Evidence that the term "microaggression" survives in public discourse (at least at McGill University in Canada). Here's my speculation, dated December 13, 2013, that the word had died:
I've been working on the theory that the term "microaggression" briefly spiked to prominence and then utterly crashed with the story of the professor who was accused of "microaggression" for correcting spelling and grammar errors....I reported a blip of usage there, but then, on January 6, 2014, after checking for signs of life, I proclaimed the term "really most sincerely dead." I've kept monitoring and today's link goes to Professor Jacobson who asserts:
“Microagression” is the latest craze in racial grievance, something we highlighted when a UCLA professor was accused of the transgression for correcting grammar on minority students’ papers.That is, as evidence of the "latest craze," he cites the very incident that I saw as so dumb it killed any incipient craze.
By the way, the idea of microaggression is a secular version of the scrupulously religious believer's concept of sin. There are all these little wrongs you might be committing, and you should become aware of them and apply conscious effort to eliminating them. The religious person might believe that God watches and cares about these tiny infractions. The purveyors of the concept of microaggression seek to instill a conscience about the smallest things, but unlike those who define sin very broadly and call believers to seek perfection, they are shaming even those who have not yet signed on to the broad definition of what counts as wrong, and they want to enforce their strict demands through the exercise of power in this world.
पोस्ट्स
१८६ टिप्पण्या:
"the broad definition of what counts as wrong"
I like that whites are confused by "wrong" as a concept.
Not knowing how to treat people (Slavery? Jim Crow? Jane Crow?) will do that,...
Nanoaggression is even more prevalent and also accumulates.
Deleting comments that are not insulting and relevant to the posting should be considered "micro-passive-aggression."
Ugly.
Enjoy your crack bait and censorship.
A better response to an accusation of "micro aggression" would be to circulate the faces of one's accusers photoshopped onto an historical photo of infamous monsters of history, such as Lenin or Stalin or gangs of Maoist thugs.
Those who cannot tolerate mockery of Obama deserve only contempt.
By the way, the idea of microaggression is a secular version of the scrupulously religious believer's concept of sin.
Mencius Moldbug described how modern leftism is a descendant of the Calvinist/Puritan line of thought, minus the belief in God. That's not just an analogy, either - if you trace back the historical origins of progressivism it ends up in the fundamentalist protestant religious movements of the 19th century and earlier.
I think that explains the impulse among the Left to behave like religious fundamentalists, seeking out blasphemers and sinners and favoring social change to enforce their moral vision on everyone else.
Not knowing how to treat people (Slavery? Jim Crow? Jane Crow?) will do that,...
Never forget
By using this particular image of President Obama, I unknowingly perpetuated incongruity humor. From now on I will stick to nonsense humor. Or no humor at all. And no personality, either. That should be safe.
Academia is breeding a a generation of Zeligs.
Uh oh. I just referenced Woody Allen. Someone better apologize.
This is the template (Wrong Number).
Here's what I think of when I hear the term "microaggression".
If you cannot criticize, and mock, a public servant, then he should not be in office. Perhaps the civil rights corporations and activists are not prepared to step down from their perch and support equal treatment.
I'm showing my contempt for your blog and how you run it......by posting here everyday.
garage mahal said...
I'm showing my contempt for your blog and how you run it......by posting here everyday.
Garage gets introspective for a change.
That was a blog comment version of a subtweet.
garage mahal said...
That was a blog comment version of a subtweet.
Is a subtweet like a subwoofer? People get shot for less.
Nanoaggression could give you two squares on buzzword bingo at once.
I doubt that "microaggression" is really, most sincerely dead. The lollipop guild needs to get tenure, and academia doesn't turn on a dime. There are papers on microaggression in journal pipelines. People have signed up to give talks at conferences. It takes more than a little ridicule to make a social science idea go away. Is Critical legal studies dead? Maybe just a little old and sick?
You err, Althouse.
There is nothing dumb enough to kill this kind of craze. It feeds on dumb.
Crack's comment was an extension of the cultural, historical and living legacy surrounding people of pallor — particularly old men—being portrayed as not knowing how to treat people in contemporary culture and blog comments.""
Althouse said:
"By the way, the idea of microaggression is a secular version of the scrupulously religious believer's concept of sin. There are all these little wrongs you might be committing, and you should become aware of them and apply conscious effort to eliminating them."
Exactly! What we are dealing with is a secular religion.
The major difference between this religion and traditional religions is that this secular religion has become the official religion of the United States government. What conservatives are asking it for separate of religion and state including separation of the new secular/paganism and politics.
Crack: I like that whites are confused by "wrong" as a concept.
I like that blacks are confused by "civilized" as a concept.
The Crack Emcee said...
"I like that whites are confused by "wrong" as a concept.
Not knowing how to treat people (Slavery? Jim Crow? Jane Crow?) will do that,..."
If Mr. Emcee's statement were worded slightly differently, "I like that people (black and white)are confuised by "wrong" as a concept" I could agree with him.
The problem with the concept of microaggression is that it is being used to condemn behavior that isn't aggression at all. Tweeting a gag video President Obama is not aggression. Correcting s student's grammar and spelling is not aggression. If you think you have grounds to criticize such behavior, do so, but don't pretend that they're bad because they're aggressive when they aren't.
"...the latest craze in racial grievance..."
Just once--just once--I would like to see somebody tell these racial grievance-mongers to go blow it out their a**.
I wondered how many comments it would take for "The Crack Emcee" to get here... ONE!
Oh my, but that is funny stuff. The jokes write themselves. Goodness, gracious. Wow.
"But the Equity Policy inverts the burden of proof so that accusation and subjective experience becomes a valid basis of discipline and it considers matters of identity, rather than strict evidence, in determining culpability."
Women's ways of knowing.
Being "micro," it's very small. Like the people obsessed with it.
Micro-aggressives suck at telling jokes.
Would it be ok to show Obama kicking the Constitution?
And don't forget kiddies: denying you engage in micro-aggression is itself micro-aggression. Or something.
""the broad definition of what counts as wrong" I like that whites are confused by "wrong" as a concept. Not knowing how to treat people (Slavery? Jim Crow? Jane Crow?) will do that,…"
You name some things that easily fit a narrow definition of what is wrong. What do you say about broader definitions that include things such as emailing the joke video of Obama kicking in the door or putting red correction marks on all of a students' spelling and grammar errors?
I don't even know what your position is about that: obviously wrong, obviously not wrong, or will you now admit that you spoke too soon and you see my point and it is unclear whether things like that should be swept into a definition of wrong?
