Racist - The Bear and Badger

JRPC

Kow wrote:

Why should anyone be specific when you don't even bother to answer any of the questions anyone asks you?

If you accuse someone of making claims that are "offensive drivel" that justifies the kind of behavior that's been happening here, then there absolutely should be an expectation that you specify what those claims are.

I've got a sneaking suspicion that there's an awful lot of virtue signaling going here but not a whole lot of actual understanding. I've been falsely summarised several times now with views being attributed to me that I don't have.

And also what are you talking about? Everything I've written in the last several pages has responses to specific questions.

Yossarian

Virtue fucking signalling? Fucking really?

Yossarian

Fucking hell man, at least we’re taking your shite in good faith.

Kow

"Offensive drivel" is pretty generous, really.

hunk

Jrpc, the whole problem stems from you being vague on your stance.
You post controversial stuff you claim to agree with and when people grill you on it you suddenly claim not to agree with all of it, only certain parts. Then you fail to specify the specific parts you agree and disagree with.and people go facepalm. Not to mention you claiming to be leftist but having essentially conservative beliefs.

Confused yet? So are we.
Failure to communicate.

Brooks

Anyone using "virtue signalling" without sarcasm in 2018 is very daft indeed. Just jeer, it's as worthwhile and more fun.

JonB

JRPC wrote:

I've got a sneaking suspicion that there's an awful lot of virtue signaling going here but not a whole lot of actual understanding. I've been falsely summarised several times now with views being attributed to me that I don't have.

You're absolutely right that people aren't understanding your position. But that's because it's incoherent and you don't seem to understand it yourself.

You start with that pedestrian/driver shit and don't get what a fucked up analogy that is. It absolutely implies that the government has 'done all it can' for racial minorities. And so far your only attempt to explain what you really mean (using second wave feminism as an example) has been to support a form of identity politics, which contradicts the apparent opposition to it (not that you defined it in the first place) that you started from.

So yes there's misunderstanding. There's no other possible result based on the incomprehensible drivel you've posted.

[Deleted User]

JRPC wrote:

Why should anyone be specific when you don't even bother to answer any of the questions anyone asks you?

If you accuse someone of making claims that are "offensive drivel" that justifies the kind of behavior that's been happening here, then there absolutely should be an expectation that you specify what those claims are. I've got a sneaking suspicion that there's an awful lot of virtue signaling going here but not a whole lot of actual understanding. I've been falsely summarised several times now with views being attributed to me that I don't have. And also what are you talking about? Everything I've written in the last several pages has responses to specific questions.

Don't bother your hole with it dude. Engage in discussions irl, far more rewarding. Internet forums are a (being generous) mediocre medium for the discussion of any nuanced topic.*

* tho fun for talking about light stuff like video-games etc.

Bob

Andy wrote:

@Facewon, I think we're mostly agreeing, I suppose the issue is down to where the line is drawn between categories. Either someone draws a line, or we reduce the forum to about three or four superthreads. Stupid question for any etymologists; why are some -ists practitioners or proponents of something (socialist, capitalist, etymologists) while other -ists are prejudiced based on certain factors (sexist, racist, ageist)?

Ftw

GooberTheHat

JRPC wrote:

there's an awful lot of virtue signaling going here

DING DING DING DING DING!

Kow

But he's not peddling alt-right crap at all! He's really left wing!

GooberTheHat

Well apparently all the alt right dudes are actually alt left identify politicos

GooberTheHat

Left wingnuts were protesting their own yesterday in DC. ‘Unite the right’ is a left wing group whose founder Richard Spencer denounces Republicans & supports @TheDemocrats. In reality, ‘Unite the left’ were eaten up by other liberal groups, BLM & Antifa! https://t.co/G3JII5G5rE

Facewon

indigoDos wrote:

Don't bother your hole with it dude. Engage in discussions irl, far more rewarding. Internet forums are a (being generous) mediocre medium for the discussion of any nuanced topic.*

* tho fun for talking about light stuff like video-games etc.

I mean, I guess, if you're talking twitter or fb this is true, but a forum, where you have no real word limit, quote options link options etc is just about as good as it gets for communicating nuance. Yes, the odd joke doesn't go over or requires a safety wink, but I'd rather discuss nuanced stuff here than just about anywhere.

Being able to take time to formulate responses also helps.

[Deleted User]

If ye lot were sat in a coffee shop/whatevs positions would be established quickly, more personal respect would (hopefully!) be shown and I doubt you'd be saying childish shite like 'your words make me physically sick, etc'.

If this place is your jam Face then fair fucks but I've never been witness to a proper measured, nuanced discussion here on any topic, ever.

Yossarian

I’ve seen plenty.

Facewon

indigoDos wrote:

I doubt you'd be saying childish shite like 'your words make me physically sick, etc'.

JRPC wrote:

You read through this thread and THAT'S what jumps out to you as an objectionable use of language!?

Facewon

Also, I went back and checked, to remind myself.

I said it was vomit inducing and immediately acknowledged that wasn't constructive and then went into substance for the rest of the post and next.

I'm also pleading attrition due to trying to engage evenly for most of the harris Murray debacle.

hunk

I agree with facewon and disagree with indigodos.
It's perfectly possible to have a decent heated debate here if the posters are willing to engage in a proper debate. So far, Jrpc has done nothing but post controversial conservative authors while avoiding debate, ignoring many posters and their arguments hampering the discussion. As mentioned before he's also not clear on his own stance flip flopping all over the place.

Facewon

I hate the term controversial. So undescriptive. Is that the word?

hunk

Pop conservative heroes?

djchump

JRPC wrote:

Look, there's clearly just a widespread misunderstanding of what the arguments are here.

Not widespread, no. Just localised to yourself.

If anyone here thinks that my position, or Hughes' position for that matter, can be summarised as being that the US has 'done all they can do' for the American black community, then they have just not been paying close enough attention.

Or, they’ve thought through the implications of the “analogy”, and you haven’t.

I don't think that and I haven't said that.

So the absolutely basic premise of the “thought experiment” doesn’t apply to the reality of the situation?
So it’s a completely pointless analogy then, doesn’t apply, and is completely unedifying.
Congratulations on lots of pointless typing then, I suppose?

(And PS - you did say that, the inference was plain on page 18)

Yossarian

Current Affairs has tweeted a thread containing links to its takedowns of prominent right intellectuals over the years.

https://twitter.com/curaffairs/status/1029148698947792896

Facewon

Already hit grem up with it on FB. Just read the dinesh dsausa one. That dude is Cray Cray.

tin_robot

JRPC wrote:

dynamiteReady wrote:

@JRPC - Quick question... Do you believe the Israelis have done 'all they can' for the Palestinians?

OK. Look, there's clearly just a widespread misunderstanding of what the arguments are here. If anyone here thinks that my position, or Hughes' position for that matter, can be summarised as being that the US has 'done all they can do' for the American black community, then they have just not been paying close enough attention. I don't think that and I haven't said that.

Bloody hell, I just spent an hour writing a long goddamn reply to your last post to me, and then lost it. I am officially an idiot (not least because it's not the first time). So I give up. However, to this point in particular - here's the direct quote from Amy Wax when she first presented the Pedestrian Parable (a formulation that Hughes explicitly references)

Amy Wax wrote:

"That blacks did not, in an important sense, cause their current predicament does not preclude charging them with alleviating it if nothing else will work."

If nothing else will work. Or, in other words, when we have done everything else we can. Her position, Hughes' position, the one you are hitching your cart to, is that the only group now able to help black communities is the black community itself. Neither of them, I would argue, earn that conclusion, and your reluctance to be tarred with it implies that you don't think they've earned it either.

Vela

indigoDos wrote:

If ye lot were sat in a coffee shop/whatevs positions would be established quickly, more personal respect would (hopefully!) be shown and I doubt you'd be saying childish shite like 'your words make me physically sick, etc'. If this place is your jam Face then fair fucks but I've never been witness to a proper measured, nuanced discussion here on any topic, ever.

This is you in nintendo threads, yeah?

FWIW Ive decided I dont debate JRPC. He has his opinion, I disagree and good luck to those who hold discussion. But the position you are taking is essentially dismissive of some of the reasonable claims that either JRPC is not discussing in good faith, or is not aware that is how he comes across on times.

Reg made a very salient observation when he pointed out JRPC was making some comments that inadvertently shut down discussion. They were the kind of comments that almost roll off the tongue on auto-pilot, like management speak. I'll give him the benefit and assume that JRPC didnt actually mean to shape discussion like that, but he didnt seem to understand why reg pointed that out.

Reg didnt address the substance of JRPC's argument, merely the presentation of it.

I hope you didnt assume that was dogpiling, because thats a bad-faith interpretation if ever Ive seen one.

[/daily quota of internet arguing]

Unlikely

Australian Senator Fraser Anning is not a very nice man.

Kow

Australians should really vote to send these types back to their country of origin. Probably England.

Gremill

Facewon wrote:

Already hit grem up with it on FB. Just read the dinesh dsausa one. That dude is Cray Cray.

Thanks, but I don’t really do Facebook.

Gremill

Unlikely wrote:

Australian Senator Fraser Anning is not a very nice man.

What an absolute cunt.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories