Something I should say more often

[oskar]

I dunno about Obamagate, but mail voting should not be allowed for anyone able enough to walk. Lazy fuckers. Get to the polling station. I do it even when I'm not going to vote.

Yay, but the UK doesn't have the same kind of voter suppression problem the US has. I always vote in person, but if I had to potentially wait 3 hours at a polling place on a work day, I wouldn't.

[wufwugy]

When kids move, parents sometimes still get the ballots and fill them out.

When one member of household is registered voter but isn't interested in the specific election, he/she sometimes will let somebody else in the household fill it out.

One spouse sometimes watches over the other spouse when filling out the ballot.


None of this gets reported. These examples and others are incredibly common here.

[Poopadoop]

When kids move, parents sometimes still get the ballots and fill them out.

When one member of household is registered voter but isn't interested in the specific election, he/she sometimes will let somebody else in the household fill it out.

One spouse sometimes watches over the other spouse when filling out the ballot.


None of this gets reported. These examples and others are incredibly common here.

Sample size.

You're extrapolating from your personal experience and/or things you've heard of to the entire country. Going from 'I know someone or two who did x', to 'it's incredibly common' is not a solid argument.

[MadMojoMonkey]

When kids move, parents sometimes still get the ballots and fill them out.

A) Based on what study / investigation?

When one member of household is registered voter but isn't interested in the specific election, he/she sometimes will let somebody else in the household fill it out.

B) Based on what study / investigation?

One spouse sometimes watches over the other spouse when filling out the ballot.

C) Based on what study / investigation?

None of this gets reported. These examples and others are incredibly common here.

D) If none of it gets reported, then how do you know whether it's common or affecting any results?


Those are 4 separate claims. Do you have any data to back any of them up?


I cited real sources, based on real investigations. If you can't / wont do the same, then you're not arguing in good faith.

You've given me no reason to believe you're presenting reasonable, data-based conclusions,
which leaves me to assume you have neither reason nor data to back up those claims.

[wufwugy]

I can't prove any of it. Nobody can. Public evidence on the subject barely exists.

Just know: I say I've seen a lot. Over the many years, a lot from varied people. It gets discussed at parties and shit. People joke about the different ways they fill out the ballots, typically unaware that it's fraud or sometimes borderline.

It would be really cool to get some decent data. As of now what we have to go on is description from somebody who lives here and says he sees it.

[MadMojoMonkey]

I'm not arguing that you aren't telling me what you honestly feel, wuf.

I'm saying that your feelings and anecdotal "I heard it at a party" musings are no basis for policy.


Do you disagree with that assessment?

[wufwugy]

I'm not arguing that you aren't telling me what you honestly feel, wuf.

I'm saying that your feelings and anecdotal "I heard it at a party" musings are no basis for policy.


Do you disagree with that assessment?

My experience is definitely not basis for policy.

We need more investigation into just how common the behavior is.

[oskar]

They're putting in a lot of resources for the elections to be the way they are. Voter suppression is a feature to them, not a flaw.

[Poopadoop]

They're putting in a lot of resources for the elections to be the way they are. Voter suppression is a feature to them, not a flaw.

This.

Voter suppression, gerrymandering, libel and slander tactics, these are all tacitly accepted in the US. Sure, people bitch about them, but they go on nonetheless.

The US score on the democracy scale (if there is such a thing) would rank somewhere between a banana republic and a country in W. or S. Europe.

[MadMojoMonkey]

The integrity of our democracy dilutes as you get close to the top, but on local scales, it's pretty solid.


People complaining that the presidential election isn't democratic are just failing to recognize that it hasn't ever been and probably was never intended to be. The Electoral College elects the president, not a popular vote. That system is completely corrupt, based on congressional districts that are drawn up by the congress.

Gerrymandering is less common than people think, but it's still a thing. Just not as much a thing as people say it is, which is partially evidenced that most districts do not change when the majority party changes in Congress. If neither side is unhappy with where the district lines are drawn, then it's probably not a problem.