Just as people can bear only so much reality, they can also bear only so much lying about reality. The purpose of political jargon and euphemism is to lie about reality. Unfortunately for the health of the mind and conscience of an ordinary scrupulous devotee, these terms are manufactured ad hoc and without concern for whether they fit together in any systematic, mutually non-contradictory way. Tragedy, or a laff-riot, is the inevitable outcome.
Consider that exemplar of idiot-speak, "people of color". Mr. Farnan no doubt took it into his vocabulary unthinkingly as soon as the cadres started bleating it about. Now he bleats it out automatically during his recantation. But in doing so he transgresses against its intended function, which is to promulgate a lie about common interests and solidarity among all non-white people. But there is no "cultural, historical, and living legacy" about young men of color "being portrayed as violent". Only blacks are, or maybe some kinds of Hispanics. All the other "colors" are both perceived and portrayed as less prone to violence than not only blacks but whites. Somewhere in the small fissures created by inconsistent strains of bullshit, someone is going to find a nucleus around which to crystallize a new grievance.
Farnan won't get any more penalty points for this, the cadres being thick, but I'd predict that "people of color" is on its way to being meta-euphemized, and in future it will define the micro-aggressions that will lay low many a hapless goodthinker. It will all get so unbearably nutty that one day we will see one of them go barking mad in the middle of his struggle session, screaming at his tormentors every filthy racial, ethnic, national, class, occupational, religious, or sexual epithet ever invented by the mind of man.
...but unlike those who define sin very broadly and call believers to seek perfection, they are shaming even those who have not yet signed on to the broad definition of what counts as wrong, and they want to enforce their strict demands through the exercise of power in this world.
The preachers of Christianity have a challenging problem in dealing with American (and European) culture. The culture(s) used to have a conception of sin and morality that mostly agreed with Christian conceptions of sin and morality.
Now (especially with respect to the modern quasi-religion of sexual experience), Christians preach sin and need for salvation to a culture that doesn't agree about the nature of sin.
The existence of sin isn't challenged. However, Progressive moralizers call sin "Micro-Aggression" and "Intolerance".
Progresive moralizers also hew to an unspoken religion that centers on sexual experience as its proxy for the Divine. And this, combined with personal autonomy about the choice of partners/methods, is at odds with the traditional Christian notion about sexual pleasure and morality.
All those het up about micro-aggression are invited to micro-blow me. Thank you and good day.
Anglelyne: For the love of God get it right! It is peoples of color, not people of color. Points deducted.
So, we've gone from "aggression" all the way to "micro-aggression" by passing "milli-aggression"? I'm kind of curious how "micro-aggression is even detectable being at 6 orders of magnitude weaker than normal aggression.
Will they still be as upset about "nano-aggression" and "pico-aggression"? Will the democrats want to spend billions on the technology to detect and punish "femto-aggression".
Strange, but this is the sort of technology race that democrats would support.
Isn't the door thing funny because it is playing against type? I thought Obama was known as placid, perhaps even sedate.
Ah Anne always the legalist, the Pharisee.Trying to quantify sin is a game that Christians, at least evangelicals, don't attempt to play( alas we sometimes fail). It is not Christian doctrine and does not fit with the attribute that the Lord is holy. We mock God"s holiness by grading sin. This is brilliantly illustrated by the verse"don't worry about the STY in someones eye, but the LOG in your eye". Note what is capitalized. At first glance you would say see there is gradation in sin, but upon further reflection, the only gradation is not whether one sin is greater than the other but in God's eye that is foolishness . We always think the other person's sin is so much greater (log) that our sin (sty). God isn't saying your sin is worse he is just pointing out " All have sinned....." by a brilliant turn.
The important thing is not grading sin but trying not commit a sin.
So lets throw this microsin subject into your rather large Tower of Babel bin.
"...I proclaimed the term 'really most sincerely dead'."
Only if somebody drops a house on the Left.
"You name some things that easily fit a narrow definition of what is wrong."
Slavery easily fits a narrow definition of what is wrong? Slavery was an accepted institution in every civilized society on Earth until the 18th century. The people who began to think that might be a bad idea mostly lived in Europe. We are still waiting for that notion to penetrate parts of Africa and Asia.
Fortunately, UMich has a more enlightened approach to aggression, micro or otherwise;
http://tinyurl.com/m48n2vz
The US still issues H1B visas, which are in fact licenses for corporations to indenture a non-US citizen.
Otto: Trying to quantify sin is a game that Christians, at least evangelicals, don't attempt to play( alas we sometimes fail).
I'm a bit hazy on Catholic doctrine, but I do distinctly remember being taught that "scrupulosity", if not exactly a sin (somebody correct me on this), was definitely something one was NOT supposed to engage in. It meant you had a spiritual stick up your butt and needed to lighten the hell up.
"Trying to quantify sin is a game that Christians, at least evangelicals, don't attempt to play"
Venal sin vs. mortal sin?
does micro aggression mean "things a mentally healthy person might find annoying but allows the feeling to pass because they are a mature, healthy adult?" Just asking?!
Does micro aggression mean "things a mentally healthy person might find annoying but allows the feeling to pass because they are a mature, healthy adult?" Just asking?!
On, that was a micro aggression?! Shit.
Jupiter said...
The people who began to think that might be a bad idea mostly lived in Europe.
I bet some of the people living in the slave quarters started to suspect it was a bad idea too. /micro-aggression
Remember when the left on campuses internationally claimed to support "free speech"?
Good times.
I like that whites are confused by "wrong" as a concept.
Because you'd do swimmingly in a similar concept.
Actually, you would because progressives don't view any minorities as being equal.
That's why it is enlightened to feel blacks are incapable of getting a photo ID.
Not knowing how to treat people (Slavery? Jim Crow? Jane Crow?) will do that,...
Both things blacks in Africa do to this very day.
But, yeah, whites have the problem...because you ALSO don't buy that darker skin doesn't make you intrinsically inferior.
Now call of us racist rather than have a discussion you claim you wish to have...
"I like that whites are confused by "wrong" as a concept.
Not knowing how to treat people (Slavery? Jim Crow? Jane Crow?) will do that,."
Why would someone say that whites today have imposed slavery on others? Or Jim Crow laws? By and large just about everyone in the west today opposes those things.
Oh, but it's that "whites" thing. Seeing people for the color of their skin and then assigning them horrible traits based on some rather ridiculous stereotypes.
It's not like whites all universally supported slavery or other oppressions, as any student of history would realize. Many whites, among other skin colors (a trait of no relevance) gave their lives fighting to end slavery. Many fought hard to end Jim Crow.
That comment is a good example of racism.
The pc liberals who act like strict Calvinists when it comes to policing micro-aggressions do seem to have the same flawed joyless outlook on life associated with certain severe religious fundamentalists.
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/diane-bederman/slavery-africa_b_3975881.html
Look what those darn white folks are doing...in Sudan. Sold from the South to the North.
I bet there's A LOT of white folks in Northern Sudan.
What? It's Arabs enslaving darker skinned folks?
I bet whites are behind it ANYWAYS.
PB Reader (2:46pm):
You're right: no one talks about milli-agression. And you know what other kind they don't talk about? Vanilli-agresssion. Of course, that's the only kind that counts as aggression these days.
"Venal sin vs. mortal sin?"
Wait. Evangelicals are Catholic? Who knew?
Althouse: "I don't even know what your position is about that: obviously wrong, obviously not wrong,...."
I can't speak for him, but I would argue that it's obviously wrong. Malum prohibitum a la lefty don'tcha know?
I know how to treat people who have a chip on their shoulder and blame me for every bad thing that has ever happened to them, merely because of my skin color. That is, the way to treat them is to stay the heck away from them.
Micro-aggression persists as a term.
Need we any more evidence that the left has gone quite mad?
OH, FFS
YOu know what they say..If you're the only to hear the whistle, then....
hombre said "Wait. Evangelicals are Catholic? Who knew?"
Please note that the original commenter wrote "Catholics or at least Evangelicals." I was merely pointing out that gradations of sin do exist for many Christians, maybe even for most.
I saw a NOBAMA bumper sticker.
It was a clear case of micro road rage.
I was micro-offended.
Microaggression is for pikers. With me it's macroaggression or nothing. In for a penny, in for a pound, I say.
Crack has set off another episode of thrust and parry.
White people can't thrust.
Black people can parry.
Or something.
I'm still trying to recover from learning from Crack that I can not thrust. Sexually I mean. It has destroyed my entire self image. Now I wonder just what those little looks from my wife actually mean. So I keep trying to see myself as Not White.
As I understand it, I don't have to be black to be a Good Thruster. I only need be Not White.
Being Not White is proving hard for me. White is not something you just unlearn in a few days. It may even be an innate characteristic. I hope so, because then I won't have to feel bad about it.
That apology is worse than the original non-crime.
Microaggression my ass.
Ann Althouse,
"You name some things that easily fit a narrow definition of what is wrong. What do you say about broader definitions that include things such as emailing the joke video of Obama kicking in the door or putting red correction marks on all of a students' spelling and grammar errors?"
I say they are a further manifestation of what this thread is - people, with little to no appreciation for right, scoffing.
Look around and you'll see - you've all lost meaning. Blacks haven't. We still have our eyes on the prize, and know which way is up, because we're not listening to whites. They simply don't care - that's clear - so, as Obama said, he'll (we'll) go around them.
"I don't even know what your position is about that: obviously wrong, obviously not wrong, or will you now admit that you spoke too soon and you see my point and it is unclear whether things like that should be swept into a definition of wrong?"
No, there is a history here - and such a thing as the American character - and whites have been dismissing it for so long THEY are detached from ethics, but not us. Shit, whites have fucked things up so bad - with their staunch refusal to reveal their humanity - a black can kill with a clear conscience under these circumstances. He didn't set this shit in motion and they won't stop it - fuck it - might as well.
If whites would stop fucking with black people - try actually being nice to black people for a change, instead of trying to tell us shit, because you don't know - maybe they wouldn't always be accused of perpetuating stereotypes and patronizing people.
There you go:
Instead of working us to death, maybe for the NEXT 400 years, you could try killing us with kindness.
The Crack Emcee said...
"Shit, whites have fucked things up so bad - with their staunch refusal to reveal their humanity - a black can kill with a clear conscience under these circumstances."
I hope this sentence doesn't mean what it appears to say.
I'll bite:
What does it appear to say?
It appears to be a justification for murder. Is that what you meant so say?
See? Crack is into macroaggression too. It rectifies the humors.
Illuninati,
It appears to be a justification for murder. Is that what you meant so say?
For some. Or haven't you noticed?
I mean, if America's finished it's business with blacks, slavery, Jim Crow, Jane Crow, and just outright bullshit, then, please, let me know.
But, if it hasn't, how you can think some would think it uncivilized (as one suggested) to disregard the humanity you work so hard to conceal, I can't imagine. You've tortured and traumatized us - as a group - so what's left is what's left. You killed MLK (and before you all start screaming, he was NOT beloved at the time of his death) and he was the only one of his kind.
Now it's up to you.
Pity.
I gather that your answer to my question is yes.
One of the creepy aspects of the book Mein Kampf is the way Hitler talks of the Jew as if all Jews are one organism. You appear to be doing that in your description of white people.
"You appear to be doing that in your description of white people."
I know - I got it from how whites talk about blacks.
Weird, huh? Considering Mein Kampf, what do you think that means about whites - and not me?
Everybody recognizes it's racism, they just refuse to accept it's THEIR racism I'm reflecting.
That's endlessly amusing to me,...
Illuninati "One of the creepy aspects of the book Mein Kampf is the way Hitler talks of the Jew as if all Jews are one organism."
Also how Hitler blamed "the Jews" for all the real and imagined problems of the Germans.
pst314,
"Also how Hitler blamed "the Jews" for all the real and imagined problems of the Germans."
Is this a statement on how well-loved blacks are here?
I'll say it again - MLK.
You sunk your battleship,...
"Shit, whites have fucked things up so bad - with their staunch refusal to reveal their humanity - a black can kill with a clear conscience under these circumstances."
MLK, indeed.
pst314,
"Also how Hitler blamed "the Jews" for all the real and imagined problems of the Germans."
Or, like, how whites blame blacks for all crime and shit?
That's a good one,...
danoso,
MLK, indeed.
So you noticed whites killed him, too, huh?
Makes things so much simpler,...
"Or, like, how whites blame blacks for all crime and shit?"
So pointing out that blacks as a group commit a proportionally much higher number of crimes than whites is "blaming blacks for all crime"?
"Makes things so much simpler,..."
Yes, racists tend to view things very simply.
Crack, I hope I have misunderstood what you are saying.
So you noticed whites killed [MLK], too, huh?
King was shot by more than one guy?
The point I'm trying to make, getting back to the point of the thread, is whites talk like they're acting ethically but their actions - like slavers welding the whip and the Bible - say otherwise. Blacks are accustomed to being picked on, somehow, by whites - we'll just never GET used to it. We know who we are. You're the weirdoes who can't identify humans. But here's the thing you miss the most:
YOU'RE 72% OF THE COUNTRY IN A SICK RELATIONSHIP THAT INCLUDES BEING APPARENTLY OBSESSED WITH US.
So your barbs come at us - a little 12% - in 72% mass, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 times a day?
I tell a joke about whites in the ghetto and you may never hear it.
You tell a joke about blacks in the suburbs and not only will I hear it tomorrow but 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 times a day.
