4 ms·

> Are you saying that no one on the left calls out particular racial groups and demonizes them? Again, that is why I mentioned phraseology versus intent. > Ar

> Are you saying that no one on the left calls out particular racial groups and demonizes them? Again, that is why I mentioned phraseology versus intent. > Are you saying that no one on the left calls out particular racial groups and demonizes them? And this is my point. I don't entirely agree with this statement. I believe the situation is more subtle as the Jeong case illustrates. Instead, it would be fairer to say that the further left you go (in the US), there is animosity towards conservatism and racism and some on the left believe that this conservatism is mainly supported by a certain segment of whites. I agree that sometimes an unfortunate phraseology is used by those that muddies the meaning.

stcredzero 8y ago
Instead, it would be fairer to say that the further left you go (in the US), there is animosity towards conservatism and racism Go far enough left, and what you'll see is there's animosity towards one kind of racism, combined with energetic forwarding of another kind of racism, plus other identitarian tribalist ideas. The above is then combined with nonsensical linguistic games denying the bigotry, claiming that there's some directional arrow based on inherent characteristics. I agree that sometimes an unfortunate phraseology is used by those that muddies the meaning. Political extremists on both the far left and far right are demonizing entire groups of people based on ethnic subcultural markers, skin color, and other hard to change characteristics. We know what that is, historically. We already have words and definitions for that sort of thing. Those definitions are universal and orthogonal from any particular identity. It's only in recent years that people have tried to sell the public nonsensical "unfortunate phraseology." "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength." It's the evil that disguises itself as good in the eyes of many that does the most damage.

stcredzero 8y ago

Instead, it would be fairer to say that the further left you go (in the US), there is animosity towards conservatism and racism Go far enough left, and what you'll see is there's animosity towards one kind of racism, combined with energetic forwarding of another kind of racism, plus other identitarian tribalist ideas. The above is then combined with nonsensical linguistic games denying the bigotry, claiming that there's some directional arrow based on inherent characteristics. I agree that sometimes an unfortunate phraseology is used by those that muddies the meaning. Political extremists on both the far left and far right are demonizing entire groups of people based on ethnic subcultural markers, skin color, and other hard to change characteristics. We know what that is, historically. We already have words and definitions for that sort of thing. Those definitions are universal and orthogonal from any particular identity. It's only in recent years that people have tried to sell the public nonsensical "unfortunate phraseology." "War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength." It's the evil that disguises itself as good in the eyes of many that does the most damage.