Washington & Jefferson Statue Get Pulled Down

[The Emerald Legion]

There's honestly nothing wrong with being part of it.

Ok imperialist

And? It's not like there's anything wrong with Imperialism. We should frankly drop interventionism and just go back to Manifest Destiny.

[The Two Jerseys]

Ok imperialist

And? It's not like there's anything wrong with Imperialism. We should frankly drop interventionism and just go back to Manifest Destiny.

Yes.

All your Canada are belong to Uncle Sam.

[Kowani]

Since when does bringing other people down bring you up?

Did you not read any of my examples or something?

If someone gets shot in the head, and then someone stabs out my eye, i'd hardly call myself "privileged. "At least you're alive. You must have some kind of privilege!" That's pretty fucked up. Maybe compared to others, they get fucked over less hard, but still, how the fuck is that a "privilege"?

I mean…not having to deal with that because of some inherent condition is privilege, yes, thank you for playing.

Also, if you're going to to shift the goalposts by going from society at large to smaller systems within it, what stops me from doing the same?

I was giving examples.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I did find a wikipedia page about washington being called a "Town Destroyer" by the Iroquois.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_Destroyer

The Iroquois sided with the British in the Revolutionary War and after the war ended continued the war anyway, the British even paid them to harass US settlers in a similar way to how Russia has been recently caught paying the Taliban to kill Americans.

And the reprisals were just the 18th century drone strike.

Same effect too.

Apparently fighting a war is evil.

[The Lone Alliance]

Ok imperialist

And? It's not like there's anything wrong with Imperialism. We should frankly drop interventionism and just go back to Manifest Destiny.

These protesters are already saying that the US is beyond redemption and totally 100% evil, might as well be the villain they want the US to be.

[The Two Jerseys]

And? It's not like there's anything wrong with Imperialism. We should frankly drop interventionism and just go back to Manifest Destiny.

These protesters are already saying that the US is beyond redemption and totally 100% evil, might as well be the villain they want the US to be.

Time to replace Uncle Sam with Tony Montana.

"What you lookin' at? You all a bunch of fuckin' assholes. You know why? You don't have the guts to be what you wanna be. You need people like me. You need people like me so you can point your fuckin' fingers and say, "That's the bad guy." So... what that make you? Good? You're not good. You just know how to hide, how to lie. Me, I don't have that problem. Me, I always tell the truth. Even when I lie. So say good night to the bad guy! Come on. The last time you gonna see a bad guy like this again, let me tell you. Come on. Make way for the bad guy. There's a bad guy comin' through! Better get outta his way!"

[Kowani]

Again with the “harming” qualifier. Why is this so hard to understand?


Holy cow, Batman! It’s the Strawman!

You’re not arguing against “progressives.” You’re arguing against me.

Now, unless you can find a statement of me claiming that (spoiler alert, you won’t), try again.

Gee, who could have guessed that hate speech doesn't harm people? Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words can never hurt you, is it?

Until you can pull some evidence of hate speech causing tangible harm on a societal level, this point is moot.

Ah, another round of “I don’t know what white privilege means”

Not really no. It's more that it doesn't mean anything and is just a convenient excuse to demonize white people.

There’s a common theme here of people not engaging with the argument.
Would you like to buck the trend?

Also reading your study, your study is stupid, the people making it are stupid.

Wow. I’m convinced.

This is laughably false.

Yep, because one paper clarifies 500 years of discrimination right?

Examples, people. This is not hard to grasp.

Tell me this? If that had been a white male in Atlanta that was shot by black police officers, would their have been riots?

I dunno? Maybe? It’s unlikely, sure, but it’s technically possible-

Hmm? Would the Wendy's still have been burned down?

Who gives a fuck about a Wendy’s?

Would the officers have been fired almost immediately? Or charged with felony murder?

They’re police officers, so no. The only reason they did this time was because there’s a national reckoning going on about policing.

Let's take it a step further shall we? What if Floyd had been white, and all of the officers black? Would things have played out the same? Answer me that with a straight face and I will take what you have to say into consideration.

No…? It would’ve been seen as police brutality, but it wouldn’t fit into the overarching historical pattern of police disproportionately killing and arresting black people.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Since when does bringing other people down bring you up?

Did you not read any of my examples or something?

If someone gets shot in the head, and then someone stabs out my eye, i'd hardly call myself "privileged. "At least you're alive. You must have some kind of privilege!" That's pretty fucked up. Maybe compared to others, they get fucked over less hard, but still, how the fuck is that a "privilege"?

I mean…not having to deal with that because of some inherent condition is privilege, yes, thank you for playing.

Also, if you're going to to shift the goalposts by going from society at large to smaller systems within it, what stops me from doing the same?

I was giving examples.

Sounds pretty fucked up. that's not really "privilege". Privilege would imply gaining something, whereas this is "not losing something". Just because others have it worse doesn't mean you're in a good position, or even a better position.

