I agree with your first two points.

I know that here, it's no longer considered PC to be overtly racist, you wouldn't get people publicly denouncing 'boongs' or 'slopeheads' but that doesn't mean there in certain circumstances, people would not be quite overt in their racist views - ie if they knew they were with likeminded people.

Quote:
I don't think people think of blacks as lazy. If they have a negative stereotype it's 'violent.'

Again - I was just making a point about racial stereotyping.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 27, 2009 3:26 PM

DREAMTROVE

Quote:
I agree it is interesting, but I don't think that it has much to do with the discussion on racists, who tend to lump everyone in together with the broadest possible stereotype - the fact that they don't distinguish difference, subtle or not so subtle is what makes them racist.

MD,

I think it does. I guess the dialogue has changed here. The overarching assumption is that the overt racist is such a small population that he doesn't matter unless he has a gun. I never meet people like Wulf in real life. When I was a kid, I did. I actually suspected Wulf of being a sockpuppet for someone else, but he's posted a pic, I'm not sure. Of course, I could post a pic of a black guy.

The real racism in america is a subconscious racism. People, regardless of their political stripe or the values they espouse, make unconscious assumptions. If there's a crime scene, and there's a black guy wearing a hoodie, and a white guy in a suit and tie, many a viewer will make the assumption that black guy is committing a crime against the white guy. This was the source of the problem with the Harvard professor being arrested for breaking into his own home (okay, many people not black have also been arrested for breaking in to their own home, but) the point is that there were unconscious assumptions made.

Unconscious associations are made as well.

I agree, a klansman nazi with his own account at stormfront.org does not care what kind of african someone is. And on a conscious level, neither does anyone else. But there's another level, which is the level where a statistical impact can be made.

When people talk about white presidents, what do they mean by "looks presidential?" It must be some association that says "doesn't look like my garbage man, looks more like my mayor." This runs far deeper than we thought. As I mentioned earlier, Newsweek just did a piece on babies and toddlers making judgments like this. It's definitely subconscious.

Jon Stewart did a nice satire of this where Larry Wilmore who is black, and Stewart are sitting having a debate, and they're both wearing suits. And Wilmore says "oh, and Jon, you might want to rethink your wardrobe" and Stewart replies "But Larry, I'm dressed the same way you are," to which Wilmore responded "No, I'm dressed like the President. You look like the guy who just ran off with my 401k."

Quote:
I don't know - some of the stuff around Obama seems pretty overt to me - although I agree with your first two points.

Most of the overt stuff I see here comes from the media, and it's the GOP trying to race bait its base.

Before the GOP decided to declare war on Mexico, the southern Christians didn't care one bit about Mexicans. In fact, the only people who were anti-Mexicans were the actual Nazis. I used to live in the south, and visit often, and the christian communities were accepting. While our GI's were off fighting the "gooks," the southern Christian whites took in a lot of orphans, and there were vietnamese everywhere, and no one ever said a harsh word to them, or to any other group.

But this *is* an easily manipulated population. Why? I'm not sure, there have been a lot of theories floated, but one is this: Every week, they go to church, and a man stands up and tells them the word of God, and as long as they belong to that church, they believe him.

Now that guy can't say "Mexicans are inferior, hate them," but he can say "There's a Mexican manifest destiny, and these Mexicans are trying to take over Texas because it used to be part of Mexico and pretty soon that will be a Mexican flag, and you'll be speaking spanish and they'll force you to convert to Catholicism, and then you'll be following the pope, and have to obey him, the anti-christ nazi usurper on the throne in Rome...

And I'm no preacher, so I can't do a good job of it, and I think it takes a year of seeding ideas like that, but pretty soon you have a population riled up against Mexico.

National geographic did polls during the 1930s about the % of the german population that had an unfavorable opinion of jews. When the Nazis came to power, it was 2%. At the height around Kristallnacht it was 50%.

So, recently, the media has been bating people to hate muslims. They can try to bait people to hate blacks, I don't think that will work. Too many whites know too many blacks for that to hold. But they might get somewhere with the muslim thing. The guy's middle name is Hussein. We just fought a war to depose a Hussein. If they get anywhere with either, it's not going to be far, I suspect, but it only takes a few kooks to make mayhem.

Quote:
I know that here, it's no longer considered PC to be overtly racist, you wouldn't get people publicly denouncing 'boongs' or 'slopeheads' but that doesn't mean there in certain circumstances, people would not be quite overt in their racist views - ie if they knew they were with likeminded people.

Sure, in places that's a problem. Again, genetic distance is a good indicated of rejection, and Austalian whites and Aboriginals are about as far removed from one another genetically as you can get, and sure, there's some of that here, but I don't think it's the main thing that's going on.

Visualize, two jewish men, caught in a statistical dead heat, both sides claiming victory, and a democratic governor steps in and declares that there will be no final count of soldier's absentee ballots and appoints the democratic candidate as the new senator from Minnesota.

But he doesn't stand a chance at a second term in six years, because really folks, let's be real

Al Franken

Here's Al Franken really *trying* to look like a senator:

Defeated? Incumbent Norm Coleman:

Now, Norm was far from my favorite senator, and no one likes Al Franken because he was a sucky comedian and he went out an actively campaigned to get people to write their congressmen to support the idea that the US should go to war in Iraq. And sure, anyone would say, these are jewish men, and any anti-semitic nazi would not vote for either. But subconsciously, there's a lot of people who are going to vote for one and not the other because one guy *looks* like a senator.

Now sure, it was a split vote, Franken probably lost, but not by much. But this was because of Bush. Many people in the US don't pay any attention to smaller races and just vote party line, all democrat, or all republican, and even if this is only 15% of the vote, it's enough to solidly lose any republican their seat.

Quote:
Again - I was just making a point about racial stereotyping.

Yeah, I get that point. But I think the much larger % is happening subconsciously, and I was also making a point about the illogic of the overt racism:

1. The Nazis. First, they weren't ever aryans. East india is Aryan. Of course, that's what it was all about. Germany wanted india as an ally. That's why the symbol of the tamil slanted swastika, the name aryan, nothing like having an ally of 500 million to win a war. But also, gypsies are aryans, they were exterminated by non-aryan eastern europeans, serbs are actually germanic, and were exterminated by croats, a genetically unrelated group. None of it made any sense. The nazi definition of "jew" was "one jewish grandparent" which, given that their target, germany and eastern europe, had almost no semitic jews, almost the entire jewish population was converts or the descendants of, totally illogical except for one really cold equation: These policies generated the largest number of workers for slave labor camps.

My point? Overt racist attitudes are often totally artificial, and lack a scientific basis. Is there such a thing in the US now? yeah, sure, but it's not the dominant element. I think Chuck Schumer who is running this gentrification thing he calls "Operation Clean Sweep" all of which conjures up genocidal images, to destroy black neighborhoods, yes, Schumer is a racist, we know that. And yes, he may say it outright against palestinians, because that's "acceptable" to criticize muslims, and yes, he's just the sort of guy who would go home and say in private all sorts of things about blacks that he would never say in public... I think this makes him a dangerous man, I just don't think he's part of a statistically significant voting block. I think poll #s and recent election results show that.

Sure, Obama won in part because the republicans fucked up, but first he had to win the primary. And Chuck Schumer is a Democrat, and he wanted Hillary Clinton, and maybe that's racism, but there certainly wasn't enough of that to make a difference in the end.

Ironic footnote, if I didn't post this already: Obama's approval rating is highest in Germany, at 92%.

Anyway, your points are well taken, I just don't think that's what's going on in the US. I could be wrong.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 28, 2009 12:26 PM

STORYMARK

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
And if the majority of people WANT those ones in power to be there ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

He didn't answer that question when I asked it in his "no snark" thread.

I will say, this is one of his more disturbing - and disturbed - threads.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

Bumpin', to remind they Aryan that he keeps forgetting to answer.

And no, saying you already did, when you clearly avoided it, isn't the same, ya pussy.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 28, 2009 4:06 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:

I was really just trying to illustrate a point - not present an accurate portrayal of what happens in the US today.

Oh, you'd be surprised. I was passing through a little town in southeast Texas a few years ago (Vidor is the name of the town, and it still creeps me out to think about it), and I stopped for gas at a local convenience store. While I was pumping gas, I noticed several business cards sitting atop the gas pump. I picked on up and read it:

"You are being watched
by the Vidor Chapter of
The Knights of the Ku Klux Klan.

...and we don't like what we see."

Lovely. I'm sure they have a Klan rally every week. For the record, Vidor isn't too far from Jasper, Texas, where a black man was chained to the bumper of a pickup truck and dragged for miles, until he literally came apart. That's right - for the "crime" of being black, he was dragged chained behind a truck until pieces of his body were left all over the roadside.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd,_Jr.

