DirtbagLeft
Well-known member
@Zachowon
In reverse order. The fact that they used to be in the military it does not surprise me that they think that way. Killing everyone who uses a computer... seems excessive even for Elf's. As to the desire to genocide all boomers. Understanding that I come from a staunch anti-genocide perspective on a purely pragmatic basis I understand the sentiment. Factually speaking boomers as a generation tend toward extreme narcissism, psychopathy, and unbounded egotism as well as showing a distinct lack of personal responsibility. Factually speaking if they were Thanos snapped out of existence today the world would be greatly improved. Additionally the single largest obstacle to the left would be eliminated. That recognized and said. It is bad praxis to commit genocide. It is bad praxis to be seen publicly advocating for genocide. It is bad praxis to advocate for genocide privately. It is bad praxis to even think about advocating for genocide. It is bad praxis in all times and all places no exceptions allowed. I have very few hard lines but genocide is one.
I have yet to visit the forum and honestly I probably wont. While I enjoy a circle jerk as much as the next guy it's something I can just as easily do on my own.
While I am not trans I am a staunch trans advocate. I will admit though that if Thanos snapped them out of existence today advocating for their rights would be infinitely easier. Transpeople tend to be their own worst enemy when it comes to advocating for Trans issues. That is just a fact. That said I would much rather baby boomers stop being boomers, and transpeople to stop cutting their allies off at the hip and being so obnoxious. I mean I understand why both are the way they are. Understanding however does not excuse the behavior. In the case of Transpeople in particular when you belong to a marginalized community that is small to begin with and you have people telling you that you deserve to be murdered and tortured on a regular basis. It's made worse when vindictive assholes actually torture you (but that is for another thread).
Last side piece before the prelims are out of the way. I may be skirting a line here and if so tell me but as I have indicated else where. I am a firm gun control advocate. As in I want ever N-word (Dumb as hell because it means the same thing), faggot, tranny, and fem locked loaded and packin heat. Preferably in nothing smaller than a 45 cal. The fact that they are so weak as to be incapable of moderating a part of their forum which they disagree with shows them to be spinless and weak. I am disgusted.
Addressing racism and bigotry. As to FriedCFour's pic I am prone to think that it actually was racist or near enough as made no difference. I would need to see the image and to know more about the context. However assuming it was racist I strongly disagree with the way I suspect things played out.
Minority groups tend to be sensitive to even the perception of bigotry and for pretty good reason. Subtle bigotry becomes dehumanization pretty quick. From there it's a quick step to violence. The research is in on this and it's pretty clear. That said you cannot win hearts and minds unless you are willing to engage. Disallowing certain topics in safe spaces is not only acceptable but necessary for psychological health. But to have most or all of a place be a safespace is bad praxis, stupid, and dangerous. Life isn't a Lilly and it doesn't always smell nice. Safespaces need to go back to what they originally were. Don't know if you are aware of how or why safespaces arose but a quick history lesson. They began on college campuses in response to groups of very hateful and bigoted Christians breaking into queer clubs and shouting "God hates fags" and "burn faggots" every time they held a meeting. Universities and colleges originally implemented the safe space policy in response. During meetings of any kind (including religious meetings) that were scheduled in advanced the meeting room became a safe space during the designated time. If other students came in and attempted to disrupt the activities they were expelled or ejected depending on how many times it happened. I have no problem with that. What they have become on some college campuses (thankfully most campuses retain the old policy) is a joke and a disgrace.
Bigotry has a very specific meaning in leftist circles and in academics as is actually related to the concept of stochastic terrorism. It's not just about an individual event but about how that larger event plays into the wider structure of interactions between social groups. In the US for example it is nearly impossible for a black person to be racist against a white person. The key term being nearly. Where as in parts of Africa racism against whites may be commonplace.
Perception/Intention/Effect
The reason why we do not use intent as the definition of racism is because intent is nearly impossible to get at. Perception is nearly as useless as it is too subjective. What we can look at however is the effect which an action has. However in this case I near positive that I can demonstrate not only the effect but also the intention of calling it the wuhan flu.
Covid19
today.yougov.com
Additionally we can examine the history and the language used by individuals who tend to call the wuhan flu or some other variation. Finally if 1 in 10 individuals who use the term as a racist term then the term is in fact racist. We can I hope admit that the number of people who use the term as a racist term is actually higher than that because I think we can all admit that people lie about being racist.
In terms of intent lets ask a single question. What is the at this point almost everyone is aware that the flu came out of china. What then is the purpose of using the term wuhan flu? Especially in the face of it's connection to widely being used as a racist term. And yes 10% is widely. It's not the percentage that matters its the number of people in a given population it represents. 10% of 100 is small 10% of a million is large.
I assume you sent this from a phone so I hope you don't mind that I edited the spelling errors. I find it to be both polite and it doesn't break the flow of people first entering the conversation in a new thread.I also got my most recent temp ban for freaking saying using Wuhan flu or China flu is not racist..
They are literally censoring anyone they disagree with. There is only one thread theh dont go in to moderate, and that is the Gun control one. Thw only foothold the non far left has left.
It is sad.
I mainly stick to Vs debates on the other site.
Most people here that you have argued both have had horrible experiences with those on the left thanks to SB. FriedCFour was banned for a whole year because of them saying a profile picture was racist...when it wasn't and was actually supporting the group.
Others had been banned for daring question transgender issues. It doesn't help one of the mods on SB is a transgender who is going on the hormones and has said in a discord about wanting to kill off the boomers for the left to win and kill off everyone who uses a computer or something like that.
It was horrible. It is even worse knowing they used to be a US Army soldier..
In reverse order. The fact that they used to be in the military it does not surprise me that they think that way. Killing everyone who uses a computer... seems excessive even for Elf's. As to the desire to genocide all boomers. Understanding that I come from a staunch anti-genocide perspective on a purely pragmatic basis I understand the sentiment. Factually speaking boomers as a generation tend toward extreme narcissism, psychopathy, and unbounded egotism as well as showing a distinct lack of personal responsibility. Factually speaking if they were Thanos snapped out of existence today the world would be greatly improved. Additionally the single largest obstacle to the left would be eliminated. That recognized and said. It is bad praxis to commit genocide. It is bad praxis to be seen publicly advocating for genocide. It is bad praxis to advocate for genocide privately. It is bad praxis to even think about advocating for genocide. It is bad praxis in all times and all places no exceptions allowed. I have very few hard lines but genocide is one.
I have yet to visit the forum and honestly I probably wont. While I enjoy a circle jerk as much as the next guy it's something I can just as easily do on my own.
While I am not trans I am a staunch trans advocate. I will admit though that if Thanos snapped them out of existence today advocating for their rights would be infinitely easier. Transpeople tend to be their own worst enemy when it comes to advocating for Trans issues. That is just a fact. That said I would much rather baby boomers stop being boomers, and transpeople to stop cutting their allies off at the hip and being so obnoxious. I mean I understand why both are the way they are. Understanding however does not excuse the behavior. In the case of Transpeople in particular when you belong to a marginalized community that is small to begin with and you have people telling you that you deserve to be murdered and tortured on a regular basis. It's made worse when vindictive assholes actually torture you (but that is for another thread).
Last side piece before the prelims are out of the way. I may be skirting a line here and if so tell me but as I have indicated else where. I am a firm gun control advocate. As in I want ever N-word (Dumb as hell because it means the same thing), faggot, tranny, and fem locked loaded and packin heat. Preferably in nothing smaller than a 45 cal. The fact that they are so weak as to be incapable of moderating a part of their forum which they disagree with shows them to be spinless and weak. I am disgusted.
Addressing racism and bigotry. As to FriedCFour's pic I am prone to think that it actually was racist or near enough as made no difference. I would need to see the image and to know more about the context. However assuming it was racist I strongly disagree with the way I suspect things played out.
Minority groups tend to be sensitive to even the perception of bigotry and for pretty good reason. Subtle bigotry becomes dehumanization pretty quick. From there it's a quick step to violence. The research is in on this and it's pretty clear. That said you cannot win hearts and minds unless you are willing to engage. Disallowing certain topics in safe spaces is not only acceptable but necessary for psychological health. But to have most or all of a place be a safespace is bad praxis, stupid, and dangerous. Life isn't a Lilly and it doesn't always smell nice. Safespaces need to go back to what they originally were. Don't know if you are aware of how or why safespaces arose but a quick history lesson. They began on college campuses in response to groups of very hateful and bigoted Christians breaking into queer clubs and shouting "God hates fags" and "burn faggots" every time they held a meeting. Universities and colleges originally implemented the safe space policy in response. During meetings of any kind (including religious meetings) that were scheduled in advanced the meeting room became a safe space during the designated time. If other students came in and attempted to disrupt the activities they were expelled or ejected depending on how many times it happened. I have no problem with that. What they have become on some college campuses (thankfully most campuses retain the old policy) is a joke and a disgrace.
Bigotry has a very specific meaning in leftist circles and in academics as is actually related to the concept of stochastic terrorism. It's not just about an individual event but about how that larger event plays into the wider structure of interactions between social groups. In the US for example it is nearly impossible for a black person to be racist against a white person. The key term being nearly. Where as in parts of Africa racism against whites may be commonplace.
Perception/Intention/Effect
The reason why we do not use intent as the definition of racism is because intent is nearly impossible to get at. Perception is nearly as useless as it is too subjective. What we can look at however is the effect which an action has. However in this case I near positive that I can demonstrate not only the effect but also the intention of calling it the wuhan flu.
Covid19
![today.yougov.com](https://ygo-assets-websites-editorial-emea.yougov.net/images/trump-file-size.original.png?pw=1200)
Americans split on whether it’s racist to call COVID-19 the Chinese virus | YouGov
One in ten of those who have used terms like “Chinese virus” and “Kung flu” admit those terms are racist.
Additionally we can examine the history and the language used by individuals who tend to call the wuhan flu or some other variation. Finally if 1 in 10 individuals who use the term as a racist term then the term is in fact racist. We can I hope admit that the number of people who use the term as a racist term is actually higher than that because I think we can all admit that people lie about being racist.
In terms of intent lets ask a single question. What is the at this point almost everyone is aware that the flu came out of china. What then is the purpose of using the term wuhan flu? Especially in the face of it's connection to widely being used as a racist term. And yes 10% is widely. It's not the percentage that matters its the number of people in a given population it represents. 10% of 100 is small 10% of a million is large.