Also I call bullshit on "examples". If anything, your statement about the criminal justice system only proves that different privileges can exist in different scenarios and circumstances. So how come men can be privileged in certain societal aspects but not others, whereas white people are always privileged regardless of context or societal aspect?

[Kowani]

I did find a wikipedia page about washington being called a "Town Destroyer" by the Iroquois.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Town_Destroyer

The Iroquois sided with the British in the Revolutionary War and after the war ended continued the war anyway, the British even paid them to harass US settlers in a similar way to how Russia has been recently caught paying the Taliban to kill Americans.

And the reprisals were just the 18th century drone strike.

Same effect too.

Small note, two of the tribes that made up the Iroquois Confederacy, the Tuscarora and the Oneida joined the Americans.
They got lumped in with the other ones anyway and fucked over.

[Diarcesia]

I did quite a bit of reading regarding the dynamics connected to toppling down these statues and stumbled upon an academic criticism of the collection of fields known by some as grievance studies. To sum it up, it's not flattering, and some of those academics should be ashamed of letting ideological orthodoxy get in the way of genuine scholarship. MLK would be rolling in his grave.

Personally, it codified that gut feeling that as I sympathize and agree with the goals of addressing racism and prejudice, there seems to be a rot within the existing movements that needs to be excised.

[The Emerald Legion]

It's almost like when a field of science that is more or less entirely politicized from the start is overwhelming run by members of a particular political Bloc, you're not going to find "legitimate" opposition research.

Because the very structure of the field opposes it.

What do you mean, not engaging with the argument? You don't have an argument beyond modern trendy racism.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Gee, who could have guessed that hate speech doesn't harm people? Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words can never hurt you, is it?

Until you can pull some evidence of hate speech causing tangible harm on a societal level, this point is moot.

Not really no. It's more that it doesn't mean anything and is just a convenient excuse to demonize white people.

There’s a common theme here of people not engaging with the argument.
Would you like to buck the trend?

Also reading your study, your study is stupid, the people making it are stupid.

Wow. I’m convinced.

Yep, because one paper clarifies 500 years of discrimination right?

Examples, people. This is not hard to grasp.

Tell me this? If that had been a white male in Atlanta that was shot by black police officers, would their have been riots?

I dunno? Maybe? It’s unlikely, sure, but it’s technically possible-

Hmm? Would the Wendy's still have been burned down?

Who gives a fuck about a Wendy’s?

Would the officers have been fired almost immediately? Or charged with felony murder?

They’re police officers, so no. The only reason they did this time was because there’s a national reckoning going on about policing.

Let's take it a step further shall we? What if Floyd had been white, and all of the officers black? Would things have played out the same? Answer me that with a straight face and I will take what you have to say into consideration.

No…? It would’ve been seen as police brutality, but it wouldn’t fit into the overarching historical pattern of police disproportionately killing and arresting black people.

Wow. Hate speech doesn't cause tangible harm on a societal level? That's pretty fucked up. You may as well go and legalize hate speech. What could go wrong?

[The Emerald Legion]

Until you can pull some evidence of hate speech causing tangible harm on a societal level, this point is moot.


There’s a common theme here of people not engaging with the argument.
Would you like to buck the trend?

Wow. I’m convinced.


Examples, people. This is not hard to grasp.

I dunno? Maybe? It’s unlikely, sure, but it’s technically possible-


Who gives a fuck about a Wendy’s?


They’re police officers, so no. The only reason they did this time was because there’s a national reckoning going on about policing.


No…? It would’ve been seen as police brutality, but it wouldn’t fit into the overarching historical pattern of police disproportionately killing and arresting black people.

Wow. Hate speech doesn't cause tangible harm on a societal level? That's pretty fucked up. You may as well go and legalize hate speech. What could go wrong?

Hate speech isn't illegal. It's protected speech.

[The Reformed American Republic]

I did quite a bit of reading regarding the dynamics connected to toppling down these statues and stumbled upon an academic criticism of the collection of fields known by some as grievance studies. To sum it up, it's not flattering, and some of those academics should be ashamed of letting ideological orthodoxy get in the way of genuine scholarship. MLK would be rolling in his grave.

Personally, it codified that gut feeling that as I sympathize with the issues of racism and prejudice, there seems to be a rot within it that needs to be excised.

It's about indoctrinating people into Frankfurt activists, not about truth.

[West Leas Oros 2]

Wow. Hate speech doesn't cause tangible harm on a societal level? That's pretty fucked up. You may as well go and legalize hate speech. What could go wrong?

Hate speech isn't illegal. It's protected speech.

That doesn't sound like a good idea.

[Diarcesia]

I did quite a bit of reading regarding the dynamics connected to toppling down these statues and stumbled upon an academic criticism of the collection of fields known by some as grievance studies. To sum it up, it's not flattering, and some of those academics should be ashamed of letting ideological orthodoxy get in the way of genuine scholarship. MLK would be rolling in his grave.

