7 ms·

A classic. The part when the agitator-clown-carnival barker yells "Folks I'm just an average American but I'm an American American! {{insert-ad-libbed-racist-t

A classic. The part when the agitator-clown-carnival barker yells "Folks I'm just an average American but I'm an American American! {{insert-ad-libbed-racist-tirade}}". Good thing we defeated nonsense like this long ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGAqYNFQdZ4&feature=youtu.be&t=220 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGAqYNFQdZ4&feature=youtu.be...

cxr 6y ago
Agitators and racists are still around today.
- microcolonel 6y ago
  > Agitators and racists are still around today. Hiding behind “anti-racism” and “social justice”.
  - verroq 6y ago
    Affirmative action is racism. It’s the only institutional racism that still exists today.
    - microcolonel 6y ago
      California legislators noticed this, and instead of following their Constitution and concluding that it's immoral to discriminate, they will be voting to amend it to enable the state to discriminate on the basis of race, calling it an "affirmative action" amendment. Kendi's getting his wish I guess. “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” is once again in the Democratic party's platform, at least in California.
      - verroq 6y ago
        Not conforming to HN groupthink is grounds for instant downvoting apparently. I dare say I have too much karma to give.
        microcolonel 6y ago
        Such is the price of confronting people with the truth. You only need a few hundred karma to avoid being completely unpersoned on HN, so a few thousand will buy you lots of truth.
        notassigned 6y ago
        I use the mobile version called 'Materialistic', it doesn't show comment score which is probably a good thing. Also only has a vote up button.
        dang 6y ago
        It's actually not cool that some third-party apps are modifying the shared space of the community. I've noticed that even some apps that don't do any writes, just display HN data, are significantly breaking the intentions of the site. For example, they'll display dead comments as if they were ordinary comments—and then we get outraged emails from users who ran across $awful-thing in $app and think we condone it. Often they assume that $app is an official HN client, or that it just is HN. Lord knows how much such outrage is circulating on Twitter as well—I can't bear to look. I'm not sure what to do about this, but there are increasing signs that it's a problem. HN is what it is because it has a specific, opinionated, highly intentional design. It's fine to disagree with that design—plenty of users do. Probably every user does in one way or another. What's not fine is for third party clients to break this design in a way that alters the community itself. There's also the fact that some apps are now charging money, which feels to me like a violation of HN's spirit, which has always been to be completely free. I like to say that the currency of HN is curiosity, not money, and we'd like to keep it that way. We may have to produce some sort of standards for HN apps, which is a drag because that sort of bureaucrat is the last thing that any of us is interested in being.
        Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        I don’t love it, but in the short term, an easy solution would be to not include dead comments in the api. They are dead, after all.
    - fouric 6y ago
      Picking up my copy of Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary and looking up "racism", I see "1. a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race" (which isn't relevant to the point being made) and "2. racial prejudice or discrimination" which perfectly describes affirmative action - people of a particular race being discriminated against because of their race. This is literally textbook racism. I'm really curious what arguments the downvoters of the parent post have to say and why they didn't say them.
      - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
        I firmly believe that race is a primary determinant of some human traits and capacities, such as capacity to spend half a day in the sun without getting burnt. Look, like any religion, both racism and racial equality statements require careful interpretation by certified personnel. Applying common sense will inevitably lead to blasphemy and the producer of the heresy will be burnt at the stake.
      - p49k 6y ago
