4 ms·

And the trolls were proven right, apparently. The correct response to trolling is to not take the bait. But people seem to be devouring the bait. Disagreeing wi

And the trolls were proven right, apparently. The correct response to trolling is to not take the bait. But people seem to be devouring the bait. Disagreeing with the statement "it's okay to be white" is just such a bone-headed move that I'm more frustrated with the people responding negatively than the people asking the question.

denton-scratch 4y ago
They're responding to a white-supremacist campaign slogan, not to the meaning of the words.
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  And through their responses, they are advancing said white-supremacists' goals of making them look like anti-white racists. They know this, yet do it anyway. Like I said, it's incredibly stupid and counter-productive. They know it's bait, but they're eating it up anyway.
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    If you ask me in a survey whether it's true that "work makes you free", I'll say no, whatever my views about work and freedom.
    - landoftheice 4y ago
      [dead]
    - Manuel_D 4y ago
      I'm not sure how that's comparable. Work doesn't make you free: there are people that work that are not free. There are people that don't work, but are free. Objecting to the statement "work makes you free" isn't indicating any hatred towards a particular group. By comparison, objecting to "it's okay to be white" would imply that it's not okay to be white. Hence why objecting to such an anodyne statement is recognized by many to be racism. Imagine someone objecting to "it's okay to be Asian", or "It's okay to be African". If people recognize that it's said to try and bait people into making a statement perceived to be anti-white racism, but object to it anyway then doubly wrong on them: they know that it's bait but they're scarfing it down anyway.
      - ashwagary 4y ago
        >By comparison, objecting to "it's okay to be white" would imply that it's not okay to be white. They are not wrong to answer that question however they choose since you cannot infer how the statement is percieved by the person answering it. That's partially the point of the troll. Black Americans not immediately suspicious of similar statements and the people posting them are probably outliers since dehumanization of others was never a tactic or objective of black empowerment groups. The same cannot be generally stated about white groups and the societies that overwhelmingly supported them. Btw, Rasmussen should ask more victims of atrocities ambiguous, "It's okay to be a German prison camp guard. (Agree/Disagree/NotSure)" style poll questions to assist those acting in bad faith. /s
        trogdor 4y ago
        >Btw, Rasmussen should ask more victims of atrocities ambiguous, "It's okay to be a German prison camp guard. That might make sense if the original poll prompt was “It’s okay to be a white supremacist.” It wasn’t, though.
        ashwagary 4y ago
        Both questions are in the same vein. It doesn't have to be stated for many from the population to intuit that the "supremacist" is likely implied. Black Americans havent escaped the heavily supported global system of white supremacy that they've been fighting against for centuries, and most aren't under a false illusion that they have. As long as whites don't dismantle the system and complete the reparative justice process, "white" and "white supremacy" will remain synonymous. The same way "German" and "Nazi" would be more synonymous, if Germans didn't dismantle the ideology and carry out reparative actions for the victims of their local holocaust.
      - ModernMech 4y ago
        I think you’re struggling with the difference between connotation and denotation. It doesn’t matter if the denotation of a white supremacist rallying cry is anodyne. It’s still a white supremacist rallying cry. Actually, they tend to be anodyne exactly for this reason; it’s not often they are as explicit as “Jews won’t replace us.”
- faeriechangling 4y ago
  I would be shocked if both weren’t happening at the same time, I can’t imagine all the poll respondents knew the context and I imagine many were taking what was said at face value. Impossible to really know peoples reasons for disagreeing with that phrase which makes it maybe not the best polling question to ask.
- giardini 4y ago
  I doubt that. I think they answered a plain English question. I suspect that few, if any, of Rasmussen's pollees know anything about what you call a "white-supremacist campaign".
  - denton-scratch 4y ago
    Many of the white respondents probably answered a plain English question. I suspect many of the black respondents responded to the slogan not the words. It's very provocative to suggest that a large proportion of Black Americans disapprove of people having white skin. The question itself appears to have been deliberately provocative. Rasmussen Reports has been criticized before for asking dodgy questions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#Criticism
scythe 4y ago
The first party to get trolled here was Rasmussen themselves. I doubt such a poll would have been run if not for the meme wars.
- ashwagary 4y ago
  >The first party to get trolled here was Rasmussen themselves I disagree that all the people at Rasmussen were unaware. The question is not one a thoughtful pollster would put forth with ignorance of the original context.
foogazi 4y ago
Can a troll be proven right? what should the white supremacist do in this case ?
- Manuel_D 4y ago
  The white supremacists are going to do whatever they want. But for the rest of society, when they're asked "is it okay to be white?" the response should be "yes, no shit Sherlock." Then the white supremacists will have to find some other bait question.
ashwagary 4y ago
>The correct response to trolling is to not take the bait. But people seem to be devouring the bait. Perhaps the correct response is Rasmussen not using its vast resources and reach to knowingly assist white supermacist trolling.
anigbrowl 4y ago
Ah, so they're only allowed to answer the question one way, even if they recognize it as a right-wing dogwhistle? Fuck that. People are not obliged to play along with the rhetorical manipulation just because some troll like Adams is primed to jump around and go 'see! see!'. We do not in fact have to care about his performative overreaction. He's welcome to go to Unherd or theFP or whever and pen a me-too essay about how he got canceled by the woke mob, maybe move to Florida, etc. etc.
- jakelazaroff 4y ago
  Absolutely wild that people are being told “this seemingly anodyne statement is actually a white supremacist dog whistle” and their reaction is to double down on blaming people for not co-signing it.
  - faeriechangling 4y ago
    It’s not a dog whistle. It is literally white supremacist propaganda but that’s not the same as being a dog whistle. There’s no hidden meaning to the phrase, white supremacists actually do believe that it’s okay to be white.
  - iaml 4y ago
    It’s funny how people in this thread are so adamant you should just “not take the bait” when the entire words has been redefined to mean something completely different by these tactics. For example: woke.

denton-scratch 4y ago

They're responding to a white-supremacist campaign slogan, not to the meaning of the words.

Manuel_D 4y ago
And through their responses, they are advancing said white-supremacists' goals of making them look like anti-white racists. They know this, yet do it anyway. Like I said, it's incredibly stupid and counter-productive. They know it's bait, but they're eating it up anyway.
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  If you ask me in a survey whether it's true that "work makes you free", I'll say no, whatever my views about work and freedom.
  - landoftheice 4y ago
    [dead]
  - Manuel_D 4y ago
    I'm not sure how that's comparable. Work doesn't make you free: there are people that work that are not free. There are people that don't work, but are free. Objecting to the statement "work makes you free" isn't indicating any hatred towards a particular group. By comparison, objecting to "it's okay to be white" would imply that it's not okay to be white. Hence why objecting to such an anodyne statement is recognized by many to be racism. Imagine someone objecting to "it's okay to be Asian", or "It's okay to be African". If people recognize that it's said to try and bait people into making a statement perceived to be anti-white racism, but object to it anyway then doubly wrong on them: they know that it's bait but they're scarfing it down anyway.
    - ashwagary 4y ago
      >By comparison, objecting to "it's okay to be white" would imply that it's not okay to be white. They are not wrong to answer that question however they choose since you cannot infer how the statement is percieved by the person answering it. That's partially the point of the troll. Black Americans not immediately suspicious of similar statements and the people posting them are probably outliers since dehumanization of others was never a tactic or objective of black empowerment groups. The same cannot be generally stated about white groups and the societies that overwhelmingly supported them. Btw, Rasmussen should ask more victims of atrocities ambiguous, "It's okay to be a German prison camp guard. (Agree/Disagree/NotSure)" style poll questions to assist those acting in bad faith. /s
      - trogdor 4y ago
        >Btw, Rasmussen should ask more victims of atrocities ambiguous, "It's okay to be a German prison camp guard. That might make sense if the original poll prompt was “It’s okay to be a white supremacist.” It wasn’t, though.
        ashwagary 4y ago
        Both questions are in the same vein. It doesn't have to be stated for many from the population to intuit that the "supremacist" is likely implied. Black Americans havent escaped the heavily supported global system of white supremacy that they've been fighting against for centuries, and most aren't under a false illusion that they have. As long as whites don't dismantle the system and complete the reparative justice process, "white" and "white supremacy" will remain synonymous. The same way "German" and "Nazi" would be more synonymous, if Germans didn't dismantle the ideology and carry out reparative actions for the victims of their local holocaust.
    - ModernMech 4y ago
      I think you’re struggling with the difference between connotation and denotation. It doesn’t matter if the denotation of a white supremacist rallying cry is anodyne. It’s still a white supremacist rallying cry. Actually, they tend to be anodyne exactly for this reason; it’s not often they are as explicit as “Jews won’t replace us.”
faeriechangling 4y ago
I would be shocked if both weren’t happening at the same time, I can’t imagine all the poll respondents knew the context and I imagine many were taking what was said at face value. Impossible to really know peoples reasons for disagreeing with that phrase which makes it maybe not the best polling question to ask.
giardini 4y ago
I doubt that. I think they answered a plain English question. I suspect that few, if any, of Rasmussen's pollees know anything about what you call a "white-supremacist campaign".
- denton-scratch 4y ago
  Many of the white respondents probably answered a plain English question. I suspect many of the black respondents responded to the slogan not the words. It's very provocative to suggest that a large proportion of Black Americans disapprove of people having white skin. The question itself appears to have been deliberately provocative. Rasmussen Reports has been criticized before for asking dodgy questions. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasmussen_Reports#Criticism

scythe 4y ago

The first party to get trolled here was Rasmussen themselves. I doubt such a poll would have been run if not for the meme wars.

ashwagary 4y ago
>The first party to get trolled here was Rasmussen themselves I disagree that all the people at Rasmussen were unaware. The question is not one a thoughtful pollster would put forth with ignorance of the original context.

foogazi 4y ago

Can a troll be proven right? what should the white supremacist do in this case ?

Manuel_D 4y ago
The white supremacists are going to do whatever they want. But for the rest of society, when they're asked "is it okay to be white?" the response should be "yes, no shit Sherlock." Then the white supremacists will have to find some other bait question.

ashwagary 4y ago

>The correct response to trolling is to not take the bait. But people seem to be devouring the bait. Perhaps the correct response is Rasmussen not using its vast resources and reach to knowingly assist white supermacist trolling.

anigbrowl 4y ago

Ah, so they're only allowed to answer the question one way, even if they recognize it as a right-wing dogwhistle? Fuck that. People are not obliged to play along with the rhetorical manipulation just because some troll like Adams is primed to jump around and go 'see! see!'. We do not in fact have to care about his performative overreaction. He's welcome to go to Unherd or theFP or whever and pen a me-too essay about how he got canceled by the woke mob, maybe move to Florida, etc. etc.

jakelazaroff 4y ago
Absolutely wild that people are being told “this seemingly anodyne statement is actually a white supremacist dog whistle” and their reaction is to double down on blaming people for not co-signing it.
- faeriechangling 4y ago
  It’s not a dog whistle. It is literally white supremacist propaganda but that’s not the same as being a dog whistle. There’s no hidden meaning to the phrase, white supremacists actually do believe that it’s okay to be white.
- iaml 4y ago
  It’s funny how people in this thread are so adamant you should just “not take the bait” when the entire words has been redefined to mean something completely different by these tactics. For example: woke.