4 ms·

Yes, this is a good summary of what these changes do. They allow white people to pat themselves on the back, without actually doing anything material to help br

Yes, this is a good summary of what these changes do. They allow white people to pat themselves on the back, without actually doing anything material to help break down racism.

raffraffraff 6y ago
I think it also burns a certain amount of political capital and good will. People only have so much "give a fuck" to spare, and if you force them to use it in meaningless ways, it's a waste.
- andrepd 6y ago
  Absolutely, this is another thing I feel strongly about. People have limited energy, attention, resources. Every news segment that opens with "pc gone mad! radical leftists want to ban the word "blacklist"!" is a news segment that doesn't open with "wages have been stagnant for the past 50 years despite gains in productivity" "prices of tvs and smartphones falling, prices of housing and healthcare skyrocketing" "statistical studies show voter preferences have near-zero correlation with effected legislation, while preferences of the wealthier 0.5% are very strongly correlated" "hey have you noticed that the EU is hilariously undemocratic" etc etc.
  - kybernetikos 6y ago
    If your belief is that in the absence of minor controversy, we'd have better media, I think you're optimistic. We'll always have controversy and I really doubt that reducing it would improve the level of discourse one iota. Media that prioritises controversy will do whatever they can to find or foment it rather than discuss the topics you listed.
- vinceguidry 6y ago
  Generating controversy in support of your cause is generally thought of as building political capital, not spending it. You want to focus energy on what people on your side will agree with, and, crucially, can have a personal impact towards. You can see this dynamic in Republican posturing in the Biden era. Biden is a much harder topic for Republicans to attack. His Covid relief bill has broad bipartisan support and he's an old white guy just like Republicans like to see in office. So instead of wasting time and effort on trying to attack Biden or Covid relief, they spent the last few weeks attacking cancel culture and Dr. Seuss. This move is the opposite, it lets those interested in social justice and equality participate in a political action. Any time you can energize your base around something, that's a great boon to your side. More generally speaking, political battles are fought by people who care, not by people who don't. Actions taken that cause the uncaring to care even less are fine so long as they can get some people to care more. For no better an illustration of this look to PETA. The only reason we still know who they are is because they've taken this as a holy dictate. We still know who they are because they're fantastically successful at creating absolute zealots.
- mcphage 6y ago
  > I think it also burns a certain amount of political capital and good will. People only have so much "give a fuck" to spare, and if you force them to use it in meaningless ways, it's a waste. Is that what you think is happening here? People are fighting against this change out of concern that if they support it, they won't be able to care about other, more important things down the line?
CountDrewku 6y ago
Oh it's worse than just pats on the back. It's ACTUAL racism. They think they have the right to tell minorities how to think and feel. They think they know what's best and you can't have them thinking for themselves. I witnessed a white woman exclaim she was revoking someone's Mexican card the other day because he voted for Trump. Supposedly the Mexican is the racist according to this ideology....
- raarts 6y ago
  There is a testimony floating around from a black Portland cop, complaining that every time he wanted to talk to a black BLM protestor there was a white protestor trying to prevent the black one from speaking with the police.

Yes, this is a good summary of what these changes do. They allow white people to pat themselves on the back, without actually doing anything material to help break down racism.

raffraffraff 6y ago

I think it also burns a certain amount of political capital and good will. People only have so much "give a fuck" to spare, and if you force them to use it in meaningless ways, it's a waste.

andrepd 6y ago
Absolutely, this is another thing I feel strongly about. People have limited energy, attention, resources. Every news segment that opens with "pc gone mad! radical leftists want to ban the word "blacklist"!" is a news segment that doesn't open with "wages have been stagnant for the past 50 years despite gains in productivity" "prices of tvs and smartphones falling, prices of housing and healthcare skyrocketing" "statistical studies show voter preferences have near-zero correlation with effected legislation, while preferences of the wealthier 0.5% are very strongly correlated" "hey have you noticed that the EU is hilariously undemocratic" etc etc.
- kybernetikos 6y ago
  If your belief is that in the absence of minor controversy, we'd have better media, I think you're optimistic. We'll always have controversy and I really doubt that reducing it would improve the level of discourse one iota. Media that prioritises controversy will do whatever they can to find or foment it rather than discuss the topics you listed.
vinceguidry 6y ago
Generating controversy in support of your cause is generally thought of as building political capital, not spending it. You want to focus energy on what people on your side will agree with, and, crucially, can have a personal impact towards. You can see this dynamic in Republican posturing in the Biden era. Biden is a much harder topic for Republicans to attack. His Covid relief bill has broad bipartisan support and he's an old white guy just like Republicans like to see in office. So instead of wasting time and effort on trying to attack Biden or Covid relief, they spent the last few weeks attacking cancel culture and Dr. Seuss. This move is the opposite, it lets those interested in social justice and equality participate in a political action. Any time you can energize your base around something, that's a great boon to your side. More generally speaking, political battles are fought by people who care, not by people who don't. Actions taken that cause the uncaring to care even less are fine so long as they can get some people to care more. For no better an illustration of this look to PETA. The only reason we still know who they are is because they've taken this as a holy dictate. We still know who they are because they're fantastically successful at creating absolute zealots.
mcphage 6y ago
> I think it also burns a certain amount of political capital and good will. People only have so much "give a fuck" to spare, and if you force them to use it in meaningless ways, it's a waste. Is that what you think is happening here? People are fighting against this change out of concern that if they support it, they won't be able to care about other, more important things down the line?

CountDrewku 6y ago

Oh it's worse than just pats on the back. It's ACTUAL racism. They think they have the right to tell minorities how to think and feel. They think they know what's best and you can't have them thinking for themselves. I witnessed a white woman exclaim she was revoking someone's Mexican card the other day because he voted for Trump. Supposedly the Mexican is the racist according to this ideology....

raarts 6y ago
There is a testimony floating around from a black Portland cop, complaining that every time he wanted to talk to a black BLM protestor there was a white protestor trying to prevent the black one from speaking with the police.