4 ms·

Even so... Setting traps and then trying to blame others for falling into them? Does that sound like the behavior of a trustworthy and admirable person?

by Retra 7y ago

manfredo 7y ago
I think you're missing the point. Who knows what Notch was trying to accomplish by saying "it's okay to be White". For all we know he saw people taking offense to the phrase, and was perturbed by people evidently claiming that it is not okay to be White (the link you provided included responses to the phrase that included calls for "white genocide") and wanted to emphasize his own view that being white is not something bad. If you want to portray Notch as some kind of white supremacist aligned person, then the onus is on you to prove it. The likelihood that he is part of the overwhelming majority of people that don't really care about 4chan and other obscure internet subcultures is significantly greater. The point remains, the overwhelming majority of people will not take offense to the phrase "it's okay to be White" and will be perturbed by the people who do take offense to this phrase.
- Retra 7y ago
  Out of context, "it's ok to be white" is not a disagreement with the phrase "it is not ok to be white", it is a disagreement with the phrase "it is ok to be non-white." The overwhelming majority of people both agree with the latter and find the former to be irrational and obscene. If he's going to comment on something so divisive, he'd better add something to the discussion beyond additional ambiguity, or else he's just fanning flames and race baiting. > [He] wanted to emphasize his own view that being white is not something bad. Obviously. Perhaps emphasizing that view in this context does more harm than good? Is that possible? Perhaps when someone says something obscene and stupid, you don't pile on with additional obscene and stupid responses?
  - manfredo 7y ago
    > Out of context, "it's ok to be white" is not a disagreement with the phrase "it is not ok to be white", it is a disagreement with the phrase "it is ok to be non-white." How do you interpret "it's okay to be X" to "it's not okay to be non-X"?. When somebody says "it's okay the be gay" they're actually saying it's not okay to be straight? This line of reasoning doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. In my view the phrase "it's okay to be White" means exactly what is says: that it's okay to be White. It's totally fine to say "it's okay to be White and it's okay to be {Asian, Black, Latino, etc.}". > Obviously. Perhaps emphasizing that view in this context does more harm than dood? Is that possible? Perhaps when someone says something obscene and stupid, you don't pile on with additional obscene and stupid responses? But there's nothing obscene or stupid about saying "it's okay to be White" or "it's okay to be gay" or "it's okay to be X" (at least as long as X isn't something illegal or otherwise objectively harmful). What's stupid are the people getting riled up about the phrase "it's okay to be White". It's needless outrage that fuels resentment. The fact that it got started by 4chan makes it even worse. The people that insist on taking offense are fostering needless outrage and they're being played by 4chan. I'm particularly confused at why you persist in trying to condemn the phrase when you are fully aware that 4chan intended for people to condemn the phrase and thus portray themselves as harboring negativity towards whites. Why are you doing exactly what 4chan wants you to do? The article you posted even advises against the bevhavior you're engaging in: > Lundberg’s expert suggestion is not to reject the phrase. “I think that the best response is to deny them the pleasure of the fight—of course it is ok to be white: now how can we make it ok to be a person of any color?”
    - SimbaOnSteroids 7y ago
      It's like saying white lives matter or blue lives matter, yeah, duh, no segment of society that wields power has ever questioned that. When you say one of those phrases you're being obtuse and just distracting from a conversation that needs to be had. At which point I've got to assume you've got nefarious reasons for being obtuse.
      - manfredo 7y ago
        > It's like saying white lives matter or blue lives matter, yeah, duh, no segment of society that wields power has ever questioned that. This is evidently not correct, since a significant portion of the population is offended by the phrase "it's okay to be white". If someone is being obtuse in this conversion, I'm going to go with the people that insist that no segment of society thinks that it isn't okay to be white while simultaneously denigrating the people who say "it's okay to be white". What on Earth do people hope to achieve by condemning the people who say "it's okay to be White"? I get that a segment of the population interprets statements about a specific group as implying that the statement doesn't apply to other groups (e.g. people saying "Black Live Matter" is racist because it implies that only Black lives matter), but it should be plainly obvious to see why objecting to the phrase "it's okay to be white" is not a good idea. Apparently this is the work of 4chan as a means of duping people into making anti-white statements. If so, then the trolls have had a resounding success: they even managed to dupe a significant portion of HN commenters.
        Retra 7y ago
        It is ok to be white, it is just not something that needs to be said, and derails the discussion from things that do need to be said.
        manfredo 7y ago
        > It is ok to be white Then why are we taking offense to the phrase? Worse yet, why are we taking offense to the phrase despite knowing that the alt-right wants us to take offense to the phrase because most onlookers will see it as anti-white (which is a reasonable conclusion, for the overwhelming majority of people that don't follow internet culture).
  - 0815test 7y ago
    > Out of context, "it's ok to be white" is not a disagreement with the phrase "it is not ok to be white", it is a disagreement with the phrase "it is ok to be non-white." This is the exact same argument, almost word-for-word as saying that the phrase "Black Lives Matter" disparages non-Black lives by supposedly implying that they "don't" Matter. And it's clearly wrong, in both cases. Contrary to popular misconception, Exceptio probat regulam de rebus non exceptis is not a generally-applicable principle of English semantics.
    - Retra 7y ago
      You're assuming the language is inherently symmetrical by focusing on the technical meaning rather than the meaning derived from usage. "Black Lives Matter" is a slogan. It means "Black lives also matter." If someone wanted to respond to that by saying "White Lives Matter", they would be egregiously missing the point, no? Creating conflict from something that they presumably don't disagree with? And why would anybody do that?