Personally, it codified that gut feeling that as I sympathize with the issues of racism and prejudice, there seems to be a rot within it that needs to be excised.

It's about indoctrinating people into Frankfurt activists, not about truth.

It's a shame and a great setback to the gains of the civil rights movement.

[Kowani]

Sounds pretty fucked up. that's not really "privilege". Privilege would imply gaining something, whereas this is "not losing something". Just because others have it worse doesn't mean you're in a good position, or even a better position.

Privilege. Noun. “a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group.”
Wow, that really does sound applicable here.

Also I call bullshit on "examples". If anything, your statement about the criminal justice system only proves that different privileges can exist in different scenarios and circumstances.

Yes. This is basic shit.

So how come men can be privileged in certain societal aspects but not others, whereas white people are always privileged regardless of context or societal aspect?

…Because in most social aspects, white people, when compared to minorities, tend to have better outcomes.

And before someone jumps in with “but Asians!” You’re conflating the cultural with the econometric.

[The Emerald Legion]

Hate speech isn't illegal. It's protected speech.

That doesn't sound like a good idea.

Sure it does. It's freedom.

[The Two Jerseys]

Hate speech isn't illegal. It's protected speech.

That doesn't sound like a good idea.

This is America, we take freedom seriously.

[The Reformed American Republic]

It's about indoctrinating people into Frankfurt activists, not about truth.

It's a shame and a great setback to the gains of the civil rights movement.

People with that corrupted mindset will probably try to destroy the west.

[Kowani]

It's almost like when a field of science that is more or less entirely politicized from the start is overwhelming run by members of a particular political Bloc, you're not going to find "legitimate" opposition research.

Because the very structure of the field opposes it.

What do you mean, not engaging with the argument? You don't have an argument beyond modern trendy racism.

Or…and this might be a secondary theory...your viewpoint just happens to be incompatible with reality.

Until you can pull some evidence of hate speech causing tangible harm on a societal level, this point is moot.


There’s a common theme here of people not engaging with the argument.
Would you like to buck the trend?

Wow. I’m convinced.


Examples, people. This is not hard to grasp.

I dunno? Maybe? It’s unlikely, sure, but it’s technically possible-


Who gives a fuck about a Wendy’s?


They’re police officers, so no. The only reason they did this time was because there’s a national reckoning going on about policing.


No…? It would’ve been seen as police brutality, but it wouldn’t fit into the overarching historical pattern of police disproportionately killing and arresting black people.

Wow. Hate speech doesn't cause tangible harm on a societal level? That's pretty fucked up. You may as well go and legalize hate speech. What could go wrong?

…Hate speech is already legal.

[West Leas Oros 2]

I did quite a bit of reading regarding the dynamics connected to toppling down these statues and stumbled upon an academic criticism of the collection of fields known by some as grievance studies. To sum it up, it's not flattering, and some of those academics should be ashamed of letting ideological orthodoxy get in the way of genuine scholarship. MLK would be rolling in his grave.

Personally, it codified that gut feeling that as I sympathize and agree with the goals of addressing racism and prejudice, there seems to be a rot within the existing movements that needs to be excised.

I'm gonna take a page out of Chairman Mao's book, if and when a "Cultural Revolution" occurs in the United States, they better get this "grievance studies" or whatever cleaned out. Or not. Be a lot cooler if they did. Try not to massacre anyone, though.

[West Leas Oros 2]

It's almost like when a field of science that is more or less entirely politicized from the start is overwhelming run by members of a particular political Bloc, you're not going to find "legitimate" opposition research.

Because the very structure of the field opposes it.

What do you mean, not engaging with the argument? You don't have an argument beyond modern trendy racism.

Or…and this might be a secondary theory...your viewpoint just happens to be incompatible with reality.

Wow. Hate speech doesn't cause tangible harm on a societal level? That's pretty fucked up. You may as well go and legalize hate speech. What could go wrong?

…Hate speech is already legal.

Well nevermind. Guess society is already pretty fucked up. Why the hell would they legalize hate speech?

[The Lone Alliance]

I did quite a bit of reading regarding the dynamics connected to toppling down these statues and stumbled upon an academic criticism of the collection of fields known by some as grievance studies. To sum it up, it's not flattering, and some of those academics should be ashamed of letting ideological orthodoxy get in the way of genuine scholarship. MLK would be rolling in his grave.

Personally, it codified that gut feeling that as I sympathize and agree with the goals of addressing racism and prejudice, there seems to be a rot within the existing movements that needs to be excised.

At this point it's pretty much just another form of Scientific Racism, where as the knowledge is now told to meet the personal biases of the people running the experiment.

[Kowani]

Or…and this might be a secondary theory...your viewpoint just happens to be incompatible with reality.


…Hate speech is already legal.

Well nevermind. Guess society is already pretty fucked up. Why the hell would they legalize hate speech?

…Where are you from?