4 ms·

Seems like an odd place to put this comment. Nobody's talking about Filipino vets on this sub-thread, much less how they should feel or who is bad or wrong or s

Seems like an odd place to put this comment. Nobody's talking about Filipino vets on this sub-thread, much less how they should feel or who is bad or wrong or should be mad. Am I missing subtext?

darawk 6y ago
It seems to me that the thrust of this sub-thread is a debate over narratives. One narrative is "America is basically good, but it has serious problems, and we're working on fixing them". Another narrative is "America is basically bad, we should burn it to the ground and start over". Neither of these narratives are right or wrong, because all narratives are false. But I think one of them is more useful than the other.
- cookie_monsta 6y ago
  And can I argue against your strawman as well, or will that disrupt your momentum? This subthread started with "Well, ACTUALLY, if you look at the statistics, state sponsored/condoned violence against black people in the US barely exists and all this kerfuffle is an overreaction" That's not admitting a serious problem, and calling it out as revisionist BS is not saying we should burn the country to the ground.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    > This subthread started with > If you can't trust the society to not murder you, why would you refrain from tearing down anything you don't like?
    - cookie_monsta 6y ago
      Oh, OK - I misspoke. It was the sub-subthread that started off cherrypicking statistics. But if we're going to be pedantic it's worth noting that tearing down the things that you don't like is selective whereas burning everything to the ground is much more indiscriminate and there's a big difference there. To put it another way, calling for the razing of America is totally unreasonable. But such calls are in actual fact extremely uncommon.
      - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
        > cherrypicking statistics. Using statistics directly responsive to the claim is cherrypicking? It seems like your issue is with the claim, not the statistics. Being murdered by the police is not a central example of the problems of black people and holding it up as such will only cause people to address what you claim is the problem rather than what the actual problems are. > But if we're going to be pedantic it's worth noting that tearing down the things that you don't like is selective whereas burning everything to the ground is much more indiscriminate and there's a big difference there. When "things you don't like" consists of the likes of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, that's pretty hard to distinguish from burning the American system to the ground.
        cookie_monsta 6y ago
        That's your conception of your country? I'm sorry to have to break this to you, but they're all dead now. All of the slave owners and all of the slaves are dead. Their children are dead. Their children's children are dead. It has been seven generations. Or are we cherrypicking the past for things that mean something today as well?
        AnthonyMouse 6y ago
        Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson is dead. Independence is not. If you want to take down a statue of a Jefferson, go take down a statue of Jefferson Davis. If you can find one.
        cookie_monsta 6y ago
        > Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson is dead. Independence is not. So, even though his children are dead and their children are dead, it's almost as if what he did in his life had ramifications through the ages and still shapes society today. I'd never considered that possibility. I wonder if there are other situations where that applies?

Seems like an odd place to put this comment. Nobody's talking about Filipino vets on this sub-thread, much less how they should feel or who is bad or wrong or should be mad. Am I missing subtext?

darawk 6y ago

It seems to me that the thrust of this sub-thread is a debate over narratives. One narrative is "America is basically good, but it has serious problems, and we're working on fixing them". Another narrative is "America is basically bad, we should burn it to the ground and start over". Neither of these narratives are right or wrong, because all narratives are false. But I think one of them is more useful than the other.

cookie_monsta 6y ago
And can I argue against your strawman as well, or will that disrupt your momentum? This subthread started with "Well, ACTUALLY, if you look at the statistics, state sponsored/condoned violence against black people in the US barely exists and all this kerfuffle is an overreaction" That's not admitting a serious problem, and calling it out as revisionist BS is not saying we should burn the country to the ground.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > This subthread started with > If you can't trust the society to not murder you, why would you refrain from tearing down anything you don't like?
  - cookie_monsta 6y ago
    Oh, OK - I misspoke. It was the sub-subthread that started off cherrypicking statistics. But if we're going to be pedantic it's worth noting that tearing down the things that you don't like is selective whereas burning everything to the ground is much more indiscriminate and there's a big difference there. To put it another way, calling for the razing of America is totally unreasonable. But such calls are in actual fact extremely uncommon.
    - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
      > cherrypicking statistics. Using statistics directly responsive to the claim is cherrypicking? It seems like your issue is with the claim, not the statistics. Being murdered by the police is not a central example of the problems of black people and holding it up as such will only cause people to address what you claim is the problem rather than what the actual problems are. > But if we're going to be pedantic it's worth noting that tearing down the things that you don't like is selective whereas burning everything to the ground is much more indiscriminate and there's a big difference there. When "things you don't like" consists of the likes of Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, that's pretty hard to distinguish from burning the American system to the ground.
      - cookie_monsta 6y ago
        That's your conception of your country? I'm sorry to have to break this to you, but they're all dead now. All of the slave owners and all of the slaves are dead. Their children are dead. Their children's children are dead. It has been seven generations. Or are we cherrypicking the past for things that mean something today as well?
        AnthonyMouse 6y ago
        Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson is dead. Independence is not. If you want to take down a statue of a Jefferson, go take down a statue of Jefferson Davis. If you can find one.
        cookie_monsta 6y ago
        > Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. Thomas Jefferson is dead. Independence is not. So, even though his children are dead and their children are dead, it's almost as if what he did in his life had ramifications through the ages and still shapes society today. I'd never considered that possibility. I wonder if there are other situations where that applies?