The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

A place where you can chat about anything that isn't to do with games!
User avatar
Rob
Posts: 8075
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:58 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Rob »

BulletMagnet wrote:
Rob wrote:I guess we'll never know what these "deliberately-implemented advantages for whites" are, but we'll continually be told that they exist.
Nope, absolutely nobody has ever presented countless books' and studies' worth of evidence and/or statistics that, literally everything else being equal, on-the-books or off, minorities will frequently and consistently be given a significantly harder overall time in our society than the dominant majority, and they certainly haven't been doing it for countless decades on end, it's just a complete mystery why anyone would ever think this happens, it's all complete news to you and you need some hapless cuck to explain the whole goddamn thing to you, top to bottom,
I know what people will claim and write books about and what others will read and pass along as if they know what they're talking about, but I'm asking you. I asked Mischief Maker to name an undeniably racist policy that has survived the last half century of anti-racism and got nothing. I'm asking you what you think the hardest evidence in 2023 is of these "deliberately-implemented advantages for whites", and you can't seem to spit one out.

As a white person I'm very curious about these universal benefits I'm told I have. I understand that in certain settings being a part of the majority can be a beneficial thing (socially, culturally, politically), but this is a large country and many places are not even remotely majority white. It doesn't seem like it would pay to be a haole in parts of Hawaii, for one example. Even in places that are majority white, policies specifically designed to disadvantage the majority population have been baked into the system under the assumption that the system is implicitly favoring whites, and many politicians and celebrities have made being anti-majority their claim to fame. Name one other place outside of the western world where you can have a cushy career being anti-majority and has as many policies as we do that specifically disadvantage the majority population.
BIL wrote:"Kill whitey?" No. "We have every right to kill whitey, and it'd be a terrible shame if it came to that, but then again, they are the enthusiastic villains of history, so hmm..." In abundance.
"White people are committed to being villains" really says it all. I think a lot of people are absorbing and retransmitting this sentiment even if they don't realize it.
Last edited by Rob on Mon Mar 20, 2023 4:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
orange808
Posts: 3209
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:43 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by orange808 »

Don't feed the troll, folks.
We apologise for the inconvenience
User avatar
emphatic
Posts: 7921
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:47 pm
Location: Alingsås, Sweden
Contact:

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by emphatic »

orange808 wrote:Don't feed the troll, folks.
Can't win? Don't try.
Image | My games - http://www.emphatic.se | (Click) I have YEN stickers for sale
RegalSin wrote:Street Fighters. We need to aviod them when we activate time accellerator.
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

Rob wrote:
BIL wrote:"Kill whitey?" No. "We have every right to kill whitey, and it'd be a terrible shame if it came to that, but then again, they are the enthusiastic villains of history, so hmm..." In abundance.
"White people are committed to being villains" really says it all. I think a lot of people are absorbing and retransmitting this sentiment even if they don't realize it.
A useful rule of thumb, I've found, is to isolate and polarity-flip key terms.

If the result goes from "panel full of sagely nodding heads" to "fire this monster and impoverish his family for the next two generations," you're very likely reading a politically acceptable racism Image

For example: "[Black people] are committed to being villains." Hillary, is that you? "[Black people] are genetically predisposed towards rape and murder, due to an [excess] of melanin, the substance which [limits] compassion." No Mr. President! It's not 1994!

I realise most of us circumvent the need for this rule on account of not being gaping racist arseholes to begin with. :o But you Burgers have the polarity-flipped equivalent of Dick Clark wrapping an ep of American Bandstand, then popping over to the local Klan chapter to discuss why the negro can't help robbing, raping, and killing.

Image

And you know, God bless Nick Cannon. He seems like an ok dude who's gotten ahold of some incredibly fucked ideas. But I can't let this lie, when neither his paymasters, nor the media, nor he himself have said one word in apology to the above.

Westerners can do better than this. 3;

(*contra Sniffin' Joe - BFF of Bobby "Cyclopean Spook Slayer" "One-Eyed Wehrmacht" "Monocled Mauler of Miscegenators" Byrd, tireless enemy of integrated "racial jungle" schooling, and Super Predator MC - who mischaracterised this expression while addressing a roomful of black kids, in order to paint whitey as a nation of rabid wifebeaters, "rule of thumb" dates back to at least 1BC, and refers to the making of measurements without tools, eg, "by thumb")

---

Image

Lads, I am OFFICIALLY racist, against U (`w´メ) - THATS RIGHT, YOU (■`w´■) - if u don't drop what u are doing 2 watch this masterpiece of modern cinema verite! Image

Anatomy Of A Race Hustle: When KEEPIN IT JUICY Goes Wrong

That chase view of the bros bookin' it hurling MAGAriffic barbs Image

Now, while I am VERY disappoint in the lads for participating in a wolf-crying race hoax,

1) they fessed up, unlike that shitbird Juicy
2) they're funny dudes, valuable in these fucked times
3) Juicy called them both homos, which could've gotten them imprisoned in Nigeria - or worse, if the local Bokos got hold of em!

So on balance: all is forgiven lads, get that money. Image I think this is - ironically enough, given its craven mastermind's dreams of fomenting racewar 4 cash - an occasion all God's children can gather round to enjoy!

Spoiler
Image


Yes! Very much like that! Image Great job, Juicy!

Keepin It JUICY: Digest Ver 4 Busy Life
Spoiler
Image

Image

Image














User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 13897
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BulletMagnet »

BIL wrote:"Kill whitey?" No. "We have every right to kill whitey, and it'd be a terrible shame if it came to that, but then again, they are the enthusiastic villains of history, so hmm..." In abundance.
Again, I think you really have to place a thumb firmly on the proverbial scale to draw this conclusion from the words being spoken here. If someone does something to you that gets you really mad, and later on you tell someone else "I was this close to punching him in the face right then and there" or, "I could have killed that S.O.B. where he stood", does this by default indicate that you believe you have "every right" to make those things actually happen, either by your own hand or someone else's, and that your friend should report you as a threat to avoid being "complicit"? Or does it mean that, while the reptile part of your brain might fantasize about it, you know better than to actually follow its whims?

Of course, Cooper's not just talking about individual events in modern-day Black people's lives, but the knowledge that the same and worse was done to their ancestors going back centuries, all while the Robs of the world - who are more and more regularly making their way into high office these days - constantly tell them to "quit complaining, how is this even my problem, get over it, you're not oppressed, you're just lazy". What she, in my view, is saying is, it's absolutely understandable that your first instinct would be to lash out the same way the worst of the whites did for so long, but if you do then you're simply taking up the "villainous" mantle that their forebears used to make the mess we're all in now. Don't do it.

Again, I can't read her mind any more than yours, but if nothing else that interpretation strikes me as more in line with Occam's Razor, as opposed to having to twist the most evident meaning of her words into pretzels to get to the bottom of what she really must mean.
Rob wrote:I know what people will claim and write books about and what others will read and pass along as if they know what they're talking about, but I'm asking you.
This right here, Rob, is precisely what the video I linked was talking about, and why you and your ilk are not worth replying to.

When you demand that I explain to you all the mechanical specifics of institutional bias (while, again, not even bothering to acknowledge repeated requests to reiterate your own beliefs in this realm, just so everyone knows what we're really dealing with here), who or what did you think I was going to reference in reply? Did you expect that I, who unlike the people you hand-wave as "claiming and writing books", has neither studied this subject extensively for years nor actually experienced life as a minority himself, would, or more importantly should, be chomping at the bit to somehow just bypass all of that and offer a take completely uninformed by any of the existing and voluminous scholarship in this arena?

This is literally the "putting into a box" dodge; if I attempt to inform my reply via those who have painstakingly recorded events and compiled data for just such a purpose, well, we already know that they just yammer on "as if they know what they're talking about", which in turn means I'm just a hapless self-hating cuck who doesn't think for himself and can be dismissed out of hand just as easily. As a bonus, of course, if everything the "so-called experts" have written or said about institutional bias is deceptive bunk, then what basis do I or anyone have to question any of your "white people are the real victims" or "great replacement" whinging, or literally anything else you could come up with? By your own admission you're already aware of the counter-arguments, you already "know" they're all worthless, and will instantly disregard anyone who would deign to trust any of them over you.

If whoever you're demanding answers from attempts to make their answer even a minimally informed one, they're automatically wrong, and can be commanded to "try again" until they realize the task you've foisted upon them (again, without so much as an acknowledgement of similar requests aimed in your direction) is nonsense, they quit, and you "win".

That's not good-faith conversation. That's not genuine engagement. That's not debate. That's a performance. That's, to be frank, trolling. And it's literally the only manner of content you've posted in this section of the forum for years on end.
Can't win? Don't try.
Sage advice, though not in remotely the way you intended. :lol:

I'll make this very simple, Rob. In light of this ongoing behavior, not to mention the absolutely despicable rhetoric you've spouted (and then bravely deleted and refused to revisit :roll:) over the past several years on end, I could - and probably should - have banned you outright ages ago. I've been more than patient in the hopes that if nothing else you'd get tired of the game eventually, but that clearly hasn't happened. You or anyone else can feel free to call me a tyrant and persuade system11 to remove my credentials if you like, but the next time you pull this shit, whether in your next post or in your classic "slither out from under a rock after a few months" approach, you can consider your long-overdue ticket punched, as you have truly gone above and beyond to prove yourself far, far more of a detriment to the quality of the forum than you're worth. You're free to believe whatever you want - as loath as you are to say precisely what that is - but either keep your distance from discussions you don't actually plan to participate in, or get out.
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

BulletMagnet wrote:Again, I think you really have to place a thumb firmly on the proverbial scale to draw this conclusion from the words being spoken here. If someone does something to you that gets you really mad, and later on you tell someone else "I was this close to punching him in the face right then and there" or, "I could have killed that S.O.B. where he stood", does this by default indicate that you believe you have "every right" to make those things actually happen, either by your own hand or someone else's, and that your friend should report you as a threat to avoid being "complicit"? Or does it mean that, while the reptile part of your brain might fantasize about it, you know better than to actually follow its whims?
I have always conceptualised my rejection of racism as two-layered.

The inner layer is common pacifism, and a bit of sentimentality. Thankfully, most people don't enjoy hurting others. In fact, they have to be conditioned to unhesitatingly do so - dehumanising, othering, tribalist rhetoric is par for the course, there. I also think it's an outrage to deny someone their character based on tawdries like skin tone or ethnic origin. This is why I find the English tolerance of ginger-bashing, as some kind of racist bile valve, genuinely disgusting. Target skin = Hitler, target hair = big LOLs? Such principle.

The outer layer is pure pragmatism. I think such superficiality is a foolish and potentially dangerous way to live. I want to know as much about my surroundings and the people in them as possible. I don't want to overestimate nor underestimate. I've lived in a few places, and I've seen people of all colours, creeds, and orientations run the gamut from saintly to sadistic.

All this preamble to say: I assure you, I'm not applying some latent bias here. I go by what people say, and if they remain mute, by what they do. In the total absence of either data: yeah, the angry-looking young guys approaching from the other direction on a dark night are given a wider berth than the gaggle of tottering old ladies. I'm not an idiot.

Thankfully, there's no need to read the tea leaves, here. Ethnic slaughter has been invoked - we can both determine that much - then couched as the preserve of the despised enemy, with whom conflict remains ongoing. I can't help thinking Goebbels would love the setup, the revanchist mise-en-scene. It's a layup Harriot doesn't squander, with his apologia for the violence they reckon "white people" will make inevitable.

I also think your scenario is misleading; nobody has done anything, in Cooper's telling, besides existing while white. If someone were to confide in me, apropos of nothing but historical grievance, that "Those black bastards down the street, I want to say let's just kill them all - but then we'd be just as bad as them!" I would indeed consider that person a violent racist, if not a ticking timebomb, and urge them to have a think.
Of course, Cooper's not just talking about individual events in modern-day Black people's lives, but the knowledge that the same and worse was done to their ancestors going back centuries, all while the Robs of the world - who are more and more regularly making their way into high office these days - constantly tell them to "quit complaining, how is this even my problem, get over it, you're not oppressed, you're just lazy". What she, in my view, is saying is, it's absolutely understandable that your first instinct would be to lash out the same way the worst of the whites did for so long, but if you do then you're simply taking up the "villainous" mantle that their forebears used to make the mess we're all in now. Don't do it.
I can't help seeing two red flags in Cooper and Harriot's dialogue, here. The first is an insistence that "white people" are a monolith. The dirt-poor ditch diggers and the filthy-rich slaveowners go into the same neat bucket; some are merely worse than others, when in reality, all they frequently shared was a skin tone. The second is the race-supremacist notion that even the most despicable white slavers were operating in a vacuum. An honest historical reading of the slave trade would complicate things far too much for the quick, easy solutions Cooper and Harriot peddle: total surrender to one's racial betters, or - womp womp! - righteous murder at the hands of same.

Image

Cooper tries to patch this, ring-fencing "the good ones" - the white abolitionists and civil rights pioneers - from the villainous majority of "white people," who she maintains are destroying these rare white angels' legacy. Where's she drawing this conclusion from? Her own ass, as far as I can tell. It's just more convenient, short-sighted "eloquent rage." And as proven by murder stats, educational attainment, and the election results you mention - it's accomplishing nothing for black people. Only alienating hapless onlookers, and delivering trainloads of red meat to the extreme right; the kinds relishing precisely the bloody conflict Cooper and Harriot spend the interview forecasting with identical fatalism.
Again, I can't read her mind any more than yours, but if nothing else that interpretation strikes me as more in line with Occam's Razor, as opposed to having to twist the most evident meaning of her words into pretzels to get to the bottom of what she really must mean.
Neither of us is reading her mind, but while you consider her couching to blunt the violence of her words, I consider it a thoroughly dangerous enhancement - evoking as it does the classic pretext of just ethnic retribution. The 20th century alone has entire libraries full of that. Go further back, you'll never see the end of it.

Again, it's not her professed enemies I think will suffer the most from this deeply foolish rhetoric. Some will, I'm sure - Dr. Mammone and his family - but on the whole, particularly with the systemic disadvantages you mention, I believe it's Cooper's own kin that will lose the most in the long run.

---

A little less talk, a little more CANSHUN (`w´メ) In a staggering blow to JUICEH already ailing cred on DEEZE STREETZ, the despised TEKASHI693426642346 or whatever his name is got he ass BEAT BADLY @ TEH GYM - by AUTHENTIC CRIMZ! :shock: They KICK A FIELD GOAL, USIN HE TEEFS!

Image

Di bwoy im a get TOUCH UP YUH RAAAAAAHTID (that hairline be FUCC Image)

Now, all I know about this guy is he's a convicted chomo, and a snitch. So my verdict on the beatdown is LMAO with a side of DAYUM HE TEEF BE FUCC Well, enough from me - the entire rap industry can fuck off into a woodchipper for all I care. 3; Shit people making shit music about shit lifestyles, tbh! Fortuitously, BRUCE RIVERS THE CRIMINAL LAWYER habe u RAPPIN aficionados covered w/HAWT deets! Image
User avatar
Rob
Posts: 8075
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:58 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Rob »

BIL wrote:Coca-Cola diversity training
Whenever I'm being a dickhead I can just say that's how I was born. 8)

I think it's clear that a lot of lies and oversimplifications are being passed around as the gospel truth, and they're not helping anybody. If you've got a very diverse society like the U.S., the way forward is definitely not to create a mythology of perpetual villainy around the largest group in that society - but mirroring some things Vanguard was saying, I'm not sure if a positive way forward has been the goal. It truly is a white evil theory of everything - Google climate change and whiteness or any liberal bugbear and it will be tied to whiteness somehow. My wife has no stake in upholding white supremacy (born in another country and adopted here) and she sees how thick the anti-white rhetoric has become. The people who are most aggressive in denying what is plain as day to any perceptive person seem to be unmelanated themselves, like we've got some kind of autoimmune disease or paraphilic fascination with civil wars.
BIL wrote:Anatomy Of A Race Hustle: When KEEPIN IT JUICY Goes Wrong

That chase view of the bros bookin' it hurling MAGAriffic barbs Image

Now, while I am VERY disappoint in the lads for participating in a wolf-crying race hoax,
They've taken the best approach here and while very funny, there has to be some serious legal consequences for planning and participating in these hoaxes. What did Jussie get, like 1 week in jail?
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

Pathological altruism is a thing, sadly; and those in the grips of drowning will infamously take others down with them.

I was actually revisiting the Juicy fiasco recently, prior to the bros' debut. It really did seem like it'd been swept under the rug.

From what I understand, Juicy got 150 days' imprisonment, 30 months' felony probation, and a piffling (by his ultra-privileged standards) fine. After six very whiny days in the psych wing, he was then released pending his appeal. And that's how it's been since, with the greedy little cunt running around in full martyr mode, to vanishingly little condemnation or even acknowledgement from his erstwhile supporters.

Like the sitting vice president of the US, for example. Oof, there's a decidedly non-fringe voice.

The Osundairos, AFAIK, took a plea deal, receiving suspended sentences in exchange for cooperating. I harbour some faint hope that they'll prove a rare silver lining, here. They're better-positioned than most to tear down Juicy, and by proxy those like him, in ways that can't be IDPOLed out of quite so inconsequentially as when white devils (ptoo! *cracks an ice-cold Coke*) do it.

I do hope they stay out of trouble, at any rate. They clearly have some modicum of athletic discipline, the sort I've seen keep troubled young men away from the self-destruction that's so very en vogue right now. Entirely possible they're just venal graspers, I know, but my presence ITT has probably confirmed my hopeful rube status by now. :wink:
User avatar
emphatic
Posts: 7921
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 3:47 pm
Location: Alingsås, Sweden
Contact:

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by emphatic »

I'll just leave this here: https://youtu.be/6VTWnYOqICk
Image | My games - http://www.emphatic.se | (Click) I have YEN stickers for sale
RegalSin wrote:Street Fighters. We need to aviod them when we activate time accellerator.
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

Jokes on them, they shoulda been less white Image *long pull of soy latte* *long pull on bull's cock*

Especially the baby! *burp* Image

I find Americans and British charmingly naive when they're slaughtering Middle Eastern civilians by the hundreds of thousands, but it gets a bit near to home when they're flirting with South African-style racewar.

Then again, if that guy tried something like that on a Kingston bus, he'd have been stomped into a coma and sent back to his Burgerkin in a shoebox. Disgraceful behaviour like that is bad for tourism. Also, it's one of the few things Jebus not only won't give you a pass on, he flat-out said to fuck your shit up for doing. Imagine terrorising a little child and his parents.

From what lads I know tell me, they're not too keen on Pogrom ala Burger in Nigeria and Ghana, either. I have to say, it seems very much a Burgerthing, outside of their cultural outposts across the pond. So perhaps it's just another occasion to watch it all burn down like Iraq.

Image
User avatar
orange808
Posts: 3209
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:43 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by orange808 »

Usually, invading another nation can almost always be boiled down to one simple phrase: "Let's go start a civil war." ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯
We apologise for the inconvenience
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 13897
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BulletMagnet »

First off, apologies for the delayed reply, internet time has been limited of late.
BIL wrote:It's a layup Harriot doesn't squander, with his apologia for the violence they reckon "white people" will make inevitable.
Is this segment found only in the full video? I haven't had a chance to watch it through yet. Off the cuff it sounds at odds with Cooper's insistence that no matter how wronged Blacks may feel they need to refrain from channeling it through violence; if such an end is actually "inevitable", why would she bother saying that? Again, assuming your summation is accurate, for this to parse you need to get into reverse-reverse-reverse psychology-type "layering" of what she must "actually" be saying.
I also think your scenario is misleading; nobody has done anything, in Cooper's telling, besides existing while white.
It's probably worth stepping back a second here to remember that "race" and "ethnicity" are two different things, and as such "white" and "Caucasian" are as well, though they are, unfortunately, frequently conflated, particularly by the "race hustlers" you decry; while ethnicity doesn't change, race is actively created by society and is constantly being tweaked - almost always to the deliberate advantage of those who would most profit from its ongoing prominence in daily life. Again, I can't read Cooper's mind, but especially seeing as she's coming at this from an academic's perspective, I would imagine that by "white" she doesn't intend to venture into the "lacking melanin decreases empathy" zone, but rather refers specifically to those who effectively transmute ethnicity into race (in their own favor, of course), insisting that an innate, unchangeable part of us can be used to determine superiority at a glance, with no additional thought or effort needed.
The dirt-poor ditch diggers and the filthy-rich slaveowners go into the same neat bucket; some are merely worse than others, when in reality, all they frequently shared was a skin tone.
Another notable thing both shared, with very few exceptions, was a from-birth, constantly-reinforced assurance that they were indeed innately, genetically superior to any and all minorities. Not to mention the females of your own kind, if you happened to be male. Hell, their preachers interpreted the Bible to assure them of both (and some still do). The main difference between most rich and poor whites in terms of attitudes towards minorities throughout much of U.S. history, at least, was that the former possessed much greater means to ensure that their dominance continued.

As you rightly note, the full story goes far beyond whites' desires for cheap labor and social (and/or literal) punching bags, but I'm having a hard time seeing how you can call Cooper's note that only a small handful of whites broke the mold for a very long time as something she pulled out of thin air. The thornier question is how we deal with this history now, when in a great many respects race relations are infinitely better but should arguably have gone much further still than they actually have, and as I've said I'm very doubtful that she's even passively advocating any manner of race war, especially seeing as that's precisely and openly what the folks most eager to "put people like her back in their place" are doing.
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

BulletMagnet wrote:
BIL wrote:It's a layup Harriot doesn't squander, with his apologia for the violence they reckon "white people" will make inevitable.
Is this segment found only in the full video? I haven't had a chance to watch it through yet. Off the cuff it sounds at odds with Cooper's insistence that no matter how wronged Blacks may feel they need to refrain from channeling it through violence; if such an end is actually "inevitable", why would she bother saying that?
Believe me, contradiction is this conversation's lifeblood. :lol:
Again, assuming your summation is accurate, for this to parse you need to get into reverse-reverse-reverse psychology-type "layering" of what she must "actually" be saying.
I assure you, I am as bone-dry a textualist as you will ever find. I also have to say, it's a bit of an ironic charge you level, given...
It's probably worth stepping back a second here to remember that "race" and "ethnicity" are two different things, and as such "white" and "Caucasian" are as well, though they are, unfortunately, frequently conflated, particularly by the "race hustlers" you decry; while ethnicity doesn't change, race is actively created by society and is constantly being tweaked - almost always to the deliberate advantage of those who would most profit from its ongoing prominence in daily life. Again, I can't read Cooper's mind, but especially seeing as she's coming at this from an academic's perspective, I would imagine that by "white" she doesn't intend to venture into the "lacking melanin decreases empathy" zone, but rather refers specifically to those who effectively transmute ethnicity into race (in their own favor, of course), insisting that an innate, unchangeable part of us can be used to determine superiority at a glance, with no additional thought or effort needed.
...you're ascribing this conversation a level of sophistication, consistency, and compassion it simply does not have. Your optimism re: melanin supremacist rhetoric is especially unrequited; the exchange is marinated in its pseudo-scientific bigotry.
Another notable thing both shared, with very few exceptions, was a from-birth, constantly-reinforced assurance that they were indeed innately, genetically superior to any and all minorities. Not to mention the females of your own kind, if you happened to be male. Hell, their preachers interpreted the Bible to assure them of both (and some still do). The main difference between most rich and poor whites in terms of attitudes towards minorities throughout much of U.S. history, at least, was that the former possessed much greater means to ensure that their dominance continued.
The constellation of powerless, impoverished white people who were shat upon brutally by rich, connected, equally white people in America alone is so vast, it would demand its own post.
As you rightly note, the full story goes far beyond whites' desires for cheap labor and social (and/or literal) punching bags, but I'm having a hard time seeing how you can call Cooper's note that only a small handful of whites broke the mold for a very long time as something she pulled out of thin air. The thornier question is how we deal with this history now, when in a great many respects race relations are infinitely better but should arguably have gone much further still than they actually have, and as I've said I'm very doubtful that she's even passively advocating any manner of race war, especially seeing as that's precisely and openly what the folks most eager to "put people like her back in their place" are doing.
I'm sorry old friend, this is getting tiring. 3; Again you are essentially writing apologias for a video that doesn't exist, while I am referring to the genuine article, so naturally we are going to talk past one another.

I think you are loath on some level to accept Cooper and Harriot's exchange really is the extreme right wet dream I have described, lest you find yourself on some common ground, however remote, with said reactionary bigots (I think "broken clock" is an apt label for them, here). You have always seemed a compassionate sort, certainly not given to making disadvantaged people's lives even more difficult, and I can't imagine you find my castigations of these sorts at all comfortable. I don't, myself.

I would only ask you to consider black critique on these race hustlers; my use of that term seems to have made an impression on you, but I can't claim it as my own. That's what black Americans dismayed at Al Sharpton's antics back in the day called that since-deflated chancer, re: the Tawana Brawley fiasco (recently given infamous reincarnation via one Juicy Smouliet, the gay French TV star).

These people aren't helpful to anyone; not the marginalised, nor the majority. They not only foster interracial enmity, they actively promote and profit from it. You don't have to tolerate them, and in fact, doing so might be more harmful to society in the long run.

Anyway, in the absence of a full transcript, and also to do a little self-interrogation, I decided to sit down and rewatch the video. I've taken notes, inevitably coloured by my own perspective, with timestamps for objective perusal. NB: my bolding of the terms "white/black people" (folks, humans, etc) indicates a direct quotation from Cooper/Harriot.

Thesis: The interview (presented in full) haphazardly conflates white-favouring structures with humans of white ethnicity, becoming useless as anything but casually vicious racial denigration/triumphalism.

Additionally, Cooper and Harriot repeatedly flirt with long-recognised pretexts for violent ethnic retribution, allowing them to cross-contaminate peaceful means of social reform - giving this conversation an ironic, worrying potential to spark dismay if not outright anti-black sentiment amongst would-be charitable observers.

I: White People Are Terrifed And Enraged By The Truth

The first ten minutes are spent constructing a strawman, to explain away criticisms of CRT as "white people's" knowing terror; both of suppressed historical truths being revealed, and of "racism being dismantled." Notably, the first white people implicated by Cooper are those of her own political leanings:

"[Crenshaw et al] come along with this critique and they say, 'Look, yall gotta be able to specifically talk about race.' Because isn't it just like the white left to wanna have a broad critique of structures, social inequality, class problems... and then not to wanna talk about the major elephant in the room, which is race?"

Having implicated white leftists, Cooper continues eroding notions of white individuality; the possibility that not all Caucasians are so troubled: "Barack Obama continues to be the ghost, the spectre, the haunting that white folks are running away from, particularly on the right."

Harriot asks Cooper whether the embrace of CRT, and therefore the ugly truths of America's past, can occur without upsetting "white people;" and rhetorically, whether "white people" have ever allowed racial progress in America, without ardent pushback. She responds: "I think white people are committed to being villains in the aggregate."

Aggregate. Late Middle English: from Latin aggregat- ‘herded together’, from the verb aggregare, from ad- ‘towards’ + grex, greg- ‘a flock’. This definition permeates the interview to its core.

Cooper immediately qualifies her statement by citing "Two legacies of whiteness," divided between the Union and Confederacy. She herself admits this is cartoonishly simplistic. She proceeds to poison notions of altruism even amongst "the good ones;" casting aspersions of their condemning slavery, while approving of racism, or being motivated by a craven fear of divine retribution.

Having acknowledged the simplicity of her reading, she nevertheless continues: "I tell white people, 'Why don't you think about being in the legacy of folks who were not Confederates,' being in the legacy of abolitionists, being in the legacy of people who said, 'We cannot build a country and hope to sustain it by keeping an entire class and race of people subjugated.'" Figures such as John Brown are mooted as a treat for "white people," who will ostensibly embrace CRT on the promise of claiming more "good ones." Cooper entreats "them" to "start there;" the implication being that the white flock's default state is one alien to that of Brown, Wilberforce, et al.

Cooper then swerves back into the universal villainy narrative: "The real issue here is... I think that white people viscerally fear. It's not that white people don't know what they have done. They know. They fear that there is no other way to be human, but the way that they are human."

II: White People Are A Menace To All Other Humanity

Cooper expands her cartoon narrative, beyond the relative cul-de-sac of the American Civil War, to encompass seemingly all recorded history. "You talk to white people, you know, whenever you wanna have a reckoning about [racism], they say, 'It's just human nature! If yall had all of this power, you would have done the same thing!'"

"And it's like, no! That's what white humans did. White human beings thought 'There's a world here, and we own it.' Prior to them, black and brown people had been..."
The rest is standard-issue black utopian pseudo-history, ala Hotep: a world untainted by whites, and therefore, free of slavery, colonialism, and racism. It concludes with Cooper's doubly ominous insistence that "[white people] think black people are gonna get them back. And I wouldn't be mad at the black people who want to get them back."

In what will become her SOP, when pondering racial retribution, Cooper's latter statement is dusted with her sugary "belief" and "hope" that things will be different, "when we have some power." She is sparing, however; even this sweetening caveated by an acknowledgement that mistakes will certainly be made. Amusingly, having spent this first third of the interview establishing a dichotomy of white villainy and black victimhood, Cooper stresses that a system which determines superior and lesser humans just isn't how black people do things.

We return to Cooper's thesis: white people's terror of retribution at their liberated black victims' hands. Of the latter's faintly hoped-for, inevitably imperfect mercy upon their former oppressors, Cooper says: "That's the thing that white people don't trust us to do. Because they are so corrupt, their thinking is so morally and spiritually bankrupt, about power, that they fear, viscerally, existentially, letting go of power, because they cannot imagine there is another way to be. It is either that you dominate, or you are dominated. And isn't it sad, that is spiritually who they are, they can't imagine a more expansive notion of the world?"

Again, it's great dark comedy that Cooper, having just finished conjuring a Saturday morning cartoon of the world, proceeds to immediately decry a lack of greater nuance.

III: White People Richly Deserve Violence

Harriot's question - can "white people" ever be coaxed into peacefully accepting an honest reading of American history? - having been answered, he seems resigned: "If you think about it, right, then what are the options? One one side: they come around to the majority of human beings' on the planet's way of thinking, and say 'Hey, there is another way to think about power, and sharing it, and the way we exist in the world, and relate to each other.'

"But! That automatically means you gotta give up some of the shit that you got... and if the basis of white thinking is that hoarding of power, and that is essentially how they define humanity, and the human existence... and they say 'Fuck that, we gonna keep all of this, I might as well resort to whiteness and hold on to this little corner of what we have' - if you look at those two choices, what should we expect? Because the only other alternative is a radical change of consciousness..."


We now arrive at Cooper's answer, what The Huffington Post and other mainstream US publications describe as a cruelly out-of-context soundbite; poached from a nuanced conversation on societal structures, one not concerned with any population in particular. With her well-fed face positively beaming in good cheer, she responds: "What kind of question is that? There is no answer that is sufficient! What I wanna say to you is, we gotta take these motherfuckers out! But we can't say that, right?!"

A visibly urgent shift of gear sees Cooper apply another dusting of "belief" and "hope," that "a project of violence" will not come to pass, lest it corrupt black people's spirits. Presumably the same corruption she mentioned white people being, in aggregate, thralls to?

Fortunately, Cooper can take her mind off of white people's aggregate villainy, by thinking of indigenous people instead. "Here is where I land on white people, most days... [tn: most days?] See, part of the challenge around whiteness is that it skews our view of everything. The world didn't start when white people arrived in America, and tried to tell all the rest of us how things were going to go. There were people out here making worlds; Africans, and indigenous people, being brilliant..." - we trail off into more Hotep - "...long before white people showed up, being raggedy and violent and terrible, and trying to take everything from everybody."

Happily, there is no need for ethnic cleansing - which would hurt the executioners' souls - as Cooper regales us with her belief that this sheer weight of history will inevitably claim the latecoming universal villain: "White folks are not infinite and eternal. They ain't gonna go on for infinity, and that's super important to remember - that white colonialism and imperialism has a beginning, and that means it has an end... part of what we are trying to do, is to imagine, what are the steps we must take to get to the other side of this very inconvenient, epochal interruption of black and indigenous world-making."

Unfortunately, this world yet to come will not save us from white depredations in the here and now. "Does that give people comfort on the day-to-day, when you're having to deal with white folks, and the travesties that they create, and the sense that they wanna destroy the planet? Nahhh!"

IV: Hitler Appears

As some escape from the tormentors, Cooper again turns to the nobler members of humanity; specifically, 19th century black Americans, who had the patently un-white mindset of desiring a better world for their children. And better yet, the universe again intercedes: "Despite what white people think of themselves, they do not defy the laws of eternity. Their projects are not so sophisticated that the natural laws of physics change for them. When we humble them..."

Cooper instantly backtracks there, mid-sentence, with the same visible urgency as before. She recovers with a fundamentally reworked proposal: "...when we humble our own understandings of whiteness, it seems like the biggest giant we face, but you know...black folks were out here for centuries, and centuries, and millenia..." - a third helping of Hotep ensues - "...whiteness is largely an inconvenient interruption. So we then ask ourselves, 'Why am I here in this moment?! Damn!' I think we showed up to help figure out an end, and a way to the other side of this gargantuan historical tragedy that is white supremacy."

At last, we see the first mention of White Supremacy, a political ideology; as opposed to the wholesale condemning of millions of disparate persons.

As much as I'd love to twist myself into a broken pretzel of agony here, I'm afraid that given the preceding twenty minutes, I must conclude Cooper means (what she perceives to be) the literal supreme power of "white people" - as opposed to the racially supremacist doctrine espoused by a minority of whites; violently resisted and overthrown by other whites; widely despised and shunned in the aggregate.

Harriot seems to have come to terms with his earlier, troubling realisation, resigning himself to pure racial conflict. "They ain't gonna give up any of this stuff." (Cooper: "Right.") "So what we have to do is, keep nudging them out, to the Left, and then, one day, we'll realise 'Oh! We got a bigger piece of this thing than them!'" Sadly, Harriot doesn't foresee the losers taking this well. "The worst part about it is, they don't understand, because of their understanding of the human condition and humanity, they don't understand that... people would share that shit!" (Cooper: "That's right.")

It's Hotep time once more. Harriot seems positively ecstatic, regaling us with the history of Wakanda, and even "white people's" genocidal despoiling of - fuel for the fires of just retribution, perhaps. Harriot is now visibly squirming in his chair, as he reveals the true, bounteous gift of CRT: "To see the world through the eyes of someone else, absent whiteness. To me, it's more important for white people to see through that lens, than black people." Of course - remember who is corrupt, here. More choice bits of backhanded charity follow: "And if they do, they will fear the changing world, and the changing demographics of America, less." The villain of all human history, white people, is offered a way out of the destructive paranoia they have dwelled in for so long.

V: White People Cannot Handle The Truth™

Sadly, whites will be whites, and in their corruption, they will refuse their teachers - a fate shared by the prophets of Biblical times. So, we again return to square one: dealing with the inevitable "backlash" from the villain, in his deposed rages. Harriot, long accustomed to regarding white people with the grudging admiration one grants rats infesting a house, is particularly troubled to note that the buggers are good at planning; always ten steps ahead. "They're demonising it, before we even get a chance to teach it, to push people towards this truth."

Cooper has some heartening news: CRT can save white children from inheriting their parents' racism! Again, sadly, "white folks" are doing their damndest to suppress The Truth. Yet there may be a bargaining chip: whiteness is killing white people too. Much like Cooper's earlier invocation, of the inevitable tides of history - why flirt with ethnic cleansing, when white people face death at their own "imperial machinations?" Historically, nothing incentivises like the looming threat of death.

VI: White People Cannot Escape Their Destruction

Alas, it's damned hard work to keep a hog away from the trough, and so, we return to evocations of just taking those motherfuckers out. "We might have to entertain the notion that A: all lives are priceless in value, but B: if we think economically and structurally, white lives actually are structurally overvalued, to the extent that they undervalue other groups of people."

Happily, Cooper notes that declining white birth rates are handily explained by this iniquity; and what's more, not only are "they losing," they also "deserve it." In perhaps the conversation's most fragrant evocation of existential race war yet, Cooper paints a summer blockbuster picture, in which "[White people] are hitting us with everything they have, we are catching hell, we are living through this white supremacist vortex that is the stuff of the horror shows I read about from the 19th century... but we're living through the last gasp of a dying..."

There's yet another of those quick shifts into reverse that Cooper seems prone to, whenever the subject of white extinction flutters into the conversation - "...a dying way of being; and that's super hard to hear..." And here's the usual doling out of a grace sorely undeserved; she really has this down to a process. Concession deployed, now we're back in gear, and ready for more. "White life expectancy has gone down for the first time in a hundred years! How is it they won the 20th century, they dominate everything, they got more money than God, and yet somehow, they ain't winning in the clear metrics, we're not winning around the world, Afghanistan is a shitshow... all these markers of American Whiteness around the world, they're losing!"

Attrition will carry the day, Cooper assures, characterising "black people's" role in "white people's" downfall as that of a relentless tide slowly wearing away a great rock. "The waves win!" she declares, with a visible pleasure many a donut has seen in its last moments.

VII: Black Grace Is A Great Comfort Against White People's Schemes And Tricks

Harriot, despite his earlier wariness of the enemy's fiendish ability to plan ahead, and even refuse bait, is very pleased with battle preparations on his side - despite ongoing harassment from "white women!" Black people have, after all, been dealing with white people's shit for centuries, and know their playbook front-to-back. If anyone's going to win this fight, it's them.

Hotep looms, in the nagging question of how dumbass ol' whitey and his lame-ass playbook managed to demolish his way to the vicious racial superiority we have spent the last half-hour learning about; almost suggesting neither Harriot, nor Cooper, have really thought any of this through, or even attempted to accurately model historical fact. It almost seems like our duo are superior to their more outre comrades only in presentation, not substance. Regardless, the important thing is, as Cooper said: whitey is losing, and dying.

Fortunately for white people, CRT is a generous faith, teaching them how to be more like Cooper and Harriot, and not think so much about race.

VIII: White On White Murder Is Rampant In America

Impending white extinction from multiple vectors having been established, Harriot now seals the CRT deal with a dynamite sweetener: rejecting CRT, and creating "a whole nation of people like you," will see whites not just fade into obscurity, but outright massacred by their own kind. This, with white Americans already infamously prone to staggering rates of intra-racial murder! And as if things aren't bad enough, the spectre of ethnic cleansing looms large once more.

Harriot's zeal is understandable; he himself being in no position to relax. Like all black American men, he knows that if he does not stop his peers from becoming more like white people, he may eventually find himself at the once-unthinkable risk of being killed by another black man.

IX: White People Suck LMAO

The final ten minutes nose-dives into an aggressive session of mutually race-supremacist analingus. Even by the abysmal standards of the preceding video, it's too tawdry to make this post even longer by dissecting. Suffice to say, it continues the unbroken trend of lazily, at times malevolently blurring the distinction between "whiteness," "systems of whiteness," and "white supremacy" with many millions of people who are white - collapsing what pretends to be academic discourse into inane revanchist fantasy, built atop a foundation of Hotep-brand alternate history.

Highlights include:

-CRT is a mind contagion that instantly rewrites brain matter on contact; resistance is futile (Harriot has another seizure)

-white people are even better than black people at tricking everybody

-white people appeared out of nowhere and ruined everything

-white people made Baltimore illiterate

-black people built America for white people at gunpoint, this taught them the value of hard work

-BLACK PEOPLE ARE RLY GUD, RLY RLY SUPER SUPER GOOD *flapping hands vigorously*

-black people give life to those unworthy of life, that is why "white people" are afraid of "us."

Conclusion: If you are in the market for sneering racist vitriol, steeped in classic ethno-hostile pretexts, and certain to drive neutral onlookers straight into the arms of the extreme right, but you need something a little more superficially respectable than the typical rabid Hotep/New Black Panther/Black Hebrew Israelite, this race-supremacist revanchist fantasy masquerading as reasoned academic discourse is just the ticket.

Those who wish to see less enmity and polarisation in our societies would do well to eschew the politically-correct ball gag, and condemn this hateful, arrogant, hopelessly myopic celebration of triumphalist bigotry.
User avatar
Blinge
Posts: 5377
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:05 pm
Location: Villa Straylight

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Blinge »

Code: Select all

One one side: they come around to the majority of human beings' on the planet's way of thinking, and say 'Hey, there is another way to think about power, and sharing it, and the way we exist in the world, and relate to each other.'
*glances nervously at china*

Hell of a read. Biruford becomes the Doctor today.
I had white privilege once, i defined it as the ability to go through life and the streets not thinking much about race.
I miss it, I want it back.

edit: this idea that I've encountered a few times now, that top-down power, pillage, slavery etc is somehow unique to "whiteness" or white people or whatever is one of the most retarded things i've ever seen.
Image
1cc List - Youtube - You emptylock my heart
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 13897
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BulletMagnet »

Again I apologize for not having watched the whole thing before replying previously, but I did want to at least let you know I wasn't ignoring you in the interim; I also appreciate the breakdown you posted, and really hope you didn't feel somehow obligated to put in all that work instead of letting me attempt to meet you halfway in terms of familiarity with the material being discussed.

That all being said, I finally got around to viewing the video in full earlier today; I can certainly concur with a number of your complaints about it - the mugging to the intended audience (particularly from Cooper), the conflation of all whites with many or even most whites (not to mention the blurry line between race and ethnicity mentioned in my previous post), the sometimes inconsistent and/or conflicting tone and rhetoric. In terms of the "overall" message being sent, especially when it comes to violence, though? I understand that you're coming at this from a different part of the world and a different background than me, and that my perspective on the matter is, if anything, perhaps more limited than yours, but I have a really hard time drawing a lot of the same conclusions you do about the intent of the participants here - to a significant extent, if they're trying to foment potentially-violent resentment among Blacks, so was James Brown, and any other figure espousing some variation of "don't let the bastards grind you down".

I really don't mean to sound like I'm brushing you off here - if there's any particular point you really think I need to address please point it out and I'll try my best to do so, and may well agree with you on it to at least some degree - but in a nutshell about the worst adjective I can bring myself to apply to just about anything said therein is "unhelpful", as very much opposed to "dangerous". Maybe the daily barrage of stuff like this has just desensitized me too much at this point.
Blinge wrote:I had white privilege once, i defined it as the ability to go through life and the streets not thinking much about race.
That's called being part of the "default" race while all of the others are, by definition, anomalies to that default; it's not having to wonder whether a cop ticketed you (or worse) just because of what you look like, or whether an employer didn't even bother looking past the ethnic name on the resume you submitted. In an ideal world it wouldn't be, but unfortunately that state of being is a privilege.
User avatar
Blinge
Posts: 5377
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:05 pm
Location: Villa Straylight

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Blinge »

I have an 'ethnic name' but whatever. guess it's like spreading bets on a roulette wheel.
Is the employer racist? am i gonna be a diversity hire? it's exciting!
Image
1cc List - Youtube - You emptylock my heart
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

BulletMagnet wrote:Again I apologize for not having watched the whole thing before replying previously, but I did want to at least let you know I wasn't ignoring you in the interim; I also appreciate the breakdown you posted, and really hope you didn't feel somehow obligated to put in all that work instead of letting me attempt to meet you halfway in terms of familiarity with the material being discussed.
No work at all, honestly. Objective reality is a snap. Easier than arguing about autofire. :wink:

And as I said, these clowns are first-rate horror/comedy. Were they actors, reading from a script, filming a teaching aid for the recognition of racist vitriol masquerading as reasoned, high-minded discourse? I'd applaud all involved, wholeheartedly.
In terms of the "overall" message being sent, especially when it comes to violence, though? I understand that you're coming at this from a different part of the world and a different background than me, and that my perspective on the matter is, if anything, perhaps more limited than yours,
If anything, as a North American, you are probably nearer the fallout of Cooper and Harriot et al's racist propaganda than I am. I certainly don't have to keep an eye out for new Dylan Roofs, or Payton Gendrons, or Couch Cucks, while I'm at church or the grocery store, or tutoring at the local highschool.

Regardless, ethnocentric violence and its pretexts are very consistent across time and place. As they would be; tribalism, ironically enough, is about as population-specific as sleeping and eating. You can study the depredations of the Aztecs, or Nazis, or Hutus upon their neighbours, and note the same process each and every time.

1] Othering. They're nothing like us. Like many dangers, its infancy can seem cute and playful; "Their food tastes like SHIT, haha!" Harriot makes his living on such.
2] Dehumanising. In fact, they're not even human like us. No comment needed; watch the video to hear this verbatim, ad nauseam, from both speakers.
3] Verminising. Worse yet, they're a deadly threat to us. See previous note.

Cooper and Harriot's rhetoric is soaked in pretext. A pile of oily rags waiting for a lit match. That concluding phase - physical violence - is not my point, and never was:
Spoiler
BIL wrote:
BulletMagnet wrote:
Vanguard wrote:Teaching that all members of any one race are inherently more privileged than all members of any other race is both transparently false
What? Who the hell claims that? Nobody is "inherently" privileged: if society gives any group a default leg up over another it's by design, the result of deliberate and ongoing decisions and actions, which can be both quantified and thus changed.
Rutgers employs openly violent racist Brittney Cooper, who is not at all exceptional. Her rhetoric is so plentiful, at the moment, I'm spoiled for choice. In classic wink/nudge mode, Cooper fantasises of "Taking these motherfuckers out" - gloatingly framing the thought as a fond, justifiable, but graciously-declined option. It would "hurt her soul," she says.

I dislike soundbites, but if you're pressed for time, consider this timestamp my source. I suggest watching the whole thing; it's soaked through with incipient murder dressed up as grinning smarm. The commissioners of an atrocity often do sport leering grins, come to think of it; the beast let out of its cage in a flood of endorphins and tribal well-being. A choice cut is the "What was she wearing?" implication that, without unquestioning ideological surrender, indiscriminate slaughter will be tacitly invited.

Her interviewer Michael Harriot, of frequent media acclaim, is only superficially less hateful. Harriot dedicates his writings to examining the purportedly inborn - not learned, or designed - features of "white people," with a nose-pinching disgust familiar to anyone who's read race-supremacist doctrine. Again, the implication is always there: It'd solve so many problems if we just took these motherfuckers out.

As said, it's trivially easy to find celebrations of this bigotry in both the US and English mainstream. If anyone wants me to back up that claim, just ask. I've been watching this build up for the last decade or so, knowing full well the roots extend generations further back.

What you describe sounds hopeful. In my adopted country, I described a similar process, in the reaction to Stephen Lawrence's murder. But given the mainstream acclaim your country and mine are currently lavishing on flirtations with tribal warfare and outright ethnic cleansing - do you understand why skeptics like myself have little faith in the discerning restraint you speak of?
In fact, it cannot be the point, when criticising extant rhetoric. If it is, your criticism has likely come too late. Very brave men, some of whom I'm proud to call my forefathers, rammed tanks through the Nazi death camps' gates, in one recorded instance kicking down the front office door, and hosing down the monsters inside burning intake ledgers. Their intervention did nothing for the open graves full of emaciated corpses out back, writhing under the action of decomposition.

To be clear, I don't foresee Hotep death camps in America's future. Just lots of Michael Mammones, and even more staggering levels of black-on-black murder. Waiting until things are terminal is a lousy way to go about things. You wouldn't wait until the roofer who got nipped by a bat is prostrate, seizing, and foaming at the mouth to call the doctor for a rabies shot. You certainly wouldn't tell the doctor "Psh! It was just a little nibble on his thumb! Mr. Bat was scurred! He's just being a big baby LMAO"
but I have a really hard time drawing a lot of the same conclusions you do about the intent of the participants here - to a significant extent, if they're trying to foment potentially-violent resentment among Blacks, so was James Brown, and any other figure espousing some variation of "don't let the bastards grind you down".
I think you meant to link the lesser-known "Say It Rightly / Death To Whitey" Image
Spoiler
Uh, with your bad self
Say it louder (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it louder (I'm Black and I'm proud)

Looky here
Some people say we got a lot of malice
Some say it's a lotta nerve
But I say we won't quit moving
Until we get what we deserve
We've been 'buked and we've been scorned
We've been treated bad, talked about
As sure as you're born
But just as sure as it take two eyes to make a pair, huh
Brother, we can't quit until we get our share

Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
One more time, say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)

I've worked on jobs with my feet and my hands
But all the work I did was for the other man
And now we demands a chance
To do things for ourselves
We're tired of beating our heads against the wall
And working for someone else

Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)

Ow!
Ooh-wee, you're killing me
Alright, uh, you're out of sight
Alright, so tough, you're tough enough
Ooh-wee, uh, you're killing me, ow

Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it louder (I'm Black and I'm proud)

Now we demand a chance to do things for ourselves
We're tired of beating our heads against the wall
And working for someone else
Look here, there's one thing more I got to say right here
Now, we're people, we like the birds and the bees
And we'd rather die on our feet than keep living on our knees

Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Lordy, Lordy, Lordy, say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)

Ow!
Uh, alright now
Lordy
You know we can do the boogaloo
Now we can say we do the Funky Broadway
Now we do
Ha, sometimes we dance, we sing, and we talk
You know I do like, I do the Camel Walk
Alright now, ha, alright
Alright now, ha

Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Let me hear ya, say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)

Now we demand a chance to do things for ourselves
We're tired of beating our heads against the wall
And working for someone else, huh
You know, we are people, too
We like the birds and the bees
But we'd rather die on our feet
Than keep living on our knees

Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Let me hear ya, ha
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)

Ow!
ooh-wee, you're killing me
Alright, uh, outta sight, alright, you're outta sight
Ooh-wee, oh Lord
Ooh-wee, you're killing me
Ooh-wee, ooh-wee, ooh-wee, ooh-wee, OW

Say it loud, huh (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
God, I feel it, say it loud, uh (I'm Black and I'm proud)
Say it loud (I'm Black and I'm proud)
All JB's tune, beloved the world over, says is: black Americans have been wronged, and scorned, and vilified - all true! it's easily verified recent history, much contemporaneous with the song itself - and are humans just like everybody else, deserving of the same rights. You might also cite Bob Marley & The Wailers' similarly transcendent Exodus or Redemption Song.

These songs' shared message is the utter antithesis of what Cooper and Harriot are saying. C&H's passionate thesis is not that black descendants of slaves, wronged by history, must be restored to the same regard as everyone else. Their message is that white people are nothing like everybody else; uniquely dangerous, globally rapacious, spiritually corrupt, and on top of all that: viciously resistant to changing their ways.

This is the domain not of MLK, or even Malcom X, but the Nation of Islam, the New Black Panthers, the Black Hebrew Israelites. Less chalk and cheese, more chalk and napalm.
I really don't mean to sound like I'm brushing you off here - if there's any particular point you really think I need to address please point it out and I'll try my best to do so, and may well agree with you on it to at least some degree - but in a nutshell about the worst adjective I can bring myself to apply to just about anything said therein is "unhelpful", as very much opposed to "dangerous". Maybe the daily barrage of stuff like this has just desensitized me too much at this point.
Unhelpful, absolutely. I don't know the state of US education. I'm very familiar with both my home country's, and the English curriculum it was derived from. I learned the formidably ancient history of slavery up to the then-present day, and the Holocaust (with a tie-in to contemporary Balkan and Rwandan atrocities), and the various horrors witnessed up and down the Americas, again from the times of Cortez and Columbus up to the late 20th century, all in dispassionate detail. This used to be the most basic rubric of history education: that the past and the future were two sides of the same coin, and that ignoring the former would invite an inevitable return to it.

If what Cooper and Harriot claim is true - that white supremacists are suppressing this knowledge - then that is an appalling situation. Learning these things is largely why I'm able to instantly recognise newer instances. Like their video, and the debilitating race hustler industry it epitomises.

But do you think the average white onlooker, of no particular political leanings, and bearing no ill will towards anyone - I realise C&H would scoff at the notion, probably while twitching violently and flapping their hands, but for the sake of argument, let's allow whitey the presumption of innocence - is going to come away at all convinced of Critical Race Theory's good intentions for their children?

To them, it'll prove dismaying. To those already leery of the the left? It'll confirm all their fears. To the extreme right, actively recruiting? This video is bloody red meat. Barely legal porn. Weapons-grade jetfuel. A sugar rush of the most brutally uncharitable bias confirmations imaginable. "You are incurably villainous, and it's good you are rapidly dying out, in fact you deserve even worse."

It is indeed incredibly unhelpful, to all concerned - black Americans no exception! (it benefits the race hustlers themselves, obviously - that's an eternal constant)

Sylvester James Gates, whose expectant parents struggled to find a hospital for him to be born in, in 1950s Florida, was recently on Glenn Loury's podcast. His telling of historic anti-black bias in his field - largely centered on that of William Shockley, as integral a man to this community's raison d'etre as you could find - is relevant here, I believe. Gates describes the founding of the National Association of Black Physicists, to whom any and all are welcome. That is productive. Imagine them instead turning away white applicants appalled at the racist notions of Shockley et al, or forcing them to grovelingly accept their inborn sub-humanity.

I think I've said all I can on this matter - I hope it's clear, it's not some thin-skinned (dohoho) tribalism (oof) compelling a response on my part. You can take race-supremacist doctrine and toggle all the relevant variables; I'll balk in dismay every time.
Blinge wrote:I had white privilege once, i defined it as the ability to go through life and the streets not thinking much about race.
That's called being part of the "default" race while all of the others are, by definition, anomalies to that default; it's not having to wonder whether a cop ticketed you (or worse) just because of what you look like, or whether an employer didn't even bother looking past the ethnic name on the resume you submitted. In an ideal world it wouldn't be, but unfortunately that state of being is a privilege.
I can't verify if foreign-sounding names are being passed over for jobs, here in England. I'm sure it happens, people are a diversely unjust lot. However, I can verify that the BBC, and multiple branches of the British Armed Forces, both subsidised by ostensibly white taxpayers like Blinge and myself, are actively disadvantaging whites from job roles:

Springtime is NOT for whitey! Funny, that... I'm lily-white, but half my mom's family tree is Black As All Hell™, and holds a wealth of botanical, zoological, and agricultural knowledge I'm sure could prove valuable. I'm not too dumb, either, and I even smell nice. I bet I, and the hundreds of thousands exactly like me - fallout of empire, and all that - could've made fine candidates, who'll now be laughed out of the room. Crumbs! :sad:

White people can't fly planes for shit. Enemy pilots can see the sunlight reflecting off their bioluminscent mugs, and land instant killshots from a thousand yards. What do you mean "just black them up," you big racist!

It always makes me think of a person falling off their bike to one side, wrenching all the way to the other extreme in the hopes of finding equilibrium. It's very en vogue at the moment, though people are starting to notice the wobbling farce, thank God. There are an absolute shit-ton of cases to cite, I will add more later if you like. I have to hop on the train and try not to do a racism by, I don't know, putting mayo on my BLT or something.

Image
User avatar
Sengoku Strider
Posts: 2213
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2020 6:21 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Sengoku Strider »

BIL wrote:"And it's like, no! That's what white humans did. White human beings thought 'There's a world here, and we own it.' Prior to them, black and brown people had been..."
Image

The largest land-based empire in history. Doggone it, why did white people do this? Or found the Abbasid Caliphate? The Manchurian Qing Empire? Incans? Achemanid Empire? Xianbei Confederation? Ottomans, Rashidun caliphate, Mauryan Empire, Dzungar, Seljuqs, Timurid Empire, Aksumite Empire, Srivijaya...

[Fun fact, 82 of the 100 largest empires in history are non-European. That's 82%, for those of you keeping score at home.]
User avatar
Blinge
Posts: 5377
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 4:05 pm
Location: Villa Straylight

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Blinge »

CRT accomplishes some truly great contortions when it calls asians (BUT NOT MIDDLE EAST LOL) "white-adjacent" or the 'model minority' .

I imagine this would be the answer to your point and mine, Strider.
Image
1cc List - Youtube - You emptylock my heart
User avatar
drauch
Posts: 5638
Joined: Thu Oct 30, 2008 6:14 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by drauch »

If you're going to talk about CRTs you should probably move all discussion to the Hardware subforum.
BIL wrote: "Small sack, LOTS OF CUM" - Nikola Tesla
User avatar
Sengoku Strider
Posts: 2213
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2020 6:21 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Sengoku Strider »

Blinge wrote:CRT accomplishes some truly great contortions when it calls asians (BUT NOT MIDDLE EAST LOL) "white-adjacent" or the 'model minority' .

I imagine this would be the answer to your point and mine, Strider.
Genghis Khan, model minority.
User avatar
Rob
Posts: 8075
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:58 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Rob »

Blinge wrote:CRT accomplishes some truly great contortions when it calls asians (BUT NOT MIDDLE EAST LOL) "white-adjacent" or the 'model minority' .
The most telling thing to me about "white-adjacent" is how it's understood by everyone to be a slur, like "whiteness" is a slime to dump over someone Nickelodeon-style.

But "model minority" has definitely been retired.
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

Furries BTFO 3;

Image

-young homie pokes the furry beehive @ twitter, tells 'em he's successfully lobbied to ban furries in AZ (they believed this Image)

-sets up burner PN purportedly for complaints, furries complained violently, got recorded 3; 3; 3; Image Image Image

Image
User avatar
Vanguard
Posts: 967
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Vanguard »

BulletMagnet wrote:For all their bellyaching about what coddled wimps kids are these days, the near-universal "belief" that the above idea will absolutely destroy their children from the inside out reveals without a doubt that the "stop woke" act and other culture-war garbage has nothing whatsoever to do with their kids' well-being, but rather their own uninterrupted, all-numbing comfort.
Both conservatives and liberals are first and foremost looking for personal gratification. The social justice movement is as popular as it is in large part because it allows its members to feel like they're good people doing great things while putting in minimal effort and providing no benefit to society. Just as many conservatives to some degree enjoy the feeling of being oppressed rebels (we're god's soldiers and we'll be rewarded in heaven! we're redpilled and see through the comforting lies of the masses!), so too do many white liberals enjoy the feeling of being one of the good ones among the oppressive white majority.
BulletMagnet wrote:By this logic Martin Luther King (to say nothing of the likes of Malcolm X or Medgar Evers) was actually a double agent for the white intelligentsia, especially later on as his demands and rhetoric grew more radical. To take this notion a step further, correct me if I'm wrong here, but judging by other positions you've taken I'm willing to bet that you subscribe to the belief that the government conspired to have King killed; even if you charitably suppose that he was only serving the interests of the ruling class unwittingly, if this is truly what was happening why would they have wanted him dead at all, as opposed to alive and whipping up ever more backlash against the Civil Rights movement at large?

With the disclaimer attached that obviously diplomacy and pragmatism do have their place in any push for change from within a society, I can't help but take the opportunity to note that your attitude here seems to very closely echo the sentiment a frustrated King attached to white moderates, which he called a greater threat to racial equality than the Klan and other such groups; more concerned with stability than justice, always willing to agree that the latter was needed, just not at such an inconvenient time as now.
Your premise is that modern social justice movement is fundamentally the same thing as the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s but it isn't. The civil rights movement wanted race blind policies. The social justice movement has decided that judging people based on the content of their character was a terrible idea and that to truly fix racism we need to go back to separate but equal. The ruling class has learned that controlling their opposition is more effective than fighting their opposition. The new left they've built serves their interests. Liberalism for some time now has been the uncontested mainstream political position, and look what the new left has done with its cultural dominance. The rich are richer than ever before. Wages continue to fall behind inflation. Union rights have gone to hell. The government keeps giving itself more and more power to spy on and oppress its citizens. American foreign policy slaughters thousands of third worlders every year. Liberals ostensibly oppose all of this, but they are so needlessly hostile, so unrealistic, and so gullible that they are far more of an asset than an obstacle to the elites. They are an amazing tool for generating controversy and spreading social disunity, among other things.

The democrats had both the presidency and majorities in congress for 2 years under Obama and another 2 years under Biden. They didn't do shit for the working class, and they never will either. Improving wages would do a lot more good for minorities than the absolute nonsense that the social justice movement does. But until liberals realize that the anti-worker elites, including the ones in the democratic party, are an infinitely bigger enemy than powerless rural red state voters, there's little hope for any real societal improvements.
User avatar
BulletMagnet
Posts: 13897
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:05 am
Location: Wherever.
Contact:

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BulletMagnet »

Vanguard wrote:Your premise is that modern social justice movement is fundamentally the same thing as the civil rights movement of the 50s and 60s but it isn't. The civil rights movement wanted race blind policies.
I'll let King speak for himself on this one. If you just want a few highlights try here. And remember, he's one of the select few Civil Rights leaders considered "safe" enough to be selectively taught to general audiences.

I will, however, take this opportunity to *sigh* reiterate the simple, central query I made to you on this topic which you, depressingly and worryingly but not surprisingly, have chosen to completely and utterly ignore outright: if, as King's rhetoric became more radical, he was actually essentially doing the moneyed interests' work for them, why was he (among others on similar trajectories, might I note) offed, rather than allowed to keep on undermining his own movement?

BIL, apologies again, I need to find the time to put together a suitable reply to your most recent reply to me.
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

Don't worry about it bud, honestly. Shumps isn't a deadline kind of place, imo. A damnably comfy old couch, not a desk chair. Otherwise, I'd be fired for not having done a lick of work on that Metal Black: The Second ST, and R2R_IndexV2, and many other illustrious projects I talk about frequently. Image

As in prior discussions we've had of the ol' race relations minefield, I suspect that where we differ on C&H et al, it's more a willful alarmism on my part. That's just how I tend to operate. They're jokers, but, well... you ever see that video - no, I should say "those videos," of truckers clambering atop their fuel tanks, and squinting into the dark, before inspiredly flicking a Bic?

Sometimes jackasses can do astonishingly outsized harm. And even if it's just the nearby pump attendant who gets maimed/killed, that's still one guy that'd have been you or me. There for the grace of God goes someone else!

Speaking of licks, and Chris "WereBadger" Hansen: I wonder if Lorne Armstrong is the ur example for this thread. He's so cancelled, he's been functionally obliterated from meatspace; a living meme. Seagulls would sidle up to a guy eating lunch at the pier, see it's Lorne, and shit on the ground in disgust before flying off.

Image

Not Safe For Work & Disgusting On Multiple Levels (contains SHEXUAL EDUCASHUN :O aka lots of SHEXUAL SHIET, about the Outer Clit, and the Third Clit, and the G-Spawt on the left, and the one on the right - all things a young man should know! Christ, I went too far, I feel breakfast returning on me)

But I suppose he's not; being a convicted felon, whose infamy stems from getting caught red-handed in the commission of his crime.

But then again, he served his time, and is technically a free man. Albeit on lifetime supervision, with one return stint under his belt, a phone breathalyser subsequently installed. Can you imagine? The fucking thing rings at random times each 24hr cycle, and you gotta blow, or go - straight back to the can. Ahahahaaa! Fuuuck! Image Still, better than a family wiped out by an unrepentant chomo on another drunken early-morning beer run!

Buuut no. I suppose infamy is a legitimate risk and price one accepts, when setting out to do infamous deeds. Although, not all infamies are classified as crimes!
User avatar
Vanguard
Posts: 967
Joined: Wed Jul 31, 2013 7:32 pm

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by Vanguard »

BulletMagnet wrote:I'll let King speak for himself on this one. If you just want a few highlights try here. And remember, he's one of the select few Civil Rights leaders considered "safe" enough to be selectively taught to general audiences.

I will, however, take this opportunity to *sigh* reiterate the simple, central query I made to you on this topic which you, depressingly and worryingly but not surprisingly, have chosen to completely and utterly ignore outright: if, as King's rhetoric became more radical, he was actually essentially doing the moneyed interests' work for them, why was he (among others on similar trajectories, might I note) offed, rather than allowed to keep on undermining his own movement?

BIL, apologies again, I need to find the time to put together a suitable reply to your most recent reply to me.
Because he didn't undermine the movement. The modern social justice movement is different from, and undermines, the old civil rights movement. MLK was opposed to the ruling class. The new left is led by agents of the ruling class. They are represented by people like Alexandria Cortez, who recently voted to make it illegal for union workers to go on strike and yet remains a leftist darling.

The establishment is better at the controlled opposition game now than they were 60 years ago. If the civil rights movement happened today the establishment almost certainly would have their own controlled civil rights leader who would go around doing the will of the elites. Maybe he'd be told to terrorize the populace and destroy small businesses, much like how the George Floyd riots turned out. He'd definitely demand that his critics be censored, but not any of his supporters. The elites love controlling speech and manufacturing consent for controlling speech. Brazen displays of hypocrisy like that are also a great way to get the public riled up if the authorities need the public to not pay attention to something else. Likely he would come as close to advocating for racial violence as he could possibly get without abandoning plausible deniability. If MLK was that guy then they wouldn't have killed him, but I don't think he was that guy. Just having that guy around would be useful to the establishment because the media could talk about him all the time and avoid talking about King without it being too conspicuous.
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

Vanguard wrote:Just having that guy around would be useful to the establishment because the media could talk about him all the time and avoid talking about King without it being too conspicuous.
See Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, Zuby, and virtually any other black opposition to the "Mostly Peaceful" bleaters. I could name a million less erudite, less educated, but equally reasonable smaller voices, but it doesn't really matter. They're all but approved targets for the "Mostly Peaceful Riots" set and their bleating audience.

Seeing lily-white twatterheads calling Thomas Clarence a Tom, a nigger, and a coon wasn't surprising, but it certainly was illustrative. That's about the best I think can be hoped for, at the moment, when dealing with what has become the opposing cult to the right's worst excesses (I've mercifully never seen either's like around here). "Illustration," literally "bringing light to." Few of tawdry enough character to indulge in casual bigotry when it's "the right target" (quoth fitness expert and warrior poet MovieBob) are going to give a shit, when you point out their hypocritical void of principle. Some less far-gone observers might take note, though.

Some small hope occasionally peeps through, as with Loury & McWhorter's interview with Vincent Lloyd, of the Telluride Institute, who got Lord of the Flied by his own personal Jack most illustratively. (good read)
User avatar
orange808
Posts: 3209
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2016 5:43 am

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by orange808 »

BIL wrote: lily-white twatterheads
Not (really) okay for anyone. That reminds of something.
“He’s the other type Negro, he’s not like me,” Ali once told an interviewer. “That’s what I mean when I say Uncle Tom – I mean, he’s a brother, one day he might be like me, but for now, he works for the enemy.”
- Mohammed Ali
”In a way, Joe’s right. I said a lot of things in the heat of the moment that I shouldn’t have said. Called him names I shouldn’t have called him. I apologize for that. I’m sorry. It was all meant to promote the fight.”
- Mohammed Ali
Great man? Well, I'm not so sure. Looks like he was a good boxer that would do absolutely anything to get ahead and please the mostly white audience to me.

Look at his bullshit apology :

"In a way"?? You fucking kidding me, Cassius? Why is that qualifier there? In what way are you **not wrong**?

Okay! It was just to "promote the fight". :mrgreen: I totally understand now. (Fuck! Seriously!?!) And, of course, race baiting is a great way to promote. What else could he have done? Amirite? Ali practically had no choice!! :roll: (Fuck!!)

If you really wanted anything to change, you wouldn't spit that kind of shit, Cassius.

Could have also apologized without qualifiers and excuses. Yeah, I didn't use the stage name. Big deal. Using the guy's real name humanizes him.
We apologise for the inconvenience
User avatar
BIL
Posts: 19063
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:39 pm
Location: COLONY

Re: The Cancel Culture thread! WOO!

Post by BIL »

orange808 wrote:
BIL wrote: lily-white twatterheads
Not (really) okay for anyone.
Oh indeed, absolutely. Just especially rich coming from the bunch that (pretends to) regard those slurs as self-annihilating hexes; ones whose utterance irredeemably damns even the most neutral white examiner.

Then a black person does something they don't like, and they become like those rich people granted indulgences from the Vatican. :lol: Pretty disturbing, the thought of that quintessentially animal hatred roiling within someone, yearning for release; never self-interrogated or addressed, just futilely buried.

Ali slurred Frazier horrendously, even without considering Frazier put his own livelihood at stake to get the former's boxing license reinstated. Particularly cruel, given Ali came from relatively comfortable surroundings, if I recall, while Frazier grew up one of twelve children of sharecroppers. I remember a fairly recent documentary on the two, from before Frazier died - I want to say BBC-produced - where after their third and last fight, Frazier's son recounted Ali telling him backstage to let his dad know he was sorry for everything. And Frazier quietly replying when told, "Son, now why wouldn't he come in here, and tell me that himself?"

Some basic human credit that Ali clearly felt remorse, much later on, even if Frazier (understandably) never forgave him. I never got the whole warrior poet thing with Ali. Phenomenal athlete, obviously, and charismatic, of course, and he spoke out admirably against the Vietnam disaster. But you could say that about lots of celebrities - skilled, charming, humanitarian - who nevertheless eat their own shoes on the regular, saying the dumbest shit a more introspective soul would recoil from. Tom Cruise was in a horrible state for a while there, seems to have learned to STFU and just do rad movies, thankfully.
Post Reply