3 ms·

Being cancelled for saying "it's really scary that half of all black people don't agree it's ok to be white" would radicalize anyone. The fact itself radicalize

by qcnguy 9mo ago

Being cancelled for saying "it's really scary that half of all black people don't agree it's ok to be white" would radicalize anyone. The fact itself radicalizes people, the hysterical reaction of the left radicalizes people even more.

the_af 9mo ago
But where does this self-indulgent excuse ends? You can argue BLM itself got radicalized into extreme positions by the radicalized mistreatment of black people, and so on. At some point, if Scott Adams behaved like a bigot, we should stop making excuses for him. Becoming "radicalized" through life's hardships is not an excuse, unless we also grant this excuse to BLM et al. Otherwise it's selective slack-cutting.
- qcnguy 9mo ago
  The BLM movement hasn't suffered any hardships. They were the opposite of cancelled: BLM were donated over $90M. (they embezzled large parts of it. one of them just got charged with wire fraud and money laundering https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdok/pr/executive-director-black-lives-matter-okc-charged-wire-fraud-and-money-laundering https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdok/pr/executive-director-blac...)
  - the_af 9mo ago
    So BLM just sprouted out of thin air, without prior history of cop violence against black people?
    - OCASMv2 9mo ago
      [flagged]
      - the_af 9mo ago
        But surely the history and treatment of black people in the US is at the root of it all, rather than "the radicalized left"? Cop violence against black suspects because of violent crime by blacks seems a very suspect explanation. It ignores how the US got to that situation. Also, cops aren't in the same category as criminals (well, non-criminal cops anyway) and should be held to higher standards. They should de-escalate, not be another factor in violence. It seems to me it's a spiral of violence in which the cops sometimes play a role in making it worse, and in any case, it makes the excuses for Scott Adams' views very weak in my opinion. So we should cut Scott Adams' some slack because he was "radicalized" by the "hysterical reaction of the left", but not acknowledge the reasons for BLM's existence or anything even before that?
        OCASMv2 9mo ago
        > But surely the history and treatment of black people in the US is at the root of it all, rather than "the radicalized left"? At some point people have to stop blaming whites from hundreds of years ago and start looking at the consequences current policies and individual choices. This cop violence problem is really only a thing in high-crime areas. > It ignores how the US got to that situation Yes, by very lenient with violent criminals. > Also, cops aren't in the same category as criminals (well, non-criminal cops anyway) and should be held to higher standards. They should de-escalate, not be another factor in violence. They try that. Suspects refuse to cooperate and results are predictable. > So we should cut Scott Adams' some slack because he was "radicalized" by the "hysterical reaction of the left", but not acknowledge the reasons for BLM's existence or anything even before that? There's nothing radical about peacefully disengaging with people who think your mere existance is a bad thing. BLM on the other hand is mostly an attempt to make crime worse by weakening police forces, which again, would mostly hurt black people.
        defrost 9mo ago
        > This cop violence problem is really only a thing in high-crime areas. All around the world, and all through recorded history the same thing can be seen. It's more of an interconnected feedback loop. Distrusted minority areas are over-policed with excess force, more charges are laid (even if actual crime rates are on par with majority less policed areas), people that are over policed act up and push back, reported crime increases. In the recent history of the USofA there are even examples of state munfactured crime - the CIA famously raised money for off book weapons to foreign fighters by buying cocaine and selling in bulk in minority parts of the USofA. That was under Ronald Reagan.

by qcnguy 9mo ago

the_af 9mo ago

But where does this self-indulgent excuse ends? You can argue BLM itself got radicalized into extreme positions by the radicalized mistreatment of black people, and so on. At some point, if Scott Adams behaved like a bigot, we should stop making excuses for him. Becoming "radicalized" through life's hardships is not an excuse, unless we also grant this excuse to BLM et al. Otherwise it's selective slack-cutting.

qcnguy 9mo ago
The BLM movement hasn't suffered any hardships. They were the opposite of cancelled: BLM were donated over $90M. (they embezzled large parts of it. one of them just got charged with wire fraud and money laundering https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdok/pr/executive-director-black-lives-matter-okc-charged-wire-fraud-and-money-laundering https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdok/pr/executive-director-blac...)
- the_af 9mo ago
  So BLM just sprouted out of thin air, without prior history of cop violence against black people?
  - OCASMv2 9mo ago
    [flagged]
    - the_af 9mo ago
      But surely the history and treatment of black people in the US is at the root of it all, rather than "the radicalized left"? Cop violence against black suspects because of violent crime by blacks seems a very suspect explanation. It ignores how the US got to that situation. Also, cops aren't in the same category as criminals (well, non-criminal cops anyway) and should be held to higher standards. They should de-escalate, not be another factor in violence. It seems to me it's a spiral of violence in which the cops sometimes play a role in making it worse, and in any case, it makes the excuses for Scott Adams' views very weak in my opinion. So we should cut Scott Adams' some slack because he was "radicalized" by the "hysterical reaction of the left", but not acknowledge the reasons for BLM's existence or anything even before that?
      - OCASMv2 9mo ago
        > But surely the history and treatment of black people in the US is at the root of it all, rather than "the radicalized left"? At some point people have to stop blaming whites from hundreds of years ago and start looking at the consequences current policies and individual choices. This cop violence problem is really only a thing in high-crime areas. > It ignores how the US got to that situation Yes, by very lenient with violent criminals. > Also, cops aren't in the same category as criminals (well, non-criminal cops anyway) and should be held to higher standards. They should de-escalate, not be another factor in violence. They try that. Suspects refuse to cooperate and results are predictable. > So we should cut Scott Adams' some slack because he was "radicalized" by the "hysterical reaction of the left", but not acknowledge the reasons for BLM's existence or anything even before that? There's nothing radical about peacefully disengaging with people who think your mere existance is a bad thing. BLM on the other hand is mostly an attempt to make crime worse by weakening police forces, which again, would mostly hurt black people.
        defrost 9mo ago
        > This cop violence problem is really only a thing in high-crime areas. All around the world, and all through recorded history the same thing can be seen. It's more of an interconnected feedback loop. Distrusted minority areas are over-policed with excess force, more charges are laid (even if actual crime rates are on par with majority less policed areas), people that are over policed act up and push back, reported crime increases. In the recent history of the USofA there are even examples of state munfactured crime - the CIA famously raised money for off book weapons to foreign fighters by buying cocaine and selling in bulk in minority parts of the USofA. That was under Ronald Reagan.