2 ms·

Just to be clear, the article cites mlk's quote not as "not woke enough" but rather as a commonly invoked cover for ignoring inequality. Often people employ it

Just to be clear, the article cites mlk's quote not as "not woke enough" but rather as a commonly invoked cover for ignoring inequality. Often people employ it as a way to dismiss discussion of race and institutional inequality. People are tired of that. MLK's dream remains unfulfilled, so using it as some representation of an imaginary Utopia of modern America is lazy. I'm hoping you saw that.

monoideism 7y ago
There are folks who see very clearly that MLK's dream remains unfulfilled, who want it to be fulfilled, and yet who still oppose making hiring decisions on the basis on someone's race or gender. Those are not mutually exclusive.
mindslight 7y ago
> MLK's dream remains unfulfilled, so using it as some representation of an imaginary Utopia of modern America is lazy This is an utter straw man. MLK's quote isn't being stated as some insistence of how things currently are, but rather as a model of how one should treat others. Be the change you want to see, and all that. "Racism" is not simply some directional stream of abuse, but rather the general promotion of superficial group characteristics over actual individuals. The political propagandists of both teams are stoking the fires of racism to distract from the ruling class's general corruption and looting, and it's fucking working.
- nkozyra 7y ago
  You completely misread my comment. MLKs quote is specifically an ideal; something he's hopeful for. It's invoked today very often to dismiss or minimize the impact of race in any discussion, as if the ideal has been realized. The concept of everyone treated as equal would have more merit were the effects of institutional racism not very, very pertinent in 2020. You can see the absurdity of this when people try to push away any discussion of race by telling you that slavery ended 130+ years ago, as if the cascading effects haven't impacted the lives of most people of color through today.
  - mindslight 7y ago
    I do not think I misread your comment: > the article cites mlk's quote ... as a commonly invoked cover for ignoring inequality The article does not. The article cites the quote as an example that will fail the political test. You are the one filling in motives.
    - nkozyra 7y ago
      > The article cites the quote as an example that will fail the political test. Untrue! It cites using/invoking the quote as one that will fail the political test. Which is precisely the phenomenon I described.
      - mindslight 7y ago
        You're the one dragging this strawman "phenomenon" into the mix. But sure, I am willing to believe that the administrators of the test are thinking the same thing. While this may explain their actions, it does not justify them. The overall result is still that an anti-racist quote is being condemned, because it contradicts the narrative desired by the political test.
        nkozyra 7y ago
        Again, untrue. If I invoke some random quote in a scenario that is nonsensical or lacks context and you take umbrage, you are not condemning the original quote, but my use/abuse of it. > The overall result is still that an anti-racist quote is being condemned, because it contradicts the narrative desired by the political test. Nope, the article makes this clear: > Don't quote Martin Luther King, on judgement by content of character rather than color of skin. It is, again, the use or misuse of the quote and that's what's condemned, not the original quote.
        mindslight 7y ago
        Obviously the administrators of the test are not condemning MLK himself, nor what he said outright. If they were asked by someone of appropriate standing, they would most certainly agree with the quote itself. So the distinction of "use" is redundant - where I've said they've condemned the quote, I mean they've condemned usage of it. > Don't quote Martin Luther King, on judgement by content of character rather than color of skin. A good faith reading of the original article includes the implication that use of said quote is part of a reasonable argument that contradicts the desired political dogma. Presumably you do agree that these exist?

monoideism 7y ago

There are folks who see very clearly that MLK's dream remains unfulfilled, who want it to be fulfilled, and yet who still oppose making hiring decisions on the basis on someone's race or gender. Those are not mutually exclusive.

mindslight 7y ago

> MLK's dream remains unfulfilled, so using it as some representation of an imaginary Utopia of modern America is lazy This is an utter straw man. MLK's quote isn't being stated as some insistence of how things currently are, but rather as a model of how one should treat others. Be the change you want to see, and all that. "Racism" is not simply some directional stream of abuse, but rather the general promotion of superficial group characteristics over actual individuals. The political propagandists of both teams are stoking the fires of racism to distract from the ruling class's general corruption and looting, and it's fucking working.

nkozyra 7y ago
You completely misread my comment. MLKs quote is specifically an ideal; something he's hopeful for. It's invoked today very often to dismiss or minimize the impact of race in any discussion, as if the ideal has been realized. The concept of everyone treated as equal would have more merit were the effects of institutional racism not very, very pertinent in 2020. You can see the absurdity of this when people try to push away any discussion of race by telling you that slavery ended 130+ years ago, as if the cascading effects haven't impacted the lives of most people of color through today.
- mindslight 7y ago
  I do not think I misread your comment: > the article cites mlk's quote ... as a commonly invoked cover for ignoring inequality The article does not. The article cites the quote as an example that will fail the political test. You are the one filling in motives.
  - nkozyra 7y ago
    > The article cites the quote as an example that will fail the political test. Untrue! It cites using/invoking the quote as one that will fail the political test. Which is precisely the phenomenon I described.
    - mindslight 7y ago
      You're the one dragging this strawman "phenomenon" into the mix. But sure, I am willing to believe that the administrators of the test are thinking the same thing. While this may explain their actions, it does not justify them. The overall result is still that an anti-racist quote is being condemned, because it contradicts the narrative desired by the political test.
      - nkozyra 7y ago
        Again, untrue. If I invoke some random quote in a scenario that is nonsensical or lacks context and you take umbrage, you are not condemning the original quote, but my use/abuse of it. > The overall result is still that an anti-racist quote is being condemned, because it contradicts the narrative desired by the political test. Nope, the article makes this clear: > Don't quote Martin Luther King, on judgement by content of character rather than color of skin. It is, again, the use or misuse of the quote and that's what's condemned, not the original quote.
        mindslight 7y ago
        Obviously the administrators of the test are not condemning MLK himself, nor what he said outright. If they were asked by someone of appropriate standing, they would most certainly agree with the quote itself. So the distinction of "use" is redundant - where I've said they've condemned the quote, I mean they've condemned usage of it. > Don't quote Martin Luther King, on judgement by content of character rather than color of skin. A good faith reading of the original article includes the implication that use of said quote is part of a reasonable argument that contradicts the desired political dogma. Presumably you do agree that these exist?