Good thing that could never happen here, huh?

Mike

The percentage you're paying is too high-priced
While you're living beyond all your means;
And the man in the suit has just bought a new car
From the profit he's made on your dreams

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:06 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
other direction me was thinking. How about "Nation Demolition"?

DT, I meant it was working well for THEM, not what it really is. Nation Building makes it sound good, so the people will buy into it, just as "Global War On Terror" did...eh?

Frem: I don't care, I think you're CUTE. And I like my men "compact" (Jim's only 5'9"). So there. I oughta dig up a picture of my Victorian, Jim and I built one for my mom eons ago, based on a plan but we went from there. I landscaped it beautifully, and spent far too much on interior stuff for it. Was real proud of it. Mom had it about two weeks, then fell and hit her head on it, got shingles, and blamed it. She hated it from that moment forward...typical of mom. Gave it to Jim's daughter in the end for her kid, but I dunno if she ever even used it. Terrible waste of money and effort, but we had fun doing it, so I guess that's what counts.

Quote:
I don't start till he does. And I reserve the right to snark back.

Which I think is fair. (Don't you ?)

Rue, while I certainly believe you have the reserve the right to snark back, from what I've seen your "snark backs" are far more nasty and visceral than his, to begin with, and I don't see that it adds anything to anything to do so. Watching these threads devolve into personal attacks and visceral remarks doesn't do a damned thing for ME, dunno about anyone else; nor does lengthy discussions of who's a sock puppet, etc. I think Cavalier put it succinctly, and perfectly, in saying it was a pain in the ass when it keeps on going and going and going, and shows no maturity. Obviously trying to discuss the issue with you gets nowhere, so I agree with Cav, there's no point. I made a remark, I'll probably make it again when I see it, but will try not to respond to your rationalizations: because they are just that and nothing more. Just my opinion.

Like Sig, I disagree about Wulf discussing and debating. Yeah, I give you that he runs away, but what I also see is an effort to discuss and debate, as well. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. And one of the basic tenants of debate is that if you personally attack someone, they're not going to hear a word you have to say. Essentially it doesn't further the discussion, just gives you a moment of "ah-HAH!"

Quote:
he felt threatened enough to make it

You just made the point for us; someone who feels threatened lashes out--we're all different, we all lash out in our own individual ways, not all of them "PC". No excuse, just human nature. I know, I've been there in the past, too.

As to cutting Wulf slack, I deal with each person as I find them. I agree and disagree with you, as well as everyone else, and I have specifically called Mike on stuff I thought was inappropriate, if you were in that thread. I DEFINITELY don't think you are to blame for all the snarking, I never said that nor believe it. I'm pretty sure you don't see that Wulf responds to you by carrying the same baggage toward YOU as you do toward him, so I have no doubt it colors his posts to you. Neither has any excuse. But both are human, and I DEFINITELY, if you've noticed, call everyone on it at the same time mostly.

Nonetheless, in this thread at least, I think you've been singled out, Rue, when everyon here has at one point or another lowered themselves to snarking. "Pots calling kettle black"--maybe it's because your bias is so obvious and you give into snarking back so frequently, but you HAVE been piled on, at least in this thread. I'm to blame as much as anyone; hopefully I get cut just a teeeeny bit of slack 'cuz I've been gone two days and am responding to stuff since then, but I'll shut up from here on.

Re: PC

Quote:
by disapproving of hate-based speech, hopefully not routinely reinforcing prejudices in society

Right on. Good point, too. I disagree with DT on that one; not using pejoratives, especially to children, and pointing out racist statements made by others, is just plain the right thing to do. You're not going to cure how people think by speech, but making an effort is a START. And I agree with Rue:

Quote:
If people were to think fairly there would be no hateful speech at all then.

It's too easy to say people need to THINK fairly rather than TALK fairly...peer pressure, for one thing. How many have heard non-PC things said around them which we KNOW are wrong, and how many (of the general population) will stand up and call it so? It has its purposes.

But again, I decry it on any side. I have nothing against Christians...tho' I'm a bit prejudiced against Evangelicals...but in both cases, it's against those who USE their religion, who prosletize, are hypocritical, who look down on others of different faiths, etc....usually individuals, Christians or Evangelicals per se. Of COURSE some lefties are non-PC and THINK that way...there are those in all societies, all political stances, all everything having to do with humans.

Anthony,

Quote:
As in, the more knowledge you have, the less patience you have with ignorance.

I don't think so. I've found that some of us have good IQs, but lousey EQs. Don't think it has to do with "wisdom", however. I know among the bipolar population (we tend to have higher IQs than average), many of us tend to lean on our IQs to avoid our inabilities in social intercourse. It's another human failing. At the same time, yeah, we too have problems with people who are TRULY dumb; sometimes the world seems to move way too slowly and those around us can seem to be awfully slow to grasp things. But it's no excuse, and I don't think it's at all related to how smart one is.

Magon, I think DT has it:

Quote:
All people who group themselves into an identity are easily manipulated into group action.

Add to that "all people who group themselves into an identity are more likely to be intolerant of those OUTSIDE that identity, too.

DT, of COURSE genetics has nothing to do with racism, in truth. As was said in another thread, it's about APPEARANCE when it comes to what we consider "racism", but "bigotry" is a far more accurate term. I agree to a point with Mike's

Quote:
wouldn't say radical Islam is currently crazier than fundamentalist christian zealotry; I'd say they're on an equal lack of footing.

--I think the reason radical christian fundamentalists TALK more violently than Muslims ACT is societal to a large degree...violence such as goes on in Muslim countries, and which radical Muslims do in other countries, is societal; in America, our society tolerates less outward violence, while "free speech" allows visceral spoken attacks. In our past, we tolerated plenty of the active forms! Good comparison, Magon, to 15h and 16th century.

DT,

Quote:
The real racism in america is a subconscious racism. People, regardless of their political stripe or the values they espouse, make unconscious assumptions. If there's a crime scene, and there's a black guy wearing a hoodie, and a white guy in a suit and tie, many a viewer will make the assumption that black guy is committing a crime against the white guy.

Right on. That's the kind of racism that exists mostly in America today...and most people making assumptions aren't even aware that their assumptions are based on appearances, unless you call them on it. Many not even then, admittedly, but if you call people on it, some at least are willing to look at the situation differently. And

Quote:
When people talk about white presidents, what do they mean by "looks presidential?" It must be some association that says "doesn't look like my garbage man, looks more like my mayor." This runs far deeper than we thought.

is SO right on. Can be extrapolated to movie stars, too, a la Reagan, Eastwood, etc. We definitely have a "thing" that way in America. Appearance/perception is a biggie.

Yeah, I agree that

Quote:
Most of the overt stuff I see here comes from the media, and it's the GOP trying to race bait its base.

Whatever the percentage of racism/bigotry exists in America, right NOW the right wing is using it most overtly. And semi-overtly, and appealing to the subconscious racism, as well. I really don't think anyone can argue that point; it's so prevalent, that whatever right/left did in the past, that one is CLEARLY the biggie right now.

It's being played on because Obama is Black, pure and simple. That fact has heaped on it fear of the unknown, of change, so given he's "the other" in the first place, any depreciatory will be accepted as a reason to hate. Sure, some of it is fear of big government/socialism/whatever, but it WORKS so well because it's aimed at an "other". It's easy to use, because Mike's right, in some places in America racism is not only alive and well, but ACTED UPON. Tho' there is a price for acting on it SOMETIMES, in some places, as he mentioned, there is not. I wonder how many racist things happen overtly (especially in the South) that we never even hear about...?

There. I'm caught up. Jeez, catching up with you guys makes for posts even longer than my USUAL ramblings!

________________________
Together we are greater than the sum of our parts

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:37 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

I would argue this simple fact (as I have seen it)...

The Right can be/is overtly racist.

The Left can be/is subtly racist.

But the truth is... both are wrong.

We need another option.

Wouldn't it be nice if we could just SEE certain things, and work to making them better?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:19 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
So there. I oughta dig up a picture of my Victorian, Jim and I built one for my mom eons ago, based on a plan but we went from there. I landscaped it beautifully, and spent far too much on interior stuff for it. Was real proud of it. Mom had it about two weeks, then fell and hit her head on it, got shingles, and blamed it. She hated it from that moment forward...typical of mom. Gave it to Jim's daughter in the end for her kid, but I dunno if she ever even used it. Terrible waste of money and effort, but we had fun doing it, so I guess that's what counts.

Ah, well the story behind that dollhouse, well, it's just awesome.