        You and others are providing a willfully ignorant and overly simplistic presentation of what affirmative action is. Your question is in bad faith. I don’t agree with a lot of political opinions of others but I don’t try to pretend like I don’t understand where they are coming from. Requiring someone to explain something you already know is how you would keep people eternally occupied with meaningless work, not what you would do to have a fruitful conversation. What you’re doing here is one reason why no one ever makes any progress these days in resolving their differences.
        AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
        In my extremely humble opinion this discussion would benefit if parent's question was given a benefit of doubt accompanied with a good, substantiated, logical answer. Otherwise you are preaching to the choir, my friend.
        User23 6y ago
    - hobs 6y ago
      The current top of the executive branch made it clear that he equates black lives matter with white supremacists. Miller and Bannon have gone ridiculously out of their way (and gotten thrown out in the courts over and over) to create explicitly racist policies. They want to spend trillions to build an ineffectual wall to keep out the "other" - and you say that "the only institutional racism is affirmative action" ... that's what I would expect to hear from a white middle class person whose not experienced any hardship due to their race... ever?
      - verroq 6y ago
        How does any of what you claim, even if true, make affirmative action not racist? Or do you intend to engage in whataboutism? Also securing a country’s border is not racist.
      - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
        You may say that I'm nitpicking on words, but could you please give an example of an official policy that explicitly mentions race?
  - dang 6y ago
    You were banned for this kind of thing before. Then we saw that your posts had mostly improved, and we unbanned you. If you keep dumping flamebait into HN threads, we are going to ban you again. Actually I've already had to warn you about this several times. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- JKCalhoun 6y ago
  Whoosh?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - cxr 6y ago
    Nope. The comment I responded to was a low-quality comment, and it irked me that it was at the top. I repeated the same obvious point, only stripped of the sarcasm to show that without the sarcasm, it's a pretty bare statement. If you think that my restatement is facile, then you must be able to recognize that the previous attempt at the same point is, too. Its payload differs only in the sarcasm attached to it, and there's no value in the sarcasm itself.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
IncRnd 6y ago
It wasn't a racist tirade. It was a tirade against everyone who the fictional person felt was different from him as a method of identifying who he believed to be taking away his opportunities - just by those people existing. See the consequent side-conversation here, https://youtu.be/vGAqYNFQdZ4?t=319 https://youtu.be/vGAqYNFQdZ4?t=319. The crowd rejected him, the more he spoke. Today's news is full of exactly the same attitude displayed by this person. Why are people not rejecting this today?
- jachee 6y ago
  Because the propaganda machine serves the suckers' self-centric worldview first and foremost, "unites" them, galvanizes them, and exploits their selfishness and greed to weaponize them against "the other". That's what is so insidious about it, and the only real defense for those of us who are "the other" is deplatforming and throwing a wrench into the propaganda machine.
  - IncRnd 6y ago
    You are debunking something I didn't claim. Can you answer the question I posed, "Today's news is full of exactly the same attitude displayed by this person. Why are people not rejecting this today?"
    - jachee 6y ago
      Because the people with the same attitude as that guy are—mindboghlingly—in power. There are plenty of people who reject that rhetoric. That's what BLM is, as a currently-relevant, specific example. The problem is the aforementioned undermining and exploitation of selfish and self-serving attitudes and actions has led to an unreasonably large base on the other side, giving the illusion (at least to you) that nobody is rejecting it.
jeffbee 6y ago
Gee, it would be a real improvement if our modern racist clowns were articulate orators, instead of the drooling simpletons we have to put up with these days.
- anm89 6y ago
  Their guy got elected. What does that say about your team.

cxr 6y ago

Agitators and racists are still around today.

microcolonel 6y ago
> Agitators and racists are still around today. Hiding behind “anti-racism” and “social justice”.
- verroq 6y ago
  Affirmative action is racism. It’s the only institutional racism that still exists today.
  - microcolonel 6y ago
    California legislators noticed this, and instead of following their Constitution and concluding that it's immoral to discriminate, they will be voting to amend it to enable the state to discriminate on the basis of race, calling it an "affirmative action" amendment. Kendi's getting his wish I guess. “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever” is once again in the Democratic party's platform, at least in California.
    - verroq 6y ago
      Not conforming to HN groupthink is grounds for instant downvoting apparently. I dare say I have too much karma to give.
      - microcolonel 6y ago
        Such is the price of confronting people with the truth. You only need a few hundred karma to avoid being completely unpersoned on HN, so a few thousand will buy you lots of truth.
      - notassigned 6y ago
        I use the mobile version called 'Materialistic', it doesn't show comment score which is probably a good thing. Also only has a vote up button.
        dang 6y ago
        It's actually not cool that some third-party apps are modifying the shared space of the community. I've noticed that even some apps that don't do any writes, just display HN data, are significantly breaking the intentions of the site. For example, they'll display dead comments as if they were ordinary comments—and then we get outraged emails from users who ran across $awful-thing in $app and think we condone it. Often they assume that $app is an official HN client, or that it just is HN. Lord knows how much such outrage is circulating on Twitter as well—I can't bear to look. I'm not sure what to do about this, but there are increasing signs that it's a problem. HN is what it is because it has a specific, opinionated, highly intentional design. It's fine to disagree with that design—plenty of users do. Probably every user does in one way or another. What's not fine is for third party clients to break this design in a way that alters the community itself. There's also the fact that some apps are now charging money, which feels to me like a violation of HN's spirit, which has always been to be completely free. I like to say that the currency of HN is curiosity, not money, and we'd like to keep it that way. We may have to produce some sort of standards for HN apps, which is a drag because that sort of bureaucrat is the last thing that any of us is interested in being.
        Wowfunhappy 6y ago
        I don’t love it, but in the short term, an easy solution would be to not include dead comments in the api. They are dead, after all.
  - fouric 6y ago
    Picking up my copy of Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary and looking up "racism", I see "1. a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race" (which isn't relevant to the point being made) and "2. racial prejudice or discrimination" which perfectly describes affirmative action - people of a particular race being discriminated against because of their race. This is literally textbook racism. I'm really curious what arguments the downvoters of the parent post have to say and why they didn't say them.
    - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
      I firmly believe that race is a primary determinant of some human traits and capacities, such as capacity to spend half a day in the sun without getting burnt. Look, like any religion, both racism and racial equality statements require careful interpretation by certified personnel. Applying common sense will inevitably lead to blasphemy and the producer of the heresy will be burnt at the stake.
    - p49k 6y ago
      You and others are providing a willfully ignorant and overly simplistic presentation of what affirmative action is. Your question is in bad faith. I don’t agree with a lot of political opinions of others but I don’t try to pretend like I don’t understand where they are coming from. Requiring someone to explain something you already know is how you would keep people eternally occupied with meaningless work, not what you would do to have a fruitful conversation. What you’re doing here is one reason why no one ever makes any progress these days in resolving their differences.
      - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
        In my extremely humble opinion this discussion would benefit if parent's question was given a benefit of doubt accompanied with a good, substantiated, logical answer. Otherwise you are preaching to the choir, my friend.
      - User23 6y ago
  - hobs 6y ago
    The current top of the executive branch made it clear that he equates black lives matter with white supremacists. Miller and Bannon have gone ridiculously out of their way (and gotten thrown out in the courts over and over) to create explicitly racist policies. They want to spend trillions to build an ineffectual wall to keep out the "other" - and you say that "the only institutional racism is affirmative action" ... that's what I would expect to hear from a white middle class person whose not experienced any hardship due to their race... ever?
    - verroq 6y ago
      How does any of what you claim, even if true, make affirmative action not racist? Or do you intend to engage in whataboutism? Also securing a country’s border is not racist.
    - AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
      You may say that I'm nitpicking on words, but could you please give an example of an official policy that explicitly mentions race?
- dang 6y ago
  You were banned for this kind of thing before. Then we saw that your posts had mostly improved, and we unbanned you. If you keep dumping flamebait into HN threads, we are going to ban you again. Actually I've already had to warn you about this several times. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
JKCalhoun 6y ago
Whoosh?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- cxr 6y ago
  Nope. The comment I responded to was a low-quality comment, and it irked me that it was at the top. I repeated the same obvious point, only stripped of the sarcasm to show that without the sarcasm, it's a pretty bare statement. If you think that my restatement is facile, then you must be able to recognize that the previous attempt at the same point is, too. Its payload differs only in the sarcasm attached to it, and there's no value in the sarcasm itself.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]

IncRnd 6y ago

It wasn't a racist tirade. It was a tirade against everyone who the fictional person felt was different from him as a method of identifying who he believed to be taking away his opportunities - just by those people existing. See the consequent side-conversation here, https://youtu.be/vGAqYNFQdZ4?t=319 https://youtu.be/vGAqYNFQdZ4?t=319. The crowd rejected him, the more he spoke. Today's news is full of exactly the same attitude displayed by this person. Why are people not rejecting this today?

jachee 6y ago
Because the propaganda machine serves the suckers' self-centric worldview first and foremost, "unites" them, galvanizes them, and exploits their selfishness and greed to weaponize them against "the other". That's what is so insidious about it, and the only real defense for those of us who are "the other" is deplatforming and throwing a wrench into the propaganda machine.
- IncRnd 6y ago
  You are debunking something I didn't claim. Can you answer the question I posed, "Today's news is full of exactly the same attitude displayed by this person. Why are people not rejecting this today?"
  - jachee 6y ago
    Because the people with the same attitude as that guy are—mindboghlingly—in power. There are plenty of people who reject that rhetoric. That's what BLM is, as a currently-relevant, specific example. The problem is the aforementioned undermining and exploitation of selfish and self-serving attitudes and actions has led to an unreasonably large base on the other side, giving the illusion (at least to you) that nobody is rejecting it.

jeffbee 6y ago

Gee, it would be a real improvement if our modern racist clowns were articulate orators, instead of the drooling simpletons we have to put up with these days.

anm89 6y ago
Their guy got elected. What does that say about your team.