Even so... Setting traps and then trying to blame others for falling into them? Does that sound like the behavior of a trustworthy and admirable person?

by Retra 7y ago

Even so... Setting traps and then trying to blame others for falling into them? Does that sound like the behavior of a trustworthy and admirable person?

manfredo 7y ago

I think you're missing the point. Who knows what Notch was trying to accomplish by saying "it's okay to be White". For all we know he saw people taking offense to the phrase, and was perturbed by people evidently claiming that it is not okay to be White (the link you provided included responses to the phrase that included calls for "white genocide") and wanted to emphasize his own view that being white is not something bad. If you want to portray Notch as some kind of white supremacist aligned person, then the onus is on you to prove it. The likelihood that he is part of the overwhelming majority of people that don't really care about 4chan and other obscure internet subcultures is significantly greater. The point remains, the overwhelming majority of people will not take offense to the phrase "it's okay to be White" and will be perturbed by the people who do take offense to this phrase.

Retra 7y ago
Out of context, "it's ok to be white" is not a disagreement with the phrase "it is not ok to be white", it is a disagreement with the phrase "it is ok to be non-white." The overwhelming majority of people both agree with the latter and find the former to be irrational and obscene. If he's going to comment on something so divisive, he'd better add something to the discussion beyond additional ambiguity, or else he's just fanning flames and race baiting. > [He] wanted to emphasize his own view that being white is not something bad. Obviously. Perhaps emphasizing that view in this context does more harm than good? Is that possible? Perhaps when someone says something obscene and stupid, you don't pile on with additional obscene and stupid responses?
- manfredo 7y ago
  > Out of context, "it's ok to be white" is not a disagreement with the phrase "it is not ok to be white", it is a disagreement with the phrase "it is ok to be non-white." How do you interpret "it's okay to be X" to "it's not okay to be non-X"?. When somebody says "it's okay the be gay" they're actually saying it's not okay to be straight? This line of reasoning doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny. In my view the phrase "it's okay to be White" means exactly what is says: that it's okay to be White. It's totally fine to say "it's okay to be White and it's okay to be {Asian, Black, Latino, etc.}". > Obviously. Perhaps emphasizing that view in this context does more harm than dood? Is that possible? Perhaps when someone says something obscene and stupid, you don't pile on with additional obscene and stupid responses? But there's nothing obscene or stupid about saying "it's okay to be White" or "it's okay to be gay" or "it's okay to be X" (at least as long as X isn't something illegal or otherwise objectively harmful). What's stupid are the people getting riled up about the phrase "it's okay to be White". It's needless outrage that fuels resentment. The fact that it got started by 4chan makes it even worse. The people that insist on taking offense are fostering needless outrage and they're being played by 4chan. I'm particularly confused at why you persist in trying to condemn the phrase when you are fully aware that 4chan intended for people to condemn the phrase and thus portray themselves as harboring negativity towards whites. Why are you doing exactly what 4chan wants you to do? The article you posted even advises against the bevhavior you're engaging in: > Lundberg’s expert suggestion is not to reject the phrase. “I think that the best response is to deny them the pleasure of the fight—of course it is ok to be white: now how can we make it ok to be a person of any color?”
  - SimbaOnSteroids 7y ago
    It's like saying white lives matter or blue lives matter, yeah, duh, no segment of society that wields power has ever questioned that. When you say one of those phrases you're being obtuse and just distracting from a conversation that needs to be had. At which point I've got to assume you've got nefarious reasons for being obtuse.
    - manfredo 7y ago
      > It's like saying white lives matter or blue lives matter, yeah, duh, no segment of society that wields power has ever questioned that. This is evidently not correct, since a significant portion of the population is offended by the phrase "it's okay to be white". If someone is being obtuse in this conversion, I'm going to go with the people that insist that no segment of society thinks that it isn't okay to be white while simultaneously denigrating the people who say "it's okay to be white". What on Earth do people hope to achieve by condemning the people who say "it's okay to be White"? I get that a segment of the population interprets statements about a specific group as implying that the statement doesn't apply to other groups (e.g. people saying "Black Live Matter" is racist because it implies that only Black lives matter), but it should be plainly obvious to see why objecting to the phrase "it's okay to be white" is not a good idea. Apparently this is the work of 4chan as a means of duping people into making anti-white statements. If so, then the trolls have had a resounding success: they even managed to dupe a significant portion of HN commenters.
      - Retra 7y ago
        It is ok to be white, it is just not something that needs to be said, and derails the discussion from things that do need to be said.
        manfredo 7y ago
        > It is ok to be white Then why are we taking offense to the phrase? Worse yet, why are we taking offense to the phrase despite knowing that the alt-right wants us to take offense to the phrase because most onlookers will see it as anti-white (which is a reasonable conclusion, for the overwhelming majority of people that don't follow internet culture).
- 0815test 7y ago
  > Out of context, "it's ok to be white" is not a disagreement with the phrase "it is not ok to be white", it is a disagreement with the phrase "it is ok to be non-white." This is the exact same argument, almost word-for-word as saying that the phrase "Black Lives Matter" disparages non-Black lives by supposedly implying that they "don't" Matter. And it's clearly wrong, in both cases. Contrary to popular misconception, Exceptio probat regulam de rebus non exceptis is not a generally-applicable principle of English semantics.
  - Retra 7y ago
    You're assuming the language is inherently symmetrical by focusing on the technical meaning rather than the meaning derived from usage. "Black Lives Matter" is a slogan. It means "Black lives also matter." If someone wanted to respond to that by saying "White Lives Matter", they would be egregiously missing the point, no? Creating conflict from something that they presumably don't disagree with? And why would anybody do that?