I took a discarded and abandoned wreck, and for no other reason but to give a kid one shining happy moment of a proper childhood, built a freakin miracle, with my own two hands, on a string budget.

Here's the cliffs notes version of the tale, with pictures.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=11&t=29685

For all that many folk (not here) view me as a font of wickedness, it ain't never been true save from the perspective of folk who do ill unto others and come up against the wrath.

Behind that wrath, often as not I'll do things to help or benefit folk simply because I please to do them, because it pleases ME to see people happy, since I have so little of my own happiness inside.

Given a choice and a chance, I'd like to see the world itself more happy, but first that is gonna take removing or reducing elements and structures that wish to take away our childrens ABILITY to be happy, by reducing them to obediant sociopaths.

Never ever, only over my mangled remains is THAT gonna happen.

Love and kindness are weapons in this fight too, they require no permit, cannot be taken from you, nor can the forces of darkness long stand against them.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 12:18 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Just a few quick posts to a dead thread:

I'm so GLAD you posted that link Frem. I truly hope others read my posts, b/c my posts do not support your assertion.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=33401

Niki
".. maybe it's because your bias is so obvious and you give into snarking back so frequently ... I'm pretty sure you don't see that Wulf responds to you by carrying the same baggage toward YOU as you do toward him ..."

Not quite. I have asked Wulf topical questions. I have posted without snark. I have TRIED to enter into reasoned debate.

For example I posted this, and it was ALL I posted: "And if the majority of people WANT those ones in power to be there ?" THAT was what 'earned' me the threat. "You just won't leave me alone, will you Rue? You'd like me to "Hulk out" and smack you back..."

Let me ask you a favor. TRY to find ANY post of Wulf to me that was topical. ANY post that wasn't pure snark, if not outright threat. OK ? Just try.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:39 PM

DREAMTROVE

Nik,

Sorry if I'm in a mood, but I actually have to disagree on a couple points:

GWOT was a stupid term. That's like declaring world war three against anger.

Quote:
DT, of COURSE genetics has nothing to do with racism, in truth.

On the contrary, it has everything to do with genetics. Study animals much? Or insects? Studying politics and philosophy will get you only so far. Those are just random people's takes, and sometimes they are manipulative, other times they are outright lying.

This is where you can uncover the real subconcious. Sure, much of it is learned, but academia is really bogus in its division of animal and insects into "instinct." These guys learn just the way we do, we're not all that different.

In short, racism is not a plague of social "hate groups" except when you have out of control regimes like the ones in South Africa (take your pick really...) Does anyone else notice that the ANC put forward Zuma for the exact same reason that the GOP put forward Michael Steele? The ANC is well known to have a bias against Zulus, and so they go out of their way to get a zulu member to run, even if he does have a rape conviction and another for embezzlement.

We react to these things, and we do it on both sides of the aisle equally. The danger for liberals is that they are so convinced that they *aren't* racists that they are less likely catch themselves doing it. The danger for conservatives is that they are often surrounded by people more like them who will not point out if they are doing it. But we all do it.

The genetic reality is that in the eyes of the American voter, Barack Obama did not generate the same primal rejection that Jackson, Sharpton and Braun did. IIRC, with 30% of democratic primary voters being black, none of the three got more than a couple percent. Could African Americans have the same unconscious bias? Obama didn't trigger whatever it is, but it's not conscious hate groups doing it, and it's not people with issues like Wulf. It's folks like you and me, completely unaware that we're doing it. Oh, I voted for Cynthia McKinney, but then again, she didn't do to well, did she?

Oh, and everyone always does this, you're not the first and won't be the last, just gotta post it:

A tenant is an occupant of a piece of land owned by someone else.

A tenet is a point within a belief structure.

Oh, and edit. Take the time. It's good practice, even if it takes a little longer. Each rant will become shorter. Here's why it's worth doing: I poll people every so often, and find that 1/2 of the audience trails off after the first couple of paragraphs. Newspapers have done excellent studies on this phenomenon.

Here's a secret: Fox really is fair and balanced, and at the same time, it's really biased. Here's how:

Sample fake FOX piece:

Obama's plan has pitfalls that could lead us into hell... Page two: mostly these are budgetary issues that really aren't well thought through... Page three: a lot of these are actually just extensions of Bush policies... Page four: Some of these provisions are good ideas <-- hah, but we gotchya. We know only 10% of readers are still reading on page four. But if you question us, we can point to this and say "Nah, we covered it fairly"

Clever guys ;)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE