4 ms·

I would like to believe that those are just intellectually lazy labels. Are you sure it's not 100% accurate to say that Musk and Hegseth are neo-Nazis? Or that

by ilaksh 2y ago

I would like to believe that those are just intellectually lazy labels. Are you sure it's not 100% accurate to say that Musk and Hegseth are neo-Nazis? Or that we are headed straight for new American Holocaust against Hispanics and a race-fueled third world war? I want that to be hysterical paranoia or "intellectually lazy labels". But look at the historical parallels.

loanedempathy 2y ago
[flagged]
- computerthings 2y ago
  > What is the relative population of Latinos in the US as a percent, compared with Jews in Germany at the time? What is the geographic distribution of those folks compared to Jews at the time? What is the representation of Latinos in Congress? How is that relevant? > it's also worth evaluating on its own merits. But why do it in the form of a riddle?
  - loanedempathy 2y ago
    > How is that relevant? The thing that user is concerned about seems to be trying to decide if we're looking at another Holocaust. It seems reasonable to check to see if the preconditions are similar. > But why do it in the form of a riddle? It's not a riddle, it's an invitation to set a baseline to discuss from that's not just "the world is scary and we're looking at another Holocaust". If somebody says the world is scary and they want reassurance, we can't just go "no the world isn't scary it's gonna be fine"--we have to explain _why_ the world isn't scary, and to do that we need shared understanding. It's not helpful if, for example, they mean Nazi in the general sloppy sense ("thugs and bigots that seek power") and I use Nazis in a very particular sense (a group desirous of annexing Sudetenland and Alsace–Lorraine, seeking to restore German and Austrian economic power, scapegoating particular minorities and progressive values for cultural corruption, a reliance on a patchwork of occult and mystical foundations for rallying, etc.). So, I didn't ask "riddles": I asked a bunch of questions to see where they were coming from before making an argument one way or the other. I wish more folks did this in the years leading up to the current situation, but here we are.
    - computerthings 2y ago
      > It seems reasonable to check to see if the preconditions are similar. I know. And I ask how that is relevant, how any answer to those particular question would makes them similar or dissimilar. It's not. I know this for a fact, but you didn't even make the attempt to claim otherwise. It's not about absolute or relative numbers. And it's not about knowing the future. If I say "don't fall asleep with a cigarette", do I mean "don't burn yourself", "don't kill yourself", "don't burn down your house", "don't burn down the block", "don't burn down the city", or "don't burn down the continent"?
      - loanedempathy 2y ago
        > I know this for a fact If you can't see how the implementation of a Holocaust in the US might be impacted by the distribution and population density of Latinos I can't help you. Some of the estimates I've seen for 1930s Germany were that Jews were less than 1% of the population; by contrast, Latinos are far beyond that--something like 40% in Texas and California. A big part of the Holocaust was the targeted persecution and removal and ultimate execution of Jews, right? This was greatly aided by the fact that there were so few of them, and the Nazis were able to pin a bunch of ills of the time upon them. It's a lot easier to other a group when there are only a few representatives around. My assertion--if you agree with the numbers earlier, which to me seem to be about the right near order of magnitude--is that we're not going to see that here in the US with Latinos (or Blacks, or most other groups) in the same way, and so fears of a Holocaust against those groups are likely unfounded. Now, this isn't to say that there aren't a dozen other problems that could pop up, or that perhaps it might take a form wholly different than history--but the assertion was "we have lots of parallels to the Holocaust's preconditions" and I think that is (mercifully) one of the few things we don't have to worry about.
        computerthings 2y ago
        "the exact same thing in the same way" is a goal post of your own making, and I reject it. People stripped of their rights and disappeared, not based on individual actions, but their being only considered as object-like members of their groups. That's more than enough to have on one's plate not to wonder about the "likely" desert.
DonHopkins 2y ago
"Goatfucker" is a fair and accurate and intellectually rigorous label. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Popehat%27s%20Law%20of%20Goats https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Popehat%27s%... Popehat's Law of Goats He who fucks goats, either as part of a performance or to troll those he deems has overly delicate sensibilities is simply, a goatfucker. "He claimed he was just pretending to be racist to trigger the social justice warriors, but even if he is telling the truth, Popehat's Law of Goats still applies."
- loanedempathy 2y ago
  If you're referring to me, you'll have to do better than namecalling. If you're referring to Musk or the current administration, calling them names doesn't really seem to have worked for what, at least nine years now?
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    Confessing to fucking goats isn't quite the power move you make it out to be, but if you want to take one for the team, and claim that what you're doing is merely performance art intended to troll, while "things aren't as bad as they're being made out to be" and "concerns about replacement" are actually well founded, then be my guest. The fact that a racist doesn't mind being called a racist doesn't make them not a racist.
    - loanedempathy 2y ago
      I don't think you're reading me in the way that I intended, and I think you're being very uncharitable. I did not claim that their concerns about replacement were well-founded, merely that they were understandable. Again, go back and read what I actually wrote: we cannot both acknowledge that there is a decline in the proportion of whites in America, that there are policies being pursued that help with this (again, no moral judgement, simply a statement of fact), and also that the people who are scared about losing majority status are completely without basis in their concerns. If you cannot understand the tiny pier of truth that these people use as a foundation for the massive pile of other nonsense they've stacked (or had stacked) upon it, you will never be able to get them to change. I'm not asking you to agree with them. I'm not asking you to say that the whole of their beliefs makes any sense at all. I'm asking you to understand that they aren't pulling this completely out of thin air, and that if you want to have more success than you've had it may be worth it to acknowledge their concerns and try to show how your preferred policies would serve them better and how their current preferred bozos are manipulating them. You and people like you might assert that they're idiots, misinformed, evil, or whatever else--but their vote counts as much as yours, sometimes moreso, and so you ignore or misunderstand them at your peril.

by ilaksh 2y ago

loanedempathy 2y ago

[flagged]

computerthings 2y ago
> What is the relative population of Latinos in the US as a percent, compared with Jews in Germany at the time? What is the geographic distribution of those folks compared to Jews at the time? What is the representation of Latinos in Congress? How is that relevant? > it's also worth evaluating on its own merits. But why do it in the form of a riddle?
- loanedempathy 2y ago
  > How is that relevant? The thing that user is concerned about seems to be trying to decide if we're looking at another Holocaust. It seems reasonable to check to see if the preconditions are similar. > But why do it in the form of a riddle? It's not a riddle, it's an invitation to set a baseline to discuss from that's not just "the world is scary and we're looking at another Holocaust". If somebody says the world is scary and they want reassurance, we can't just go "no the world isn't scary it's gonna be fine"--we have to explain _why_ the world isn't scary, and to do that we need shared understanding. It's not helpful if, for example, they mean Nazi in the general sloppy sense ("thugs and bigots that seek power") and I use Nazis in a very particular sense (a group desirous of annexing Sudetenland and Alsace–Lorraine, seeking to restore German and Austrian economic power, scapegoating particular minorities and progressive values for cultural corruption, a reliance on a patchwork of occult and mystical foundations for rallying, etc.). So, I didn't ask "riddles": I asked a bunch of questions to see where they were coming from before making an argument one way or the other. I wish more folks did this in the years leading up to the current situation, but here we are.
  - computerthings 2y ago
    > It seems reasonable to check to see if the preconditions are similar. I know. And I ask how that is relevant, how any answer to those particular question would makes them similar or dissimilar. It's not. I know this for a fact, but you didn't even make the attempt to claim otherwise. It's not about absolute or relative numbers. And it's not about knowing the future. If I say "don't fall asleep with a cigarette", do I mean "don't burn yourself", "don't kill yourself", "don't burn down your house", "don't burn down the block", "don't burn down the city", or "don't burn down the continent"?
    - loanedempathy 2y ago
      > I know this for a fact If you can't see how the implementation of a Holocaust in the US might be impacted by the distribution and population density of Latinos I can't help you. Some of the estimates I've seen for 1930s Germany were that Jews were less than 1% of the population; by contrast, Latinos are far beyond that--something like 40% in Texas and California. A big part of the Holocaust was the targeted persecution and removal and ultimate execution of Jews, right? This was greatly aided by the fact that there were so few of them, and the Nazis were able to pin a bunch of ills of the time upon them. It's a lot easier to other a group when there are only a few representatives around. My assertion--if you agree with the numbers earlier, which to me seem to be about the right near order of magnitude--is that we're not going to see that here in the US with Latinos (or Blacks, or most other groups) in the same way, and so fears of a Holocaust against those groups are likely unfounded. Now, this isn't to say that there aren't a dozen other problems that could pop up, or that perhaps it might take a form wholly different than history--but the assertion was "we have lots of parallels to the Holocaust's preconditions" and I think that is (mercifully) one of the few things we don't have to worry about.
      - computerthings 2y ago
        "the exact same thing in the same way" is a goal post of your own making, and I reject it. People stripped of their rights and disappeared, not based on individual actions, but their being only considered as object-like members of their groups. That's more than enough to have on one's plate not to wonder about the "likely" desert.

DonHopkins 2y ago

"Goatfucker" is a fair and accurate and intellectually rigorous label. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Popehat%27s%20Law%20of%20Goats https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Popehat%27s%... Popehat's Law of Goats He who fucks goats, either as part of a performance or to troll those he deems has overly delicate sensibilities is simply, a goatfucker. "He claimed he was just pretending to be racist to trigger the social justice warriors, but even if he is telling the truth, Popehat's Law of Goats still applies."

loanedempathy 2y ago
If you're referring to me, you'll have to do better than namecalling. If you're referring to Musk or the current administration, calling them names doesn't really seem to have worked for what, at least nine years now?
- DonHopkins 2y ago
  Confessing to fucking goats isn't quite the power move you make it out to be, but if you want to take one for the team, and claim that what you're doing is merely performance art intended to troll, while "things aren't as bad as they're being made out to be" and "concerns about replacement" are actually well founded, then be my guest. The fact that a racist doesn't mind being called a racist doesn't make them not a racist.
  - loanedempathy 2y ago
    I don't think you're reading me in the way that I intended, and I think you're being very uncharitable. I did not claim that their concerns about replacement were well-founded, merely that they were understandable. Again, go back and read what I actually wrote: we cannot both acknowledge that there is a decline in the proportion of whites in America, that there are policies being pursued that help with this (again, no moral judgement, simply a statement of fact), and also that the people who are scared about losing majority status are completely without basis in their concerns. If you cannot understand the tiny pier of truth that these people use as a foundation for the massive pile of other nonsense they've stacked (or had stacked) upon it, you will never be able to get them to change. I'm not asking you to agree with them. I'm not asking you to say that the whole of their beliefs makes any sense at all. I'm asking you to understand that they aren't pulling this completely out of thin air, and that if you want to have more success than you've had it may be worth it to acknowledge their concerns and try to show how your preferred policies would serve them better and how their current preferred bozos are manipulating them. You and people like you might assert that they're idiots, misinformed, evil, or whatever else--but their vote counts as much as yours, sometimes moreso, and so you ignore or misunderstand them at your peril.