Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Melody Bot, Jul 7, 2016.
This isn't what he meant and you know it.
This forum's unwelcoming echo-chamber circlejerk sees no shades of grey and will just condescend to people who don't see exactly eye-to-eye. Best not to engage tbh.
You're welcome to sign out at anytime.
Poor you, not being able to play devil's advocate for supporters of a candidate who said Saddam Hussein had the right idea 48 hours ago without being scrutinized.
People took a lot of time to explain to you their points of view, and you seemed to actually reach some common ground with them, then you make this kind of post? I don't get it.
When you say things like this, it seems like you just didn't read any of the discussion that's been occurring here.
He's in all likelihood a Trump supporter or a Republican who doesn't want to admit it because 95% of people here aren't. Just like tea party nuts who call themselves "moderate" instead of "that insane fringe part of conservatism" because it's become a borderline indefensible position.
You know, I feel like if you're in that situation it should make you stop and think for a second... but it never seems to.
The part that baffles me is why they won't just admit it. They'll defend them on the internet for hours at a time but still claim to not have a dog in the fight or "I don't support them but..."
Like, just say you support them in some roundabout way, everyone else sees it.
Circle jerks are great.
Every time an even remotely political thread comes along there's always that guy, and I can only think of this tweet.
I mean, they sound fun.
I want this to be a full-fledged Onion article.
White man from central Indiana leading expert on social justice, reports white man from central Indiana
His equally white brother from Wisconsin agrees.
I just don't... understand.
Yes, fundamentally, it is "wrong" to stereotype an entire group. But what exactly is the consequence of being lumped into being a bigot/ignorant because you're conservative/Republican? I'm asking honestly.
Someone earlier compared the generalization to "all Muslims are terrorists" and I just can't make that connection. Maybe it's my ~liberal bias but I just can't see how assuming that someone is a bigot because they support a bigot is this world ending thing.
Two cops shot at a Dallas protest. Still going on now.
Edit: now saying 3-6
Man Driving While Making YouTube Video To Explain How PC Culture Destroying America
Between him and Best Coast's latest sentiments of the bullshit that's been going on the last 72 hours, I fucking love them even more. What the oppressed need in this country more than anything are allies. People will shit on him for saying these things, but worship Nirvana, who continually throughout their career spoke out against the same ignorant shit. Good for him.
Right I have been posting throughout and reading every post, but difference of opinion means didn't read. Sick discourse. I feel like my post is even more relevant waking up to 5 cops shot dead along with other cops and civilians hurt. Continuing the us vs them mentality will only make things worse for the country I guarantee it. It's easy to shut out all conflicting other opinions as bigotry instead of finding middle ground to change these things as its been done in this country for hundred of years. I wish it was as easy to make minorities of all types feel as safe as white straight men with a click of my fingers, ban guns, allow for easy immigration etc. None of that will get done when you demonize 50% of the country, absolutely none of it. Conversation is the way to do it not hatred on both sides.
did someone actually think a strawman argument is an "sjw" slang? lmao
Which part of this country's history involved finding a middle ground? The genocide of indigenous people? The 3/5 Compromise? The transatlantic slave trade? Jim Crow? Mass incarceration? Being killed every twenty eight hours? I'm just trying to understand. One says we need to find a middle ground, but it does not usually involve people of color fairing too well, it usually means accepting terms of authority of their lives in different ways.
Well for one the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the strengthening of that act in 1968 passed by bipartisan support in an arguable more polarizing time (especially for race). More recently the change in public opinion on gay marriage that gave it enough momentum to become legal on a federal level. Which I think if anything talking to your family and neighbors shows you can change perception/views. Especially evident because it took less than 20 years from DOMA being passed to full legalization in society and the military. If you do not want to find middle ground to get rid of these injustices through laws then what would you like, war? I am asking seriously.
Those weren't things that were won by finding the middle ground. They were concessions made in the face of movements. Understand the difference. And, in terms of race, we've seen the things we've won rolled back by both democrats and republicans in the name of bipartisanship. That's how we got mass incarceration, "don't ask, don't tell", etc.