3 ms·

Nobody is going to call you a racist because you claim that 1=2. If you want to debate in good faith whether people are too quick to call others racist, maybe

by ratww 6y ago

Nobody is going to call you a racist because you claim that 1=2. If you want to debate in good faith whether people are too quick to call others racist, maybe you should start the debate by enumerating what kind of speech have sparked those claims? Otherwise you're just being hyperbolic and increasing the political divide. I get that people are pissed for being called racist, but if they REALLY wanna fix that, the first step is admitting that the other side might be pissed about something too.

chordalkeyboard 6y ago
> admitting that the other side might be pissed about something too. I spend most of my mental effort trying to get people on each side to do this, its not easy bro.
jariel 6y ago
"Nobody is going to call you a racist because you claim that 1=2." ? A woman is under arrest for trying to grab what she thought was her phone back from a black kid. It's a national story. In 2020, getting into an argument with a Black person is 'racist' and 'criminal' if you happen to be wrong. The woman did 1=2, in that, her actions are wrong. But because someone is a different colour, she's being destroyed and doxxed on the MSM for the assumption of racism. (Ironically, she could easily pass as a 'person of colour' if she chose to). This is unfortunately a problem right now in politics and it's perpetuated by the press.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > ? A woman is under arrest for trying to grab what she thought was her phone back from a black kid. It's a national story. > In 2020, getting into an argument with a Black person is 'racist' and 'criminal' if you happen to be wrong. Assault isn't a mere argument, and it's a crime regardless of the race of the perpetrators or victim. > But because someone is a different colour, she's being destroyed and doxxed on the MSM for the assumption of racism. No, she’s being condemned for the objective fact of assaulting a child.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ratww 6y ago
  That's a terrible example. She not only falsely accused, but also assaulted someone she had never seen before. False accusation and assault should be crimes, period. If she had done the same thing to me you can be damn sure I would want her ass in jail regardless of my skin colour. Her arrest is a good thing. Actions that affect others negatively should have consequences.
  - jariel 6y ago
    You're misunderstanding my point. Assault is a crime, yes, what she did was wrong - yes, of course - I agree with that. But what she is being destroyed for is 'racism' - not 'assault and false accusation'. She was being irrational (1=2) and then because of this, castigated for racism - which is a much more devious charge. Also - it's shocking that anyone is 'shocked' over such a pedestrian encounter. Have HN readers never been in a fight before? Have folks literally never been in an argument? This kind of stuff is 'daily' on the streets, at WallMart, etc. It's not very civil obviously, but it's really common for people to get upset over things. We have bouncers at bars for this reason. But we're adults and we move past it. And - 'false accusation' in this manner is clearly not criminal. The woman had her phone stolen, it's reasonable for her in a hysterical state and just see the first iPhone and possibly think it's hers. Again, not nice at all, but not completely crazy. The proper response to a hysterical person who had their phone stolen, and who maybe thinks you have it is to 'take the high ground' and calmly demonstrate your ownership. That's all. I don't expect this of a kid, but that could have happend. That we have a 'national story' with literally Al Sharpton because someone 'grabbed someone's arm' is utterly ridiculous. The kid is 'seeking counselling' because someone 'touched him forcefully'? It's a farce. They've turned this utterly minor incident into a bad SNL parody. Finally - I'm not implying their couldn't have been racism either, this woman could possibly just as nasty as it gets, it's impossible to tell. And of course, the whole point of CNN putting this on the news is not that this specific moment is important, but that it could be demonstrative of 'systematic racism in the commons' and they want to make an example out of her - but lacking any possible reference to racial motivation, it's just plain stupid. In summary - this is an example of certain parts of the media castigating individuals who may be of a certain persuasion (in this case 'White') for no reason, and I can see people getting upset over that. The riot on capital hill however was not mostly a political movement of general malaise, rather, it was specifically about that certain people feel the election was stolen. It was mostly certainly not stolen, but they believe that because Trump told them so, and that's the primary motivation issue of the violence at this point.

by ratww 6y ago

chordalkeyboard 6y ago

> admitting that the other side might be pissed about something too. I spend most of my mental effort trying to get people on each side to do this, its not easy bro.

jariel 6y ago

"Nobody is going to call you a racist because you claim that 1=2." ? A woman is under arrest for trying to grab what she thought was her phone back from a black kid. It's a national story. In 2020, getting into an argument with a Black person is 'racist' and 'criminal' if you happen to be wrong. The woman did 1=2, in that, her actions are wrong. But because someone is a different colour, she's being destroyed and doxxed on the MSM for the assumption of racism. (Ironically, she could easily pass as a 'person of colour' if she chose to). This is unfortunately a problem right now in politics and it's perpetuated by the press.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> ? A woman is under arrest for trying to grab what she thought was her phone back from a black kid. It's a national story. > In 2020, getting into an argument with a Black person is 'racist' and 'criminal' if you happen to be wrong. Assault isn't a mere argument, and it's a crime regardless of the race of the perpetrators or victim. > But because someone is a different colour, she's being destroyed and doxxed on the MSM for the assumption of racism. No, she’s being condemned for the objective fact of assaulting a child.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ratww 6y ago
That's a terrible example. She not only falsely accused, but also assaulted someone she had never seen before. False accusation and assault should be crimes, period. If she had done the same thing to me you can be damn sure I would want her ass in jail regardless of my skin colour. Her arrest is a good thing. Actions that affect others negatively should have consequences.
- jariel 6y ago
  You're misunderstanding my point. Assault is a crime, yes, what she did was wrong - yes, of course - I agree with that. But what she is being destroyed for is 'racism' - not 'assault and false accusation'. She was being irrational (1=2) and then because of this, castigated for racism - which is a much more devious charge. Also - it's shocking that anyone is 'shocked' over such a pedestrian encounter. Have HN readers never been in a fight before? Have folks literally never been in an argument? This kind of stuff is 'daily' on the streets, at WallMart, etc. It's not very civil obviously, but it's really common for people to get upset over things. We have bouncers at bars for this reason. But we're adults and we move past it. And - 'false accusation' in this manner is clearly not criminal. The woman had her phone stolen, it's reasonable for her in a hysterical state and just see the first iPhone and possibly think it's hers. Again, not nice at all, but not completely crazy. The proper response to a hysterical person who had their phone stolen, and who maybe thinks you have it is to 'take the high ground' and calmly demonstrate your ownership. That's all. I don't expect this of a kid, but that could have happend. That we have a 'national story' with literally Al Sharpton because someone 'grabbed someone's arm' is utterly ridiculous. The kid is 'seeking counselling' because someone 'touched him forcefully'? It's a farce. They've turned this utterly minor incident into a bad SNL parody. Finally - I'm not implying their couldn't have been racism either, this woman could possibly just as nasty as it gets, it's impossible to tell. And of course, the whole point of CNN putting this on the news is not that this specific moment is important, but that it could be demonstrative of 'systematic racism in the commons' and they want to make an example out of her - but lacking any possible reference to racial motivation, it's just plain stupid. In summary - this is an example of certain parts of the media castigating individuals who may be of a certain persuasion (in this case 'White') for no reason, and I can see people getting upset over that. The riot on capital hill however was not mostly a political movement of general malaise, rather, it was specifically about that certain people feel the election was stolen. It was mostly certainly not stolen, but they believe that because Trump told them so, and that's the primary motivation issue of the violence at this point.