Still... complaining that your vote for POTUS wont be counted fairly is voluntary ignorance of the fact that it never was going to be counted in the first place.

[CoccoBill]

Gerrymandering is less common than people think, but it's still a thing. Just not as much a thing as people say it is, which is partially evidenced that most districts do not change when the majority party changes in Congress. If neither side is unhappy with where the district lines are drawn, then it's probably not a problem.

"In the lead-up to the 2010 United States elections, the Republican party initiated a program called REDMAP, the Redistricting Majority Project, which recognized that the party in control of state legislatures would have the ability to set their congressional and legislative district maps based on the pending 2010 United States Census in manner to assure that party's control over the next ten years. The Republican took significant gains from the 2010 elections across several states, and by 2011 and 2012, some of the new district maps showed Republican advantage through perceived partisan gerrymandering. This set the stage for several legal challenges from voters and groups in the court system, including several heard at the Supreme Court level."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrym..._United_States

[Poopadoop]

Yeah I mean the US would definitely be above a banana republic in any Democracy Index. The elections aren't exactly "rigged". But there's a lot that seems to go on that isn't kosher.

[wufwugy]

I love BLM. The core philosophy of protesting against rule by a power you don't have say in is dear to my heart.

I wish BLM didn't have its losing strategy of extreme exclusion. Then I (and millions of others) could join them.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Assuming you're speaking from the heart, and not making bullshit excuses, Craig Benzine knocked it out of the park on this with his latest video.

Here's many avenues to join.




Time to show your true colors, wuf.

Will you step up to the challenge?

[wufwugy]

It's the extreme exclusion (the racist strategy) that I can't get behind.

I love the core philosophy of wanting freedom from a legal power you don't consent to.

[MadMojoMonkey]

IDK what exclusion you're talking about. If some people have treated you poorly or excluded you, then those people were being jerks, and they don't represent the greater movement. Try not to fall into that trap of reflecting negative shit. We all fall into it from time to time, but it's not who we want to be.


There are lots of links in the YouTube video I posted. Did you watch the video? Or click any of the links?


Or maybe you've excluded yourself by not educating yourself or accidentally espousing ideals which come across as insensitive or even antithetical to the reforms that need to take place so that all Americans have equal freedoms.

Self-education, and reaching out to solve this problem is what needs to happen.
If you truly believe in what the peaceful protests stand for, then there is room for you in the conversation, in the protest. Your voice is valid and important and can be used to achieve the freedoms you praised.

[oskar]

The only ones excluded from an anti-racism movement are, you know, racists.

[MadMojoMonkey]

The only ones excluded from an anti-racism movement are, you know, racists.

This is poor language to use.

My preface:
Everyone is born a racist. Children in pre-school separate into racial groups by age 3. It's not malicious, there's no hate or competition between the groups. Children of all peoples seek familiar interactions and familiar situations. So they naturally group up with other children who look like their own families.

Then over time, these groups further consolidate, and feed the notion that there is identity in these groups.

When people become teenagers, and their struggle for identity becomes a dominant part of their personal growth. It's easy to fall into a trap of finding identity in things they did not choose to be. Racial tensions in mixed race schools starts on the playgrounds in grade school or middle school, but it doesn't tend to elevate to real race violence until middle school or high school.


A huge problem with addressing racism are the lies that "racism is a choice" or "racism is only a thing that affects haters."

Every one of us was born with the human desire to have familiar surroundings, predictability. It takes an intellectual choice to disavow judging people by things they cannot choose about themselves.


And so we get to my point:
Most racism is accidental. I've said and done a lot of racist things. I've never incited violence, or consciously thought I was being racist, but accidental racism is very real. The wrong thing to do if you've been accidentally insensitive is to double down on the fact that it was an accident and insist that it should be excused. That is not acknowledging your mistake and learning from it. Or at least, it isn't likely for you to accept that what you did was a mistake, and all that you need do to fix it is apologize and learn from it by listening to the reasons why it was a mistake and understanding those reasons.

[CoccoBill]

[OngBonga]

It's a bad meme war too.

[CoccoBill]

Are the memes bad, are are they necessarily ridiculous since what they depict is ridiculous?

[OngBonga]

They're bad analogies.

Actually the second one is reasonable because there's someone pretending to help, barking orders at someone else.

But the first one is just all bad.

Try "imagine you have a child, and someone else's child has died after being bullied for being ginger, and you turn up at the funeral pretending to share the grief of the mother who has lost her child because your child is ginger too".

[CoccoBill]

Try "imagine you have a child, and someone else's child has died after being bullied for being ginger, and you turn up at the funeral pretending to share the grief of the mother who has lost her child because your child is ginger too".

Wait what. Pretending? You mean other black parents are pretending when they show up grieving for other parents' dead black kids? Or that all white people supporting them are pretending? Maybe you should try rephrasing or elaborating.

[OngBonga]

Ok, replace "pretending" with "assuming". And jiggle the grammar so it makes sense.

Outrage and grief are most definitely not the same thing. We grieve for people we love.

That analogy is poor because it appeals to the emotion that your child is dying.

[CoccoBill]

Outrage and grief are most definitely not the same thing. We grieve for people we love.

To elaborate, they're of course not, but nothing is stopping from feeling both. You're maybe being excessively cynical about this, most people are capable of empathy and they give a shit. I'm not a particularly emotional person as most here have probably guessed, but I get emotional watching those videos about Flynn, that bitch at central park and the various attacks against civilians in the riots. I can't even imagine what they feel like for black people living through that shit. I don't feel directly guilty for it, not even my ancestors have been part of any of that, but I do acknowledge I'm one lucky fuck for having been born at this place and to these parents. No, I haven't been handed any medals, handouts or stipends, but I've evaded most handicaps existing for humans.

[OngBonga]

To elaborate, they're of course not, but nothing is stopping from feeling both. You're maybe being excessively cynical about this, most people are capable of empathy and they give a shit. I'm not a particularly emotional person as most here have probably guessed, but I get emotional watching those videos about Flynn, that bitch at central park and the various attacks against civilians in the riots. I can't even imagine what they feel like for black people living through that shit. I don't feel directly guilty for it, not even my ancestors have been part of any of that, but I do acknowledge I'm one lucky fuck for having been born at this place and to these parents. No, I haven't been handed any medals, handouts or stipends, but I've evaded most handicaps existing for humans.

I get angry watching videos too. Half an hour ago, I watched an Irish guy getting kicked in the head by black youths shouting about slavery. I got angry when I saw the old guy pushed over by cops and him lying there in a pool of blood. And of course the Floyd footage made me angry too. I'm not immune to emotional reactions to what I see. But grief? I don't think it's healthy to grieve for those you don't love, I mean idk how many people die every day but it's a lot. Why care about one guy but not the next? USA isn't the only shitshow in the world right now.

[CoccoBill]

Well yeah sort of, but I think the word you're looking for is empathy.

[Poopadoop]

The principal of our college sent out a tweet the other day to say "All lives matter." The reaction was predictable.

The thing is, he almost certainly meant it as 'not just black lives, but brown lives, yellow lives, etc.', which he in fact clarified it as meaning after getting dunked on by half of twitter. And fwiw, I don't think THAT message is insensitive at all, because it acknowledges that other minority groups face prejudice as well.

OTOH, when you're a fat rich white guy tweeting about race relations, and you're not clued into the fact that just saying 'All lives matter' and not explaining what you mean is going to be taken the wrong way, you do show yourself to be sadly out of touch and it seems pretty clear you're just virtue signalling.

On the third hand, it's also sad that a lot people just immediately assumed he was saying some kind of white privelege thing or whatever and jumped all over him. And it's noteworthy that once he explained what he really meant, not one of them apologized to him. I'm sure they were all too busy moving on to the next thing they could be outraged about. It really must be fucking exhausting being one of those people.

[OngBonga]

Empathy is overrated. It's an emotional reaction, and it's mentally draining.

[MadMojoMonkey]

"it's mentally draining"


Of course it is. Choosing personal change is difficult and uncomfortable. That's why learning is stressful, you have to confront your own ignorance and deal with it.

But I can't endorse the reaction that learning is hard, so I choose to not learn.


Personally, in my biased opinion, I believe that if there is any evil in the world, it is voluntary ignorance. By which I mean, choosing to remain uneducated once you are aware of your short-comings is choosing to be wrong. Choosing to be wrong is against my core philosophy as a scientist. I believe that choosing to be wrong is antithetical to all human growth both on the individual level and on the societal level.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Part of the problem is that people know racism is bad and they believe themselves to be a good person, so they conclude, "Therefore I am not racist, because bad people are racist, and I'm a good person."

But it's possible to be both. This is what I mean by accidental racism.

[OngBonga]

Part of the problem is that people know racism is bad and they believe themselves to be a good person, so they conclude, "Therefore I am not racist, because bad people are racist, and I'm a good person."

But it's possible to be both. This is what I mean by accidental racism.

I don't think I'm a good person, but I also know I'm not racist.

[CoccoBill]

Sure, literally no one thinks they're racist, David Duke famously included. We have infinite sympathy and excuses for our own actions. The problem is most of the "evil" things happening in the world aren't because of malice, but selfishness and false assumptions.

[wufwugy]

The movement -- that goes back much further than BLM -- about freeing black communities from the legal power structure they never consented to is maybe the most libertarian movement I know of. And I love it.

I want to be a part of that. I also want freedom from legal power structures I didn't consent to.

[CoccoBill]

If my spouse comes to me in obvious pain and asks “Do you love me?”, an answer of “I love everyone” would be truthful, but also hurtful and cruel in the moment. If a co-worker comes to me upset and says “My father just died,” a response of “Everyone’s parents die,” would be truthful, but hurtful and cruel in the moment. So when a friend speaks up in a time of obvious pain and hurt and says “Black lives matter,” a response of “All lives matter,” is truthful. But it’s hurtful and cruel in the moment.

[OngBonga]

If my spouse comes to me in obvious pain and asks “Do you love me?”, an answer of “I love everyone” would be truthful, but also hurtful and cruel in the moment. If a co-worker comes to me upset and says “My father just died,” a response of “Everyone’s parents die,” would be truthful, but hurtful and cruel in the moment. So when a friend speaks up in a time of obvious pain and hurt and says “Black lives matter,” a response of “All lives matter,” is truthful. But it’s hurtful and cruel in the moment.

The phrase "all lives matter" is deliberately intended to trigger the left in the same way "Black live matter" triggers the right. The stupid thing is, most people agree that all lives, including black live, matter. Yet people are arguing with each other about slogans.

I don't like BLM because they are intentionally racially divisive.

[wufwugy]

If my spouse comes to me in obvious pain and asks “Do you love me?”, an answer of “I love everyone” would be truthful, but also hurtful and cruel in the moment. If a co-worker comes to me upset and says “My father just died,” a response of “Everyone’s parents die,” would be truthful, but hurtful and cruel in the moment. So when a friend speaks up in a time of obvious pain and hurt and says “Black lives matter,” a response of “All lives matter,” is truthful. But it’s hurtful and cruel in the moment.

100% right. "All lives matter" is a losing reaction to "black lives matter."

"Black lives matter" is also a losing frame.

[OngBonga]

Of course it is. Choosing personal change is difficult and uncomfortable. That's why learning is stressful, you have to confront your own ignorance and deal with it.

Empathy isn't change. Empathy isn't ignorance. A lack of empathy in this context is an emotional detachment from social issues. A lack of empathy is not the same as willful ignorance. In my case it's a resigned sense of lack of control coupled with the awareness that I don't think it's good for my mental health to get emotionally drawn in to social matters such as this. I spent years telling anyone who would listen that 9/11 was a crock of shit, yet here we are two decades later where the majority just accept what they read on wikipedia. I never regained my trust in the system, but I did lose my sense of empathy towards the rest of the world. I lost hope, I figured people weren't willing to face the reality of the lies and preferred to live in blissful ignorance, so long as the world continued to go round. A lack of empathy isn't really a choice, it's a trait. You're either born not giving a fuck, or you get beaten down by life.

Personally, in my biased opinion, I believe that if there is any evil in the world, it is voluntary ignorance. By which I mean, choosing to remain uneducated once you are aware of your short-comings is choosing to be wrong. Choosing to be wrong is against my core philosophy as a scientist. I believe that choosing to be wrong is antithetical to all human growth both on the individual level and on the societal level.

No, evil is people who harm others knowing what they are doing is causing harm. If I want to live in the middle of nowhere, blissfully ignorant to the world's problems, that doesn't make me evil.

[CoccoBill]

"Black lives matter" is also a losing frame.

What do you mean?

[wufwugy]

What do you mean?

It doesn't include many people who have great ability to solve the problem.

The race framing is confusing to a lot of people.

Black people more than "matter".

[wufwugy]

Assuming we're sticking with the race framing:

Imagine if BLM leaders focused on statistics on whites unjustly killed by cops. Imagine if they posted all the videos of unjust killing of whites by cops.

The data supports that police brutality is a big problem for everybody. But right now, BLM has it as only a problem for black people. If they reframed it as a problem of police brutality against others as well, the support for reforming police would become overwhelming.

[wufwugy]

I'd rather we not even use race framing in the first place. That just makes everything so much harder to solve.

[oskar]

I cry every time.

I'd rather we not even use race framing in the first place. That just makes everything so much harder to solve.

You are being absolutely silly. Nobody is saying: police reform, but only when it comes to black people. Everything the BLM protestors are demanding effects everyone equally and you are getting hung up on label.

[wufwugy]

I cry every time.



You are being absolutely silly. Nobody is saying: police reform, but only when it comes to black people. Everything the BLM protestors are demanding effects everyone equally and you are getting hung up on label.

You're 100% right about the effects of reform, and many millions will never know it because of messaging issues.

[CoccoBill]

It doesn't include many people who have great ability to solve the problem.

The race framing is confusing to a lot of people.

Black people more than "matter".

Well sure, but what else do you suggest they do?

[wufwugy]

Well sure, but what else do you suggest they do?

I'm not sure.

Racism is the biggest problem in America. We need leadership that both black Democrats and white Republicans find credible.

The only person I know of who could potentially be that person is Kanye.

[CoccoBill]

I'd rather we not even use race framing in the first place. That just makes everything so much harder to solve.

I agree completely. Wouldn't it be incredible if being gay, black, atheist, fat, old or whatever wouldn't be seen as a defining quality when talking about anyone? That's not the case though, so meanwhile something probably should be done.

[CoccoBill]

Maybe sneakers with bipartisan support?

[wufwugy]

Maybe sneakers with bipartisan support?

Gotta bring back those Air Jordans

[MadMojoMonkey]

Oskar, you either completely missed by point, or you just made a joke in very poor taste.

If you think that's what I said, then please re-read what I wrote, and if it makes you emotional, then do something else for a while, then come back and repeat.

When you can read it without getting emotional, then respond to my words, rather than turn them into a false caricature and ignore that I am a person whom you know for a fact is not defending racism or racist behavior.


This isn't the twitterverse or facebook where we falsely caricature each other and talk over each other. This is a group of friends talking with the freedom to post long-form, thought out statements.

We're all friends, here. If we can't listen to each other and understand each other with nuance, then there's no point in discussing this topic, here. We can talk about other things and it hardly matters.


Please. I'm asking all of us to be aware of the emotional rawness that is expected when discussing this, and to be respectful of each other.
If you feel I'm not following my own rules, bring it up. I will apologize and try to be more respectful.

[oskar]

No, I got the point.

Wasn't "save the rainforest" exclusionary to other forests?
Wasn't "save the whales" exclusionary to other mammals?
Wasn't "breast cancer awareness" exclusionary to other cancers?

If Wuf wants to be morally consistent he'd have to condemn all of the above on the same grounds.


If I came off as emotional, I can assure you that's not the case.

[OngBonga]

https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/stat...41648683487232

What a quality rant.

[Poopadoop]

https://twitter.com/Holbornlolz/stat...41648683487232

What a quality rant.

Most of that was on point. It is almost as if people need something to complain about.

The bit at the beginning was off though - we may have never had so much prosperity, but wealth and the fair distribution of that wealth are two different things. Same goes for treatment under the law - the cops may no longer go and shoot striking miners or whatever used to happen in 1850, but that doesn't mean everyone is getting proper and fair treatment.

I think there's a very vocal minority out there that get a lot of attention from finding things to be outraged about, like vegans over the eggs in a salad emoji. Social media makes it look like 'oh wow there's thousands of people pissed about this, better change the emoji,' when in fact the vast majoriy of people are thinking what he's thinking - 'fuck off you crybabies.'

[OngBonga]

but wealth and the fair distribution of that wealth are two different things

Fair distribution of wealth is impossible. Literally impossible. There are multiple problems with this concept, not least the issue of "fair" being subjective. Then we have to consider the fact that there are a lot more people than there are mansions. There are also more people than there are yachts. How can we distribute wealth fairly?

but that doesn't mean everyone is getting proper and fair treatment.

I don't think that's the point he's making. I think he's suggesting that we have come a long way in a relatively short amount of time, which is true. The problems faced today by black people are incomparable to those faced just a century ago.

I think there's a very vocal minority out there that get a lot of attention from finding things to be outraged about, like vegans over the eggs in a salad emoji. Social media makes it look like 'oh wow there's thousands of people pissed about this, better change the emoji,' when in fact the vast majoriy of people are thinking what he's thinking - 'fuck off you crybabies.'

Yeah, and it's actually a massive problem. This minority are basically trying to seize a monopoly on morality, and we end up in a world where trans rights come before women's rights because trans awareness is so fucking woke.

[Poopadoop]

Fair distribution of wealth is impossible. Literally impossible. There are multiple problems with this concept, not least the issue of "fair" being subjective. Then we have to consider the fact that there are a lot more people than there are mansions. There are also more people than there are yachts. How can we distribute wealth fairly?

I agree, but a lot of things are literally impossible. It's also literally impossible for all the wealth in the country to exist in one person's hands. The idea is to find a place in-between those two extremes that is both possible and reasonable. You can start by taxing the rich.

I don't think that's the point he's making. I think he's suggesting that we have come a long way in a relatively short amount of time, which is true. The problems faced today by black people are incomparable to those faced just a century ago.

It's the sub-text to that point that black people should be grateful that we ended slavery that I find jarring. Even if things are bad now, they used to be worse, so quit your moaning, is a pretty lame stance to take imo.

Yeah, and it's actually a massive problem. This minority are basically trying to seize a monopoly on morality, and we end up in a world where trans rights come before women's rights because trans awareness is so fucking woke.

I don't think it's a massive problem, it's more of a silly distraction from things that are actually important. It's no skin off my nose if the salad emoji has an egg in it or not, or if someone prefers to be addressed as 's/he' or 'it' or 'King Tut' or whatever they want.

[OngBonga]

‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?

I don't like Rowling, she's a twat. But she says this and Twitter goes into a trans meltdown, as though she's causing actual physical harm to someone who identifies as a woman but cannot menstruate. This is trans discrimination, apparently. This is the world we live in.

[OngBonga]

It's the sub-text to that point that black people should be grateful that we ended slavery that I find jarring.

Who's "we"? Our Great-Grandfathers? This language is also quite jarring, as though I bear responsibility in any way. I didn't keep slaves, and I didn't help to end slavery. I was born into a world where it no longer existed, at least not on a state level. For that I'm grateful, and I'm white. I'd be even more grateful if I were black. It's not that I'm grateful that bad people stopped being bad, but I recognise the world is a much better place than it was for my Grandfather.

Although I'm beginning to doubt that last sentence.

Even if things are bad now, they used to be worse, so quit your moaning, is a pretty lame stance to take imo.

That's not quite what I'm saying. The "quit your moaning" is an exaggeration. I have clearly stated I'm in favour of protest, and police brutality against black people is a fine cause. But don't kid yourself into thinking black people suffer from the same problems their ancestors did. 100 years ago we'd have seen a massacre by now.

Yes, the world can still be a much better place, and we should strive to make that the case. But progress takes time, and we are making progress, or at least we were.

I don't think it's a massive problem, it's more of a silly distraction from things that are actually important. It's no skin off my nose if the salad emoji has an egg in it or not, or if someone prefers to be addressed as 's/he' or 'it' or 'King Tut' or whatever they want.

I don't think anyone actually cares about an egg emoji, but trans rights are shitting all over women's rights. When trans people are allowed to compete as women in sport, that's the end of women's sport as we know it. Girls will no longer grow up with ambitions to be successful at school, because they will be outcompeted at professional level by boys who turned into girls. All to protect the feelings of a man who wants to be a woman.

It's a massive problem because the loud minority force change in policy by hounding people like JK Rowling for not pandering to their deluded demands.

[Poopadoop]

Who's "we"? Our Great-Grandfathers? This language is also quite jarring, as though I bear responsibility in any way. I didn't keep slaves, and I didn't help to end slavery. I was born into a world where it no longer existed, at least not on a state level. For that I'm grateful, and I'm white. I'd be even more grateful if I were black. It's not that I'm grateful that bad people stopped being bad, but I recognise the world is a much better place than it was for my Grandfather.

It's the word "grateful" that is misplaced here. Ending abuse is not an act of magnamity, it's fixing a wrong. There's nothing for them or me or you or we to be grateful for. Saying something isn't as bad as it used to be is downplaying the fact that it's bad now.

Should I be grateful the US Cavalry stopped raiding Native American camps, killing women and children, sometime in the late 1800s? Who should I thank for that? Does that mean it's ok the US gov't is still trampling on Native American rights by putting the Dakota pipeline through their sovereign land against their wishes? "Well at least they didn't go in and kill women and children? Oh, thanks a lot."

[OngBonga]

I mean this is a matter of semantics. This is no different to me taking issue with the word "privilege".

[Poopadoop]

I mean this is a matter of semantics. This is no different to me taking issue with the word "privilege".

Well, I just said what I think he's doing wrong in his rant. Saying things are better now than before downplays the fact that there's still plenty of room for improvement.

[OngBonga]

But saying that downplays the progress we've made.

This is kinda the problem with society these days. There's no middle ground.

[Poopadoop]

But saying that downplays the progress we've made.

This is kinda the problem with society these days. There's no middle ground.

But it's not about the past it's about the present and the future. I mean what are we supposed to do NOW? We can't just sit back and say 'it's better than before so let's all be happy and act like everything's good.'

[OngBonga]

Where do you get the idea that's what I'm saying?

Yes, the world can still be a much better place, and we should strive to make that the case. But progress takes time, and we are making progress, or at least we were.

I appreciate I'm not always clear, but that's pretty clear to me.

[Poopadoop]

I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about the guy in the video. He's not saying anything constructive about what should be done now, he's basically saying people should stop bitching.

[OngBonga]

I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about the guy in the video. He's not saying anything constructive about what should be done now, he's basically saying people should stop bitching.

Oh ok. Well I'm not sure he's quite saying "stop bitching", the message is a little deeper than that, but I'll grant you he's not really saying anything constructive other than going on an amusing rant.

[OngBonga]

Protesters in Bristol have pulled down a statue of a slave trader and thrown it in the river. Now that I can get behind. That is protest.

Of course, it has worrying implications, because if they think they have the moral authority to start pulling down statues of, say, Churchill, we could have some problems.

But I have no idea why a city should celebrate a slave trader and this kind of change is something that does need to happen sooner rather than later. I would hope cities and towns around the country are urgently reviewing the status of their statues.

[wufwugy]

Maybe the black freedom movement needs to not be inclusive.

The philosophy's primary tool is so powerful, that if it loses that tool, the movement might disappear. When it's explained that Africans were enslaved and relocated, to be beaten and abused, and over time gradually merged into the political power structure they wanted nothing to do with -- that's easy to understand.

I also want freedom from the political power that forces me against my will. But I don't have that gut-punch story of my people that makes it so easy to understand. I'm even viewed as part of that dominating political power because of how I was born.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Wuf: I'm not pointing a finger at you, and I'm not calling you a bad person.
Reading your statement, "Maybe the black freedom movement needs to not be inclusive." sounds to me like you're searching for a reason to not be a part of the solution.

[MadMojoMonkey]

Not because of how we were born, but because of how the system treats us differently.

Can you imagine if you went to the doctor with a broken leg, and the doctor's all, "I didn't break your leg!!"

No one worth listening to is saying white people today are the cause of this problem. People worth listening to are saying that everyone today needs to solve it.

Anyone blaming the white people of today for the history of racism deserve the criticism that they're missing the point just as much as white people who become defensive over that history are missing the point.

[wufwugy]

Not because of how we were born, but because of how the system treats us differently.

Makes me go back to thinking inclusiveness is the key.

I'm doing two things:

(1) Expressing how I love the core philosophy of the most libertarian movement I know of.

(2) Expressing ideas for what could make that movement more persuasive and thus get better results.

[wufwugy]

The movement probably gains much of its life-breath power by being exclusive and focusing on poor treatment of one group relative to other groups.

BUT that is also probably why the movement has poor success.

[CoccoBill]

The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people, but the silence over that by the good people.

[wufwugy]

The ultimate tragedy is not the oppression and cruelty by the bad people, but the silence over that by the good people.

Which gets to another one of the major messaging failures of the current iteration of the movement.

I understand the use of bad examples of cruelty because I understand the philosophical backing of the movement. But the vast majority of people don't understand that, and what they see is martyring of criminals and lowlifes. It's super non-persuasive to most people, and it has made MILLIONS of people believe the unequal treatment is a lie.

But it's not a lie, there are so many examples of true legit system injustice against black people in ways that happen less often (but still happen) to white people.


About the spark to the current protests: it was the perfect moment. The visuals were so clear and persuasive, and the entire world was on the same page.

But then Antifa started rioting.

[MadMojoMonkey]

But then Antifa started rioting.

If you can share with me any evidence of a reality of this group's existence, and not just a bold label attached to anyone who acts in a way that offends our current POTUS, then I'll gladly take that in and let it revise my understanding.

I've seen no evidence that Antifa is anything but a boogeyman - not dissimilar to accusations of communism during the McCarthy era.


We should all be extremely skeptical with the idea that anyone can be accused of being a member of a terrorist organization, and prosecuted on that accusation without overwhelming proof.
Let's just take "terrorist organization" as a metaphor for whatever the right phrase is for an American group that does terrorist-like things, since there is no legal framework with allows an American group to be called or responded to as a terrorist group.

[wufwugy]

If you can share with me any evidence of a reality of this group's existence, and not just a bold label attached to anyone who acts in a way that offends our current POTUS, then I'll gladly take that in and let it revise my understanding.

I've seen no evidence that Antifa is anything but a boogeyman - not dissimilar to accusations of communism during the McCarthy era.


We should all be extremely skeptical with the idea that anyone can be accused of being a member of a terrorist organization, and prosecuted on that accusation without overwhelming proof.
Let's just take "terrorist organization" as a metaphor for whatever the right phrase is for an American group that does terrorist-like things, since there is no legal framework with allows an American group to be called or responded to as a terrorist group.

You're right, most of the rioters, assaulters, and murderers probably are not Antifa.