3 ms·

That everyone who voted for Trump is a white supremacist. I've seen that attitude quite a bit on this site in the days after the election, and I've seen journal

by dx87 6y ago

That everyone who voted for Trump is a white supremacist. I've seen that attitude quite a bit on this site in the days after the election, and I've seen journalists call minorities white supremacists because they didn't vote for Biden. Some people just refuse to believe that he's anything but a wannabe Hitler, and use that as an excuse to say that they have no reason to try and come together as a country.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
uoaei 6y ago
Intention matters less than material consequences. Consider the fact that this last year was the worst for hate crimes for at least a decade. If a whole group of people is propping up a leader who literally and almost exclusively enacts white supremacist policies, and uses white supremacist rhetoric/dogwhistles, what else could you call them?
- vokep 6y ago
  >a leader who literally and almost exclusively enacts white supremacist policies, and uses white supremacist rhetoric/dogwhistles This is where the rift is. This is not true. Yes, some could take that sort of interpretation of what he's saying, and that sort of interpretation being taken by lots of white supremacists regardless of intention, does mean something. But it doesn't mean much, at least, I don't see why we'd expect that to be any significant effect. Just to bring an example, at least, ime the most common "but he said.." claim. The "fine people on both sides" quote. Many misunderstand what he was actually saying there and actually what happened - the event started with a wide range of people on the right, a general conservative gathering seeming thing. It was organized by white supremacists, which lots attending did not realize until some time passed and they started getting uncomfortable and leaving, by the time people were chanting slurs and all, it went full on neo-nazi rally. Trump clearly did denounce that, and what happened that night, and was speaking to the normal people who had attended in the beginning and left later.
  - uoaei 6y ago
    The people in attendance have the personal responsibility to associate themselves and their actions with movements that reflect their beliefs. "Boo hoo, I didn't know the KKK was racist when I joined" is not a defense that folks will treat with any sympathy. Even if it wasn't their intention, they still messed up, and that onus remains on their head. Either way you look at it, those "fine people" are not fine -- they propped up white supremacists, culminating in the brazen murder of an innocent, non-violent counter-protestor and the random assault of numerous others. Even if they didn't know, their actions contributed to that, and they are to blame as are the outspoken racists. What you are saying is, "those people had the privilege to join that march and support those sentiments because they are not threatened by what the march explicitly represents." This is an inherently racist mode of interacting with the world, because it opens avenues for racist violence and oppression, and emboldens more outspoken racists to commit atrocities. Again, intention matters little when lives are at stake. Your argument enables the banality of evil to persist.

by dx87 6y ago

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

uoaei 6y ago

Intention matters less than material consequences. Consider the fact that this last year was the worst for hate crimes for at least a decade. If a whole group of people is propping up a leader who literally and almost exclusively enacts white supremacist policies, and uses white supremacist rhetoric/dogwhistles, what else could you call them?

vokep 6y ago
>a leader who literally and almost exclusively enacts white supremacist policies, and uses white supremacist rhetoric/dogwhistles This is where the rift is. This is not true. Yes, some could take that sort of interpretation of what he's saying, and that sort of interpretation being taken by lots of white supremacists regardless of intention, does mean something. But it doesn't mean much, at least, I don't see why we'd expect that to be any significant effect. Just to bring an example, at least, ime the most common "but he said.." claim. The "fine people on both sides" quote. Many misunderstand what he was actually saying there and actually what happened - the event started with a wide range of people on the right, a general conservative gathering seeming thing. It was organized by white supremacists, which lots attending did not realize until some time passed and they started getting uncomfortable and leaving, by the time people were chanting slurs and all, it went full on neo-nazi rally. Trump clearly did denounce that, and what happened that night, and was speaking to the normal people who had attended in the beginning and left later.
- uoaei 6y ago
  The people in attendance have the personal responsibility to associate themselves and their actions with movements that reflect their beliefs. "Boo hoo, I didn't know the KKK was racist when I joined" is not a defense that folks will treat with any sympathy. Even if it wasn't their intention, they still messed up, and that onus remains on their head. Either way you look at it, those "fine people" are not fine -- they propped up white supremacists, culminating in the brazen murder of an innocent, non-violent counter-protestor and the random assault of numerous others. Even if they didn't know, their actions contributed to that, and they are to blame as are the outspoken racists. What you are saying is, "those people had the privilege to join that march and support those sentiments because they are not threatened by what the march explicitly represents." This is an inherently racist mode of interacting with the world, because it opens avenues for racist violence and oppression, and emboldens more outspoken racists to commit atrocities. Again, intention matters little when lives are at stake. Your argument enables the banality of evil to persist.