3 ms·

Looks, like it might be a bit problematic or something deeper given his wife's arrest http://kfor.com/2015/10/07/oklahoma-senators-wife-arrested-claims-she-was-

Looks, like it might be a bit problematic or something deeper given his wife's arrest http://kfor.com/2015/10/07/oklahoma-senators-wife-arrested-claims-she-was-abused-at-county-jail/ http://kfor.com/2015/10/07/oklahoma-senators-wife-arrested-c... Not from OK, so I get the feeling this affects things, but not sure how.

linkregister 10y ago
Thanks for the added context!
- protomyth 10y ago
  I'm not sure I provided any real context. It is data, but I have no real clue what it means. Thanks though.
dsfyu404ed 10y ago
Or a well off white guy had to deal with the police in a negative context for the first time in his life and that changed his opinion of them and the power they do or don't deserve
- protomyth 10y ago
  I think calling someone racist just because of their skin color and economic position is wrong and adds to the level of hate in society.
  - deciplex 10y ago
    First of all, he didn't call him racist. Secondly, pointing out that for some reason long-standing problems suddenly seem to get a lot more attention once they start negatively affecting white people is not promoting hate - it is calling attention to racism.
    - protomyth 10y ago
      First of all, he didn't call him racist. When you start a comment with "well off white guy", you are indicating the person is a racist since they are ignoring problems of their fellow humans because of the person's race. If you substitute any other race in that statement, people would find it to be an accusation of racism. I suppose there is another interpretation of that line, but I am trying very hard to be charitable to posters (I do fail quite a bit). pointing out that for some reason long-standing problems suddenly seem to get a lot more attention once they start negatively affecting white people is not promoting hate from the article: ''It's called an ERAD, or Electronic Recovery and Access to Data machine, and state police began using 16 of them last month.'' I would submit his current problem is not long standing since it started last month. Also, we do not know his history of speaking out about civil forfeiture. Why, the incident with his wife could have been a "shutup" warning from the police. I said I provided a piece of data, and I have not really had time to look at the context. As to the second half, pointing out some issue is racial and the participant only started noticing because of their race is informing your reader that you believe that person to be racist. it is calling attention to racism Which implies that a belief that someone is being racist. Thus calling him a racist as he is the only protagonist mentioned. You know, I grew up in the grey between two different groups, and I sometime wish I could have been raised in a suburb or had a little more blood to qualify as the other group. Being able to say "I am..." in a clear voice is an amazing powerful thing. I've gotten to see what absolute shits groups going too far can be on each other when one believes they can say and do things with minimum risk. Assumptions about people based on their race are just wrong. Judge a person by their word and deed with a kind eye and hopeful heart. I fail at this quite a lot, but I think I'm ok with what I wrote. // as a side note, I love hnreplies and if I had cash I would suggest adding a blackout time feature
      - deciplex 10y ago
        The fact remains he did not call him racist, whatever you believe he implied. For someone who claims to try hard at being charitable, I think you should take that into consideration. At the very worst if dsfyu404ed is calling Kyle Loveless a racist, I would have to argue that this particular instance of it is borne of ignorance as opposed to malice, which is an important distinction especially for your claim that he is spreading hate. Pointing out racism borne truly of ignorance is not promoting hate, even if you're wrong on the claim. Claiming a person is racist out of malice is (rightly or wrongly). If someone (not a minority) is ill-informed about an issue that disproportionately affects minorities, to the point that they believe the issue is not so serious, and only when personally confronted with the effects do they take on a more fully-informed opinion and speak out about the injustice of it, I don't think you necessarily have to consider that person a racist, even if you think their behavior is a result of bias. And, while dsfyu404ed certainly expressed frustration with this state of affairs (as I believe anyone should), that still does not rise to the level of actually calling a person a racist. This need not apply only to race - it can also be rich people not caring about poor people problems, or men not caring about womens' issues, and so on. For another example look at the opioid epidemic in the US now, compared to crack hysteria in the 80s. Suddenly drug addicts are victims of circumstance, unfairly targeted by unjust or antiquated laws, it's the drug companies' fault for pushing these treatments to doctors, etc. etc. Whereas in the 80s crack dealers were going to infiltrate your nice suburban community and turn your daughters into whores and your sons into foot soldiers in their gang wars, or whatever the hell. And it just so happens that the opioid epidemic is particularly bad among white communities now. However, that doesn't mean that everyone who is concerned about the opioid epidemic now, yet took a different view of the crack epidemic back in the day, is necessarily a racist in the usual sense. It could be they are ignorant of their bias, and lack introspection.
  - mortenlarsen 10y ago
    I read "well off white guy" as implying privilege. I am not sure that is the same as accusing someone of being a racist. The benefits of that privilege can help make your life easier, whether you asked for the privilege or not. And also regardless off whether you actively or consciously try to benefit from said privilege. I guess it does at least affect the way you experience life and the world around you. Note: I am from Denmark and maybe I have a different perspective, even though racism is a problem here as well, but maybe in a different way. I was having an internal debate with myself about whether to jump in on this conversation just because it is a topic that can cause a lot of controversy. But I decided that self censorship, is a bad thing for society as a whole in the long run.

linkregister 10y ago

Thanks for the added context!

protomyth 10y ago
I'm not sure I provided any real context. It is data, but I have no real clue what it means. Thanks though.

dsfyu404ed 10y ago

Or a well off white guy had to deal with the police in a negative context for the first time in his life and that changed his opinion of them and the power they do or don't deserve

protomyth 10y ago
I think calling someone racist just because of their skin color and economic position is wrong and adds to the level of hate in society.
- deciplex 10y ago
  First of all, he didn't call him racist. Secondly, pointing out that for some reason long-standing problems suddenly seem to get a lot more attention once they start negatively affecting white people is not promoting hate - it is calling attention to racism.
  - protomyth 10y ago
    First of all, he didn't call him racist. When you start a comment with "well off white guy", you are indicating the person is a racist since they are ignoring problems of their fellow humans because of the person's race. If you substitute any other race in that statement, people would find it to be an accusation of racism. I suppose there is another interpretation of that line, but I am trying very hard to be charitable to posters (I do fail quite a bit). pointing out that for some reason long-standing problems suddenly seem to get a lot more attention once they start negatively affecting white people is not promoting hate from the article: ''It's called an ERAD, or Electronic Recovery and Access to Data machine, and state police began using 16 of them last month.'' I would submit his current problem is not long standing since it started last month. Also, we do not know his history of speaking out about civil forfeiture. Why, the incident with his wife could have been a "shutup" warning from the police. I said I provided a piece of data, and I have not really had time to look at the context. As to the second half, pointing out some issue is racial and the participant only started noticing because of their race is informing your reader that you believe that person to be racist. it is calling attention to racism Which implies that a belief that someone is being racist. Thus calling him a racist as he is the only protagonist mentioned. You know, I grew up in the grey between two different groups, and I sometime wish I could have been raised in a suburb or had a little more blood to qualify as the other group. Being able to say "I am..." in a clear voice is an amazing powerful thing. I've gotten to see what absolute shits groups going too far can be on each other when one believes they can say and do things with minimum risk. Assumptions about people based on their race are just wrong. Judge a person by their word and deed with a kind eye and hopeful heart. I fail at this quite a lot, but I think I'm ok with what I wrote. // as a side note, I love hnreplies and if I had cash I would suggest adding a blackout time feature
    - deciplex 10y ago
      The fact remains he did not call him racist, whatever you believe he implied. For someone who claims to try hard at being charitable, I think you should take that into consideration. At the very worst if dsfyu404ed is calling Kyle Loveless a racist, I would have to argue that this particular instance of it is borne of ignorance as opposed to malice, which is an important distinction especially for your claim that he is spreading hate. Pointing out racism borne truly of ignorance is not promoting hate, even if you're wrong on the claim. Claiming a person is racist out of malice is (rightly or wrongly). If someone (not a minority) is ill-informed about an issue that disproportionately affects minorities, to the point that they believe the issue is not so serious, and only when personally confronted with the effects do they take on a more fully-informed opinion and speak out about the injustice of it, I don't think you necessarily have to consider that person a racist, even if you think their behavior is a result of bias. And, while dsfyu404ed certainly expressed frustration with this state of affairs (as I believe anyone should), that still does not rise to the level of actually calling a person a racist. This need not apply only to race - it can also be rich people not caring about poor people problems, or men not caring about womens' issues, and so on. For another example look at the opioid epidemic in the US now, compared to crack hysteria in the 80s. Suddenly drug addicts are victims of circumstance, unfairly targeted by unjust or antiquated laws, it's the drug companies' fault for pushing these treatments to doctors, etc. etc. Whereas in the 80s crack dealers were going to infiltrate your nice suburban community and turn your daughters into whores and your sons into foot soldiers in their gang wars, or whatever the hell. And it just so happens that the opioid epidemic is particularly bad among white communities now. However, that doesn't mean that everyone who is concerned about the opioid epidemic now, yet took a different view of the crack epidemic back in the day, is necessarily a racist in the usual sense. It could be they are ignorant of their bias, and lack introspection.
- mortenlarsen 10y ago
  I read "well off white guy" as implying privilege. I am not sure that is the same as accusing someone of being a racist. The benefits of that privilege can help make your life easier, whether you asked for the privilege or not. And also regardless off whether you actively or consciously try to benefit from said privilege. I guess it does at least affect the way you experience life and the world around you. Note: I am from Denmark and maybe I have a different perspective, even though racism is a problem here as well, but maybe in a different way. I was having an internal debate with myself about whether to jump in on this conversation just because it is a topic that can cause a lot of controversy. But I decided that self censorship, is a bad thing for society as a whole in the long run.