Let's vote on what's best for blacks.
On my side are the blacks - 12 votes.
On your side are the whites - 72 votes.
Maybe we should try that another way.
How about blacks decide what's best for blacks?
Nope - that 72 votes doesn't like it. They know better, you see. They say blacks are just "race hustlers" (because Slavery, Jim Crow, Jane Crow, and all that other bullshit is harmless) who will never shut up if we settle this because blacks aren't Americans and could give a shit if we sink or swim.
Actually, under the current conditions, many blacks feel that way now. Changing that - by showing a little patriotism, ethics, and integrity yourselves - is your challenge.
I'm doing my part, small though it is, every day,...
Glad to see you posting Crack. This is your real home.
The Crack Emcee said...
"YOU'RE 72% OF THE COUNTRY IN A SICK RELATIONSHIP THAT INCLUDES BEING APPARENTLY OBSESSED WITH US."
Would it surprise you to learn that most white people have lives of their own and don't have time to obsess about black people?
The Crack Emcee said...
The point I'm trying to make, getting back to the point of the thread,
The point you in fact made is that you are a digusting racist who should be shunned.
rcocean said...
Glad to see you posting Crack. This is your real home.
wtf?
So us whites are all evil, inhuman racists? Gosh, I didn't know I was guilty of so many crimes.
rcocean,
"Glad to see you posting Crack. This is your real home."
Thanks, but no, my place is over there where darkness rules the land, but y'all should visit sometimes. I try to keep it entertaining, if you "get" it, fuck you if you don't. Racist. (LOL)
This is Ann's salon, and she's getting it cozy again, picking topics that matter. That makes it worth it. I honestly don't see this shit as difficult, just people as unwilling.
I'd always hoped the people here were different,...
When the donkey don't wanna hop off the shore onto the boat you have some options.
The fools who haven't read How To Win Friends kick the donkey.
They yell and scream.
Punch and slap.
Piss themselves with rage.
Others put a carrot a couple inches in front of the donkey and move it until the donkey is on the boat.
If the donkey don't like carrots, not all donkeys do you know, you try some water/apples/grains until the ass is hauled.
What amazes me about Crack is the misplaced aggression against whites. In the first place, if you want to be angry at the people that first enslaved you, then look at Africa. Whites never ventured into Africa to catch slaves, the local population was most happy to capture and sell their brethren to take their lands and possessions. Selling them also was a bonus for more money and complete disposal.
In the second place, it wasn't just "whites" that were in the market there too - around 40-45% of the slaves went north into the Islamic lands (strangely too, most of those were female)
Maybe it was a curse to be sent to America where around 5% of the total slave population ended. But the mortality in the Caribbean and South America was over 95% from literal work to death. The figures in the US were never that high.
So yes, your tribe got screwed by both blacks and whites big time. But why you have a special hatred for only one of them is precisely why you can't move forward. Your head is so far in the past, the present just passes on.
So McGill has achieved the Do Not Attend list, along with the institutions that appear in Professor Jacobson and team's category College Insurrection. OK then.
Illuninati,
"Would it surprise you to learn that most white people have lives of their own and don't have time to obsess about black people?"
No - I live here, moron - but if you carve off the slice that is at any given time - and that number shifts - it still dwarfs that 12% and lands a crushing blow.
And don't forget - because this is important:
Blacks did nothing to deserve this.
Slavery, Jim Crow, Jane Crow, and all the other bullshit, is all for nothing but keeping us from being fully realized American citizens. Even Obama can't escape it and he's the President of the frikin' country. It's madness.
All for nothing.
And you just keep going - look at some of these comments. They can't handle anything more than boilerplate nonsense. They're almost not human, their social skills are so warped, it's no wonder helping the Americans they traumatize seems weird. They're sadists.
Seriously - Miley Cyrus has more shame than the unfeeling, cold-hearted, cynical, paranoid, faith healing culture that produced her,...
Ironclad,
"In the first place, if you want to be angry at the people that first enslaved you, then look at Africa."
I hate this ploy, because that's all it is, is a ploy - takes the light off of us. That's cynical.
Did Africa write "All Men Are Created Equal" or did we? Did Africa rape anybody? Did Africa have any idea what they were even doing, selling to America's "peculiar" version of the slave trade?
No, let's stay on this country - we live here - and we have our own relationship with Africa that doesn't need your help.
Just like when we freed Mandela,...
Crack Emcee said:
" I honestly don't see this shit as difficult, just people as unwilling."
Each person has to seek his own way. If we wait for other people to change we will probably be disappointed.
"They're almost not human ..."
Seriously, dude, with love in my heart ... stop typing.
Anyone know what the heck "Jane Crow" is supposed to refer to? I've only ever heard the term used by feminists to describe the "war on women". I mean, ok, this is Crack we're talking about, and he could find racism in a Chinese menu that didn't offer both white and brown rice -- but even still, I'm mystified.
Not mystified enough to follow the link to his blog, but mystified nevertheless. :)
Crack Emcee said:
"Did Africa rape anybody? Did Africa have any idea what they were even doing, selling to America's "peculiar" version of the slave trade?"
Africa is a continent and didn't do rape anyone. Did Africans rape women? Undoubtedly. Did they know what life was like in America? No. Did they care? Probably not.
Did Africa have any idea what they were even doing, selling to America's "peculiar" version of the slave trade?
Yes.
Hey, Ironclad, it's always fun to hear the slave trade explained to the descendants of slaves.
You should've been a consultant on 12 Years (rolls eyes) woulda made it a whole different movie, where nobody did anything to anyone and blacks are just poor because we're stupid - not outnumbered by our brutalizers, that we're committed, by blood and country, to get along with.
Unfortunately, the movie blacks made with Brad Pitt's help will have to suffer fewer Oscars without your version of history.
You would've made a good slaver with that outlook - unfeeling, everything by the numbers, nothing personal unless blacks did it to blacks.
Good Nazi material, too,...
Hey, Ironclad, it's always fun to hear the slave trade explained to the descendants of slaves.
Silly little Ironclad forgot that knowledge of history is genetic.
Boy, is HIS face red. :)
danoso said...
"They're almost not human ..."
Seriously, dude, with love in my heart ... stop typing.
No - somebody's got to tell you. Do you seriously think blacks look at whites and see humans like others? Really? No, we see potential psychopaths of one kind or another, the only question is how they'll snap and when.
Blacks at least have an excuse for our pathologies - what the fuck is whites?
Blacks have been wondering that for 400 years now,..
Revenant,
"Silly little Ironclad forgot that knowledge of history is genetic."
No, silly little Ironclad forgot most blacks have relatives that explained it to them as bed time stories and dinner table conversation. You know, personal.
Ironclad knows dick.
That should've been the title for 12 Years a Slave:
"What The Fuck Is Their Problem?"
It's a good title for these days,..
The Crack Emcee said:
"No - somebody's got to tell you. Do you seriously think blacks look at whites and see humans like others? Really? No, we see potential psychopaths of one kind or another, the only question is how they'll snap and when."
Interesting, that is how racist whites view black people. Right now the murder statistics favor the racist whites.
"Even Obama can't escape it"
What does that mean? Is opposition to Obama, not to mention mockery of, rooted in racism?
No, silly little Ironclad forgot most blacks have relatives that explained it to them as bed time stories and dinner table conversation. You know, personal.
I grew up in the south after my parents moved there. I was informed by my white peers that the Civil War was unjust, slaves had been better off than northern whites, and the Martin Luther King was just a troublemaker.
Well, that clears that up. People with a personal history should be implicitly trusted, and their stories accepted at face value without further thought. :)
To paraphrase Sam Goldwyn, an oral history ain't worth the paper it is printed on.
That should've been the title for 12 Years a Slave
It is kind of funny that Crack keeps bringing up that story to prop up his argument.
Northrup was freed thanks to northern whites. A white government ponied up cash to help find him, a white governor launched the investigation, white lawyers and justices ran the trial, white abolitionists carried the messages, white abolitionists publicized the story, and so on.
But the formula we're supposed to see is: "enslaved by whites = white people are evil; freed by other whites at great expense = shut up I said white people are evil weren't you listening".
"Shit, whites have fucked things up so bad - with their staunch refusal to reveal their humanity - a black can kill with a clear conscience under these circumstances."
Guess that explains why blacks spend so much time killing each other. Because Slavery! And something something humanity!
Ah hell, my Cherokee and Welsh ancestors have teamed up to seek revenge on my Norman ancestors. Brb.
Illuninati,
"Interesting, that is how racist whites view black people. Right now the murder statistics favor the racist whites."
You didn't see the link I provided - no they don't.
You're 72% of the country - it's impossible.
Yeah Crack - I brought it up because your descendants are the losers of an inter-tribal fight that is still going on in Africa. You got literally sold down the river by your brothers in a fight that strangely resembles most inner city turf battles.
I never said slavery was right - but it happened (and is still going on in Africa, thank you) , so deal with it.
You got a raw deal and frankly the South did too because slavery wrecked the economy after the civil war. If only the industrial revolution had come earlier, there would have been no need for slaves.
Blame malaria too - black slaves were in demand because they had childhood exposure to the disease and could work in a mosquito environment. Labor was a lot cheaper from Europe but they had a really nasty habit of dying off the boat.
And I quote history - because if you don't try to understand the reason why things happen, you just end up hating. It's a lot easier I guess.
...WONDERFUL. Now my ancestors from Gaul are joining the fracas. They want reparations from Italy for holding them as slaves.
I'm sure I've got an Italian in here somewhere... Hope Italy still has some cash left. I need a new flatscreen baby!
pst314 said...
"Even Obama can't escape it"
What does that mean? Is opposition to Obama, not to mention mockery of, rooted in racism?
Some of it. Openly, some subtle.
The problem is you, an American, are so willing to ignore the history of this country to accommodate a "color-blind" fantasy that makes whites saints.
Face it - this country DOESN'T have a history of being kind to black politicians, or any other blacks for that matter, so quit trying to pretend it does.
You sound foolish.
Revenant,
"People with a personal history should be implicitly trusted, and their stories accepted at face value without further thought."
If it corresponds with reality and beats the shit off the malarky whites told themselves and wasted time trying to convince the rest of us, yeah.
Raise your game, Revenant, you're not usually so lame,...
Some of it. Openly, some subtle.
If it wasn't for racism, Hillary Clinton would be President right now.
Are we witnessing Crack's final descent into madness? Certainly he is coming off today as more unhinged than usual.
the formula we're supposed to see is: "enslaved by whites = white people are evil; freed by other whites at great expense = shut up I said white people are evil weren't you listening".
You have dropped a few brain cells.
The formula we're supposed to see is, while those whites got Northrup out, there were millions of others left behind and the vast majority of whites saw nothing wrong with it what-so-ever - just as they see the poverty today and can think of little more than jokes for white's verified and documented historic handiwork.
And after blacks got free, whites abandoned us, and then betrayed us further by erecting laws to maintain the status quo from before the Civil War.
That lasted for another 100 years.
And we haven't even gotten to King getting killed in a climate of fear created by whites.
Oh, your benevolence knows no bounds.
White's hands are so bloody, I don't even know why you fight.
You should be like Lady Macbeth, insanely repeating "It won't wash off,…"
Fen,
"Guess that explains why blacks spend so much time killing each other. Because Slavery! And something something humanity!"
Look at the link I provided above - you're an especially repulsive idiot.
If it corresponds with reality and beats the shit off the malarky whites told themselves and wasted time trying to convince the rest of us, yeah.
That a theory conforms with reality doesn't make it true. For any given set of facts there are an infinite number of explanations that (a) match those facts and (b) are wrong. Finding the one explanation that isn't wrong is not easy, and can't be accomplished by just listening to what your peers tell you is true.
For example, black Americans have lower average test scores, higher unemployment rates, and commit crimes at higher rates than white Americans. This conforms to the theory "black people are suffering from systemic racism". It also conforms to the theory "black people are naturally lazier, less intelligent, and more impulsive than white people". It also conforms to the theory "government programs aimed at helping black Americans have instead harmed them by discouraging parenthood and employment". Of course, of those three only the last actually offers a reason why the aforementioned problems have gotten *worse* since Jim Crow was ended.
You can tell yourself any kind of story you like if all you care about is whether it superficially matches the facts. To find the truth you need to be willing to question your assumptions. You aren't, which is why you're doomed to spend your time ranting to hostile audiences.
Are we witnessing Crack's final descent into madness?
Crack is a Mandlebrot Set of crazy. No matter how deep you go it keeps on going. Although the same patterns do tend to repeat themselves over and over. :)
Ironclad,
"I quote history - because if you don't try to understand the reason why things happen, you just end up hating. It's a lot easier I guess"
I like how you keep talking. You sound like an overseer. Like someone with no "skin in the game".
That's why you're fixated on Africa - you think it's a trump card, but no:
JEFFERSON IS THE TRUMP CARD.
I am not African and my country's broke almost every agreement it's ever made to me and mine, starting with the one that says you assholes are supposed to be my fellow countrymen.
You're just assholes.
Don't you get that?
Like George Carlin said, put me and you in a room and leave us alone for a while and you can put good money down that you're going to come out acting more like me than the other way around. Why?
Because I'm not an asshole,...
Yes Fen is a repulsive idiot. :)
Revenant,
If it wasn't for racism, Hillary Clinton would be President right now.
Yeah, but it's YOUR racism they elected Obama to defeat.
That you don't get that - that you're either that dense or in denial - is wild,...
JEFFERSON IS THE TRUMP CARD.
But you're complaining about 400 years of poor treatment. Jefferson was born 271 years ago.
How exactly was a European slave buyer in 1614 supposed to benefit from his great-great-great-grandson's post-Enlightenment wisdom?
The formula we're supposed to see is, while those whites got Northrup out, there were millions of others left behind and the vast majority of whites saw nothing wrong with it what-so-ever
Slavery was invented by black people. Abolition of slavery was invented by white people. You're welcome.
Saying that most of the people in the North saw nothing wrong with slavery is simply not true. By the time of "12 Years a Slave", the majority of population of the northern states saw slavery as a great evil. If you want to blame them for not taking action sooner, well, fine, but nobody else in the world -- black, white, or other -- did a damned thing about it either, even though Jefferson's high ideals had long since been published in every corner of the globe.
Yeah, but it's YOUR racism they elected Obama to defeat.
How's that workin' out for ya? :)
The Crack Emcee said...
"Illuninati,
"Interesting, that is how racist whites view black people. Right now the murder statistics favor the racist whites."
You didn't see the link I provided - no they don't.
You're 72% of the country - it's impossible."
Not really. All the statistics I've read are similar to those below:
• Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving
blacks and whites, blacks commit 85 percent and whites commit 15 percent.
• Blacks commit more violent crime against whites than against blacks. Fortyfive
percent of their victims are white, 43 percent are black, and 10 percent are
Hispanic. When whites commit violent crime, only three percent of their victims are
black.
• Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against
a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery.
• Blacks are 2.25 times more likely to commit officially-designated hate crimes
against whites than vice versa.
http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf
Revenant,
But you're complaining about 400 years of poor treatment. Jefferson was born 271 years ago.
How exactly was a European slave buyer in 1614 supposed to benefit from his great-great-great-grandson's post-Enlightenment wisdom?
What? Now you've outlawed complaints, too?
Revenant, I know you're trying really, really, really hard to seem clever, but you're a white boy - we expect you to try and be clever.
Do you have any new tricks? Learned any new skills?
Show me some kindness, Rev - right here, right now - betcha can't. You know why?
YOU'RE AN ASSHOLE.
Don't type anything just yet - let it sink in,...
Abolition of slavery was invented by white people.
My God you're an idoit.
By what stretch of the imagination could you assume any Abolitionist had more invested in setting blacks free than the blacks themselves?
Don't you feel dumb just reading that? Doesn't it make too much elemental sense? So what are you saying? What do you think you're doing?
You're an idiot.
Next you'll be telling me MLK was a Republican and whites led the Civil Rights marches,...
Let's get something straight - whites led nothing.
The Crack Emcee said...
"Let's get something straight - whites led nothing."
Crack, you crack me up.
All the statistics I've read are similar to those below:
All the statistics you read - I gave you the government's numbers, not "the color of crime"'s
Racist.
This is what 5+ years of Obama has done to Crack.
The Crack Emcee said...
"All the statistics I've read are similar to those below:
All the statistics you read - I gave you the government's numbers, not "the color of crime"'s
Racist."
For some reason I'm not surprised at your response. You won't be surprised if I don't get upset.
The question is, are the statistics I presented correct? If not, do you have some that are better?
Overall whites commit 70% of all crime in the USA.
According to Justice Department statistics, 84 percent of white people killed every year are killed by other whites.
Saying "Blacks are an estimated 39 times more likely to commit a violent crime against a white than vice versa, and 136 times more likely to commit robbery" means nothing when whites are the ones committing the majority of crime.
You're just being racist and desperately trying to nail blacks.
It won't work - you do know what "impossible" means, don't you?
The Crack Emcee said...
"Overall whites commit 70% of all crime in the USA."
The statistics I gave addressed Black on White crime vs. White on Black crime. Other than calling me a racist, you haven't dealt with them.
Illuninati,
"The statistics I gave addressed Black on White crime vs. White on Black crime. Other than calling me a racist, you haven't dealt with them."
Because they don't matter - when whites are committing the vast majority of crimes - because (DUH) they're the vast majority of Americans - why would you even mention blacks?
GO GET THE BAD GUYS!
72% vs. 12% and you wanna focus on black crime.
I'm sure whatever percentage of that 12% is criminals is really putting a dent in white's day.
Racist.
Crack Emcee said:
"Because they don't matter - when whites are committing the vast majority of crimes - because (DUH) they're the vast majority of Americans - why would you even mention blacks?"
Let me remind you why they matter:
The Crack Emcee said:
"No - somebody's got to tell you. Do you seriously think blacks look at whites and see humans like others? Really? No, we see potential psychopaths of one kind or another, the only question is how they'll snap and when."
If white on black crime is an excuse for your racism, then you can't blame whites who use the same argument against blacks.
Really, it's like you guys can't even count - 72 vs 12.
Figure it out.
400 years of bullshit vs. roughly 35-40 years of limited freedom.
Figure it out.
Slavery vs. Black poverty today.
Figure it out.
Crack Emcee said:
"400 years of bullshit vs. roughly 35-40 years of limited freedom."
It must be nice to live 400 years.
The problem with racism is that racism justifies racism.
Illuninati,
"If white on black crime is an excuse for your racism, then you can't blame whites who use the same argument against blacks."
First, you got on the white on black crime tip - I never mentioned it. This means you're assuming - listening to yourself. That's rude. And you get things wrong:
I said whites are seen as psychopaths - they'll abuse anything. There don't have to be blacks around. You're just violent. Insanely so. Major control issues.
And, again, blacks have an excuse for our pathologies - you - what's yours?
Why is it so important for you to denigrate the 12% of people this country oppresses? Why is it so important to defend the 72% that oppresses?
If you were hanging out with me and my friends, wouldn't you expect me to help you feel comfortable, and stand with you if trouble arose?
Then what's white's problem?
Again - we've done nothing to deserve this.
Illuninati,
It must be nice to live 400 years.
All you guys think you're cute, clever, sophisticated in your intelligence, when you're morons:
Blacks have families. Families without inherited wealth. Families without inherited wealth because for most of this place's existence we were forced to hold the place up.
You don't seem to be doing so good without us,...
Crack Emcee said:
"All you guys think you're cute, clever, sophisticated in your intelligence, when you're morons:"
Nice touch. I'm getting tired so I'll have to sign off. Cheers.
What? Now you've outlawed complaints, too?
"Too"?
Show me some kindness, Rev - right here, right now - betcha can't.
I've been showing you kindness, Crack. I'm noticing you and talking to you. This is why you comment here. You don't come here looking for friendly agreement, you come here hoping to get in an argument.
I'm helping you out, buddy. :)
Yeah, it's a great country.
Now the blacks kill the blacks and the whites kill the whites.
This is called progress.
You don't come here looking for friendly agreement, you come here hoping to get in an argument.
You know me so well.
Not even a little bit.
David said...
Yeah, it's a great country.
Now the blacks kill the blacks and the whites kill the whites.
This is called progress.
Where do you live?
(joking)
Strange thread.
Does Crack seem threatening?
If he is so wrong, why feel threatened?
South Carolina, Crack.
You should have no trouble finding me.
By what stretch of the imagination could you assume any Abolitionist had more invested in setting blacks free than the blacks themselves?
You appear to not know what the word "abolition" means. It means a bit more than simply thinking "gee, I wish *I* wasn't a slave". The slaveowners were happy not to be slaves, too.
If you guy are into it, I just posted an exquisitely tragic story on TMR for the darkest laugh one can muster. Lives, honestly cascading downhill, hitting everything they possibly can on the way.
And then, when you think it's over - BOOM - that hand from the grave shit. But this time done right.
I give you The Shanghai Shuffle
David said...
Strange thread.
Does Crack seem threatening?
If he is so wrong, why feel threatened?
Even if I was right why feel threatened? We're supposed to be Americans.
You should ask yourself why I'm the only one that keeps repeating that,...
Revenant,
You appear to not know what the word "abolition" means. It means a bit more than simply thinking "gee, I wish *I* wasn't a slave".
ROTFLMAO!!!
I swear, I reel in the face of your ignorance. You literally have no mental framework for the gibberish you're spouting. History, man. The shit that gets us from there to here. Dive in - it don't bite.
Families without inherited wealth because for most of this place's existence we were forced to hold the place up.
Except of course you didn't "hold the place up". The United States would have been better off, in both the short and long term, if slavery had never been allowed here.
Slave labor was essential to the profits of southern plantations. It was not vital to the economy of the United States as a whole, which is why the Confederacy spent its entire existence in economic crisis and the Union absorbed the hit with minimal trouble.
The vast majority of whites were made poorer by the existence of slavery, simply because it artificially drove down wages by forcing non-slave workers to compete with slave labor.
ROTFLMAO!!!
Harriet Tubman was born a couple of centuries after Europeans started pushing to ban slavery, dude.
Revenant,
Slave labor was essential to the profits of southern plantations. It was not vital to the economy of the United States as a whole,…
You know I'm gonna kill you on this one, right? I just want to be clear, because I kinda like you - I'm going to slam dunk this in your face so hard your nuts will shrink. So, just so we're clear, you're ready right?
Really, really, really ready?
Ity's gonna huurrrt,...
Congratulations Ann, your Crack bait worked.
Justifying killing whites does not get deleted, but stating that you should own your vote for Obama and this racial knowledge does.
And settle down Crack, yes I acknowledge the microaggression of the term "own."
You know I'm gonna kill you on this one, right? I just want to be clear, because I kinda like you - I'm going to slam dunk this in your face so hard your nuts will shrink. So, just so we're clear, you're ready right?
You know I'm gonna kill you on this one, right? I just want to be clear, because I kinda like you - I'm going to slam dunk this in your face so hard your nuts will shrink. So, just so we're clear, you're ready right?
Apparently I've been slam-dunked so hard I'm seeing double. :)
Another Crack grievance show.
Chapelle had a better routine.
" All you white people gimme money!"
I suppose I should feel sorry for Crack, but he works so hard to be unlikable that I just can't.
No, silly little Ironclad forgot most blacks have relatives that explained it to them as bed time stories and dinner table conversation. You know, personal.
My great-uncle was in the Polish army in 1939, captured by the Soviets and sent to Russia as slave labor (which at least was better than Katyn)
I learned my family slave stories from the actual slave.
President-Mom-Jeans said...
Congratulations Ann, your Crack bait worked.
I don't think it was so much Crack bait as it was collusion.
Crack's latest shtick is to goad anyone into saying things so that he can cut and paste the words and post at them at his blog. There's nothing wrong with the latter part of that formula -- lots of people cut and paste others' words and analyze or even mock them in their own space. It's the goading part that smacks of disingenuity.
In humor, it's the difference between a Mark Twain and a Don Rickles.
Crack said:
"Even if I was right why feel threatened? We're supposed to be Americans.
You should ask yourself why I'm the only one that keeps repeating that,..."
I do not disagree. There are manifestations of white conservative guilt as well as white liberal guilt. I think we are seeing some of the former in this thread. The initial subject of the thread--the ritual shaming of someone who posted a photograph--is a good example of the latter.
Althouse's posting subject is annoying because it is so pointless. It's not designed to do anything positive for black people. It's designed to make a certain cadre of white people feel good about themselves.
Ditto the notion that as a nation we are somehow absolved from the sins of slavery and post slavery racism by emancipation or civil rights acts. Lincoln had something to say about that in his second inaugural address.
Even amid the carnage, Lincoln understood that all the blood and suffering was not a source of absolution. He was as skeptical of the abolitionist claims of having God on their side as he was of the slaveowners' claims. He was also that great rarity, a public leader making a lucid speculation about the nature and consequence of sin in a public speech.
As a nation we are still wrestling with the consequences of a great sequence of sins. That is actually hard to recognize, hard to talk about, hard to understand. A great president grappled with it. Some great writers have done so: Faulkner, Baldwin, Wright, Du Bois, Ellison, Styron, even Mark Twain.
The individual's reaction is to rebel when called a sinner. No white person alive owned a slave in America or supported slavery. Few would support Jim Crow. Most don't want to oppress anyone, just be left alone. They are not concerned that a societal sin is still expressing itself. They may not believe that is true. Liberal or conservative, they find ways to avoid being categorized as sinners individually.
Blacks are sinners too, so when a black person puts the hammer down on sin and responsibility, it's quite easy to point that out. Some of the black sins are obvious--violence, theft and corruption. It's not a black monopoly. Some are slightly more subtle--leadership sins of demagoguery and false promises. Whites do this too--the disgusting solicitation of power through manipulation of guilt, phony promises and failed rent seeking programs.
Most still claim that God is on their side, or the modern secular equivalent of God that exists in their minds. But we do not know what side God is on, if He takes a side, if He even agrees that there are distinct sides here.
As you said, Crack, we are all Americans here. We are all sinners and we are all victims of sin. We would do well to remember that.
Excerpt from Lincoln's Second Inagurar:
It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God's assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men's faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. "Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh." If we shall suppose that American slavery is one of those offenses which, in the providence of God, must needs come, but which, having continued through His appointed time, He now wills to remove, and that He gives to both North and South this terrible war as the woe due to those by whom the offense came, shall we discern therein any departure from those divine attributes which the believers in a living God always ascribe to Him? Fondly do we hope, fervently do we pray, that this mighty scourge of war may speedily pass away. Yet, if God wills that it continue until all the wealth piled by the bondsman's two hundred and fifty years of unrequited toil shall be sunk, and until every drop of blood drawn with the lash shall be paid by another drawn with the sword, as was said three thousand years ago, so still it must be said "the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether."
"Althouse's posting subject is annoying because it is so pointless. It's not designed to do anything positive for black people. It's designed to make a certain cadre of white people feel good about themselves."
No asshole. Or are you also so morally fucked up that you see resistance to ideological bullying as racist?
FOAD to all politically correct thought police, including those who pose as Christians.
Shit, whites have fucked things up so bad - with their staunch refusal to reveal their humanity - a black can kill with a clear conscience under these circumstances.
Nice rhetoric there, Sparkles.
Given that is your mindset, a white guy shouldn't attempt to harm you...why?
Congratulations Ann, your Crack bait worked. Justifying killing whites does not get deleted, but stating that you should own your vote for Obama and this racial knowledge does.
Ann has the typical liberal blindspot - Crack is held to a lower standard because his race is inferior.
And so ends our White Privilege Conference 200 for teleworkers
Please ensure you signed in on our roster.
Your course credit certificate (along with the earlier WPC 100 credits) should arrive in your mail soon.
These credits transfer to your HR department's Diversity Training, and also allow you to ignore Black History Month this year.
Monkeyboy,
I learned my family slave stories from the actual slave.
So did I, odd as that seems, but true.
"I don't think it was so much Crack bait as it was collusion.
Crack's latest shtick is to goad anyone into saying things so that he can cut and paste the words and post at them at his blog."
Folks, chick's a slimy little thing from Lem's, who says stupid shit so often I'm inspired to blog about it - that's what he's talking about. Today I put up somebody intelligent, showing what the sky-is-falling bird understands about my shtick (is reflecting observable white racism, back at whites in denial, too difficult to understand?)
Don't pay him any mind - send him back to that cesspool he posts at,...
@Crack: I used to link to photos of Sarah Palin hanging in effigy to make the point that some gays were evil. The people I wanted to see it ignored it.
You're doing the same thing at your blog with respect to white people.
Think it through.
From Crack's link:
The truth? As the largest racial group, whites commit the majority of crimes in America. In particular, whites are responsible for the vast majority of violent crimes. With respect to aggravated assault, whites led blacks 2-1 in arrests; in forcible-rape cases, whites led all racial and ethnic groups by more than 2-1. And in larceny theft, whites led blacks, again, more than 2-1.
So whites outnumber blacks by ~6 to 1, but only outcrime them ( in assault, rape, and larceny ) by ~2 to 1. So based on the numbers Crack provides, the average black person commits three times more of those crimes than then average white person.
Crack- why are you providing these numbers that perpetuate the stereotype of blacks? Don't you think you need to apologize for this micro-aggression?
David said...
Does Crack seem threatening?
The Crack Emcee said...
Shit, whites have fucked things up so bad - with their staunch refusal to reveal their humanity - a black can kill with a clear conscience under these circumstances.
It sure seems like he's trying...
"Think it through."
He can't think it through: His entire sense of self is too wrapped up in hating white people. Just as a Klansman is obsessed with the fear that black men all want to rape white women and a Nazi is obsessed with the fantasy that Jews control the world, so Crack is obsessed with the fantasy that white people are all racists and owe him big time.
Criticize and mock a fascistic asshat of a president? You must be racist.
Object to kommissars punishing such speech? You must be a racist.
Say that it's foolish to blame white people for things done hundreds of years ago? You must be racist.
Point out that slavery was not invented by white people, and was in fact practiced around the world--including by those noble Africans and Arabs--then you must be a racist.
Point out that slavery was considered normal (albeit an unfortunate fate) pretty much everywhere and in all times)? You must be a racist.
Point out that the first universal anti-slavery movement (to abolish slavery of all people, not just one's own race or tribe) was started by white Europeans? You must be racist.
And so on, and so on.
Crack is unlikely to ever learn better, and will go to his grave just as much a sick twisted fuck as he is today.
"a black can kill with a clear conscience under these circumstances"
This blog post started as a discussion of "micro aggression" but Crackhead quickly escalated to macro aggression.
The Crack Emcee said...
72% vs. 12% and you wanna focus on black crime.
I'm a software engineer. Part of my job is to fix bugs in the code. If I find that 72% of my code contains half the bugs the customers are complaining about, and 12% contains a quarter of the bugs, then I'm certainly going to work on the 12%, because that's the highest concentration, and improving that will likely result in the greatest improvement for the amount of effort expended.
Having said that, I don't think we should focus on black crime or white crime. We should focus on crime. This will likely result in an effort that is disproportionate to the population in minority communities. That's because, based on the figures you provided, that is where it will do the most good.
I did not mean to reference Crack as physically threatening. It's the internet, people. He's not going to come over to your house and punch you. Even if he could, he probably would not want to waste the energy.
His threat, if you feel it, is moral or ideological. He is making some people act as though they are uncomfortable. If you believe he is so wrong, why would you be uncomfortable? Why does he seem to draw more intense refutation than the average disagreeable (in the literal sense) poster?
Why does he seem to draw more intense refutation than the average disagreeable (in the literal sense) poster?
It's the micro-strategy, not the strategy, David. It's too transparently stupid. It's like hosting a blog with commenters weighing in from all stripes but then deciding that you didn't like the overall tenor (i.e., democracy) and so deciding to invent phony commenters to even things out.
Why does he seem to draw more intense refutation than the average disagreeable (in the literal sense) poster?
Maybe because he seems to think he could kill me and anyone who looks like me with a clear conscience? ( Most people need to get to know me in real life before they reach that conclusion. )
His comments are well outside average disagreement, they deserve more than average pushback.
Plus they are easy to refute based on the figures he posts on his own site.
Why does he seem to draw more intense refutation [etc]
He directs racist invective against the racial group to which most of us belong. It isn't that complicated.
David: "Why does he seem to draw more intense refutation than the average disagreeable (in the literal sense) poster?"
Thanks for playing dumb David.
You are just "playing", right?
I mean, since Crack has made a lower art form of equating posters here with those that lynched, assaulted and enslaved blacks in America, I can't imagine what might have stirred up the "retort-ers".
Yep.
It's just a big gosh darn mystery.
No hope of unraveling.
Best to leave it alone.
LOL
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा