Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 13:28:22 GMT -8
Depends on what your definition of social justice is. If its dealing with racism in a fact based constructive way to reduce the negative impact of those affected most rational human beings would support that. I think most informed people, "Christians" or not , are little sharper than perhaps you might think and can separate efforts to address real racism from much of the current effort to destroy property and peoples lives who might not share their leftist views. Part of the problem is that folks want to ignore the reasons for protests. Naturally, it is challenging for people to think about the social changes that need to be implemented in order to improve our society since so many people already have little to no problem with the system. So instead of looking at possibilities or solutions, they focus on the noise. They turn their attention instead to "property damage" and "looting" in order to avoid taking the protests seriously.
Back in 2008 when the market collapsed and housing went to hell, we saw what happened when families were evicted and their homes were foreclosed, but no one cried "property damage" or "looting." These families were pissed off at the system and they took it out on the house that they lost.
It happens. Frustration leads to anger. Anger leads to violence. How do we address that anger? By addressing the frustration of those who have been held back by the system.
Turning away and saying that we don't have to listen because they are protesting wrong will only increase the frustration until it spills out again.
Violence, destruction , violent crime , looting etc until they quote "get people to listen" or succumb to all of the ridiculous demands that do nothing to deal with racism. Can you even articulate what can be done other than saying we need to eliminate "systematic racism". The victimhood narrative isn't going to solve any problems its going to perpetuate them. Most people are not held back by the "system" they are held back by poor life choices regardless of race. And 99 percent of the wealth in this country was created over the last few decades, it wasn't built off the "backs" of anyone. That's a false narrative and its a fact. If you don't deal with drugs, crime, education and yes cultural issues nothing is going to change and lowering the bar isn't going to help anyone.. I hate to break the news to you but the housing crisis was enabled by people that made poor choices and a government that felt owning a home was a human right regardless of their credit worthiness (fredi and Fannie). Its time for people to take some personal responsibility for their own actions
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jul 6, 2020 13:36:59 GMT -8
sounds like the prattling of an old man on his death bed. Guess I hit a nerve. Not really, the joke served itself up.
|
|
|
Post by lebaneaver on Jul 6, 2020 13:43:02 GMT -8
I'll make this a public warning. Using racist dogwhistle terms ("thugs), particularly in a blanket term for the BLM protesters as a whole, will not be tolerated. You do not have freedom of speech on a private forum. Clean it up, or we'll do it for you. The "antifa t****" (as well as a large majority of the so-called "protestors") are generally WHITE anarchistic types.
Is that a racist dogwhistle? Is it also a dogwhistle if I'm black and use the term (like mannnnny, many do)?
Is the "okay" sign a alt-right symbol?'' Or is it just "okay"?
More (so-called) "progressive" left-wing fascism newspeak.
Ha. Such bull s__t. Project much? Yes. You do.
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jul 6, 2020 13:53:08 GMT -8
I'll make this a public warning. Using racist dogwhistle terms ("thugs), particularly in a blanket term for the BLM protesters as a whole, will not be tolerated. You do not have freedom of speech on a private forum. Clean it up, or we'll do it for you. The "antifa t****" (as well as a large majority of the so-called "protestors") are generally WHITE anarchistic types.
Is that a racist dogwhistle? Is it also a dogwhistle if I'm black and use the term (like mannnnny, many do)?
Is the "okay" sign a alt-right symbol?'' Or is it just "okay"?
More (so-called) "progressive" left-wing fascism newspeak.
www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2018/09/18/ok-sign-white-power-symbol-or-just-right-wing-troll
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Jul 6, 2020 13:53:54 GMT -8
I'll make this a public warning. Using racist dogwhistle terms ("thugs), particularly in a blanket term for the BLM protesters as a whole, will not be tolerated. You do not have freedom of speech on a private forum. Clean it up, or we'll do it for you. Not a problem. Never realized the term "thug" had any color connotations before, and definitely not "racist dogwhistle" definition. Maybe Webster's and other dictionaries need to update their definitions. But I would say the BLM folks at the park in Salem last Saturday across from the capitol building screaming at my daughter in law who was peacefully praying, when she and her group did nothing to provoke it, was thuggish behavior. If your point is that not all BLM people are like that - I get it. The BLM leader that was there on Saturday was from Mississippi - not sure why it was necessary to travel such a great distance, but whatever works. To be fair, I thought you clearly referred to the Antifa as thugs and BLM as protesters. In my mind, when I think of Antifa protesters in Portland, a white guy pops up. When I think BLM protester, I think Black. Part of my own prejudices I guess. Because for sure the protesters cross all kinds of lines in terms of skin color, gender, etc. You even have the anarchists and white supremecists intermixing and fanning the flames. Regardless of the definition put forth by MW dictionary, the term thug is loaded with negative connotations when used towards Black people. Somewhere in the 90's white people started using it as a substitute for the N word. I'm sure you didn't mean it that way. In Salem, it seems like the BLM protestors were met with counter protesters. Perhaps your SIL was caught in the "crossfire."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 13:55:54 GMT -8
Careful there. “Thug” is now a racist term here at Benny's House.
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Jul 6, 2020 14:01:42 GMT -8
Your board your rules, but I personally think you're off base here regarding thug. I looked up several dictionary definitions, none mention race. Even the Urban Dictionary! As with all things, context matters. The whole point of a dog whistle is the word or phrase itself is not racist... Dog whistle terms are those used to subconsciously evoke a dehumanizing reaction about a group of people. It can be a wide array of words, which are innocuous. Generally it reinforces a larger more overt racial or denigrating message being used to undermine the group. Very specifically, it is done in a subtle manner so the person using the term can't be called out for being explicitly racist or denigrating. It is not the word... it is the intent behind the word, and the association the word is making. Like saying "Obama doesn't love America" is dog whistle because it reinforces the "Kenyan Muslim" narrative, subtle because none of the words, themselves, are racist but it's entire point was to reinforce racist opinions about Obama. Thanks, but I knew what "dog whistle" meant. For some reason lots of folks on this board think I'm stupid, but that's ok. I guess it's how you interpret it yourself. He said Antifa thugs, not BLM, that was clear. If you don't think the Antifa are thugs, then I'm baffled and will give up. I totally don't agree with your last point using President Obama. That's the very last thing I would think of if someone said that. I won't get in to what the First Lady said.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jul 6, 2020 14:03:35 GMT -8
Much like how on reddit /r/the_donald started off as a parody subreddit trying to make fun of extreme right wing views... it wasn't long before it was legitimately occupied by those that really held the believes being parodied. Internet is a scary place man.
|
|
|
Post by lebaneaver on Jul 6, 2020 14:05:52 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by green85 on Jul 6, 2020 14:08:32 GMT -8
I agree with most of what you are saying. One other aspect that is also in play is when someone walks around with a hammer, and only a hammer, everything looks like a nail. To be perfectly clear, there are some that do not seek equality, they seek the power for themselves. It is a human trait and we are all human. There are those that do not want equality, they want retribution. There are those that believe so strongly that the can govern effectively and with the objective of the greater good, and seek the power to do so. In fact, historically the President of the United States has at some point in their life were in public service of some type (military, civil servant, politician, etc.) or some combination of these experiences. In many cases this background creates a foundation for understanding the "greater good" that once in power the leader can find compromise without losing sight of their convictions. Every leader can be criticized for particular actions or positions that run directly contrary to a large portion of the populace. The great leaders still find some way to use their power to move things forward for the benefit of people both in the short term (2 to 5 years) and the long term (6 - 10 years). For instance, Richard Nixon saw a need to create the EPA to address issues with toxic waste, air pollution and water pollution. That agency also had a long term effect beyond Nixon's years to continue to address issues in the environment, in some cases putting regulations into effect in anticipation of new problems. To this day there are many Republicans that think the EPA is a detriment to profitable business practices, but when taken in total from the date of creation to today, most folks see the EPA contributed to the greater good. So, seeking "power for yourself" make actually be rooted in a motivation of public service, rather than some ego boost or power to beat down opponents.
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Jul 6, 2020 14:10:29 GMT -8
Part of the problem is that folks want to ignore the reasons for protests. Naturally, it is challenging for people to think about the social changes that need to be implemented in order to improve our society since so many people already have little to no problem with the system. So instead of looking at possibilities or solutions, they focus on the noise. They turn their attention instead to "property damage" and "looting" in order to avoid taking the protests seriously.
Back in 2008 when the market collapsed and housing went to hell, we saw what happened when families were evicted and their homes were foreclosed, but no one cried "property damage" or "looting." These families were pissed off at the system and they took it out on the house that they lost. It happens. Frustration leads to anger. Anger leads to violence. How do we address that anger? By addressing the frustration of those who have been held back by the system.
Turning away and saying that we don't have to listen because they are protesting wrong will only increase the frustration until it spills out again.
Violence, destruction , violent crime , looting etc until they quote "get people to listen" or succumb to all of the ridiculous demands that do nothing to deal with racism. Can you even articulate what can be done other than saying we need to eliminate "systematic racism". The victimhood narrative isn't going to solve any problems its going to perpetuate them. Most people are not held back by the "system" they are held back by poor life choices regardless of race. And 99 percent of the wealth in this country was created over the last few decades, it wasn't built off the "backs" of anyone. That's a false narrative and its a fact. If you don't deal with drugs, crime, education and yes cultural issues nothing is going to change and lowering the bar isn't going to help anyone.. I hate to break the news to you but the housing crisis was enabled by people that made poor choices and a government that felt owning a home was a human right regardless of their credit worthiness (fredi and Fannie). Its time for people to take some personal responsibility for their own actions This might qualify for the least "woke" post of the day. I suggest doing some reading on the topic of racism in the US.
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Jul 6, 2020 14:13:17 GMT -8
The SPLC is a JOKE! Hahaha.
Just another arm of the DNC. FACT.
Of course.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jul 6, 2020 14:16:26 GMT -8
The SPLC is a JOKE! Hahaha.
Just another arm of the DNC. FACT.
The entity that bankrupted the The United Klans of America, the White Aryan Resistance, and the Christian Knights of the KKK and has waged a 50 year long war against the Klu Klux Klan in America is "a Joke and another arm of the DNC" Gotcha. At least we are clear in knowing that the RNC would never align themselves with such absurd entities as a free legal center that *checks notes* represents victims of hate crimes in civil suits. I am glad you cleared that up for us all.
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Jul 6, 2020 14:20:52 GMT -8
I'll make this a public warning. Using racist dogwhistle terms ("thugs), particularly in a blanket term for the BLM protesters as a whole, will not be tolerated. You do not have freedom of speech on a private forum. Clean it up, or we'll do it for you. Not a problem. Never realized the term "thug" had any color connotations before, and definitely not "racist dogwhistle" definition. Maybe Webster's and other dictionaries need to update their definitions. But I would say the BLM folks at the park in Salem last Saturday across from the capitol building screaming at my daughter in law who was peacefully praying, when she and her group did nothing to provoke it, was thuggish behavior. If your point is that not all BLM people are like that - I get it. The BLM leader that was there on Saturday was from Mississippi - not sure why it was necessary to travel such a great distance, but whatever works. I appreciate you clarifying your reference was to those that would commit criminal behavior (stealing, looting, vandalizing) opportunistically, and not as a reference to all those associated with the cause/movements. I'll just add that someone 'screaming at your daughter-in-law' wouldn't even qualify as Webster's definition of a thug.
|
|
|
Post by lebaneaver on Jul 6, 2020 14:30:46 GMT -8
Violence, destruction , violent crime , looting etc until they quote "get people to listen" or succumb to all of the ridiculous demands that do nothing to deal with racism. Can you even articulate what can be done other than saying we need to eliminate "systematic racism". The victimhood narrative isn't going to solve any problems its going to perpetuate them. Most people are not held back by the "system" they are held back by poor life choices regardless of race. And 99 percent of the wealth in this country was created over the last few decades, it wasn't built off the "backs" of anyone. That's a false narrative and its a fact. If you don't deal with drugs, crime, education and yes cultural issues nothing is going to change and lowering the bar isn't going to help anyone.. I hate to break the news to you but the housing crisis was enabled by people that made poor choices and a government that felt owning a home was a human right regardless of their credit worthiness (fredi and Fannie). Its time for people to take some personal responsibility for their own actions This might qualify for the least "woke" post of the day. I suggest doing some reading on the topic of racism in the US. Oh hell, Glove. PB doesn’t want to be “woke.” He’s happy as a tic with his head buried in a right-wing, trumpinstanian, white male, alternative ‘murica, dammit. Don’t make him THINK. It’s not comfortable.
|
|