prev <-> next
[2020-07-14 13:53:31] - i didn't imagine the sponsors would press the issue, so this change caught me by surprise. ~a
[2020-07-13 21:54:48] - https://apnews.com/b6f6919292f5a3c94cb23d92bde21a54 pretty surprising, though once the pressure starting coming from sponsor, this was pretty inevitable. - mig
[2020-07-13 12:21:04] - Daniel: Lots of people have said maybe he should just leave ESPN and make more money doing his own thing. He might have a big enough name for it. -Paul
[2020-07-13 12:19:47] - Daniel: Yes, sorry. Last week was super busy and this week I'm out of town (leaving today and getting back Sunday). Should be good to go the week after, though. -Paul
[2020-07-13 05:40:53] - Paul: In Woj's case I don't think cancel culture can be blamed
Telling a senator to fuck off is almost always going to get you in trouble -Daniel[2020-07-13 05:40:01] - Paul: You're out on SC2 again this week right? -Daniel
[2020-07-12 19:45:01] - "mosquitoes were more attracted to persons with type O blood, with type A blood being the next preferred blood type" yah, sort of. they don't like A blood compared to O. but they like B blood least. still, interesting. i find mosquitoes like attacking me, but not as much as some, so that's consistent. ~a
[2020-07-12 17:50:56] - a: I think mosquitos might not like A blood? Maybe? -Paul
[2020-07-12 17:50:31] - https://www.si.com/media/2020/07/12/espn-woj-nba-suspension Woj canceled (or, just suspended). -Paul
[2020-07-12 14:02:20] - I looked it up. a+ and a- are both (equally?) bad. apparently a blood is shitty in general. ~a
[2020-07-12 13:57:24] - awwww, i'm a+ . . .
~a[2020-07-12 13:01:26] - I think I heard that O is the best blood type to have and A+ or something is the worst? Definitely don't take my word for it, though. -Paul
[2020-07-12 13:00:41] - We were just talking yesterday (we meaning some family members) about how COVID-19 appears to affect people with different blood types differently and that could explain why it's hard to pin down why some get hit hard and others not so much. -Paul
[2020-07-11 04:50:48] - i guess i didn't realize that at all. ~a
[2020-07-11 04:50:31] - yah. ~a
[2020-07-11 04:21:20] - a: We've come to learn that COVD-19 is not a respiratory illness, but a vascular one. -- Xpovos
[2020-07-10 19:38:04] - a bit off topic, since this is about the OTHER story of 2020: pathologist found blood clots in "almost every organ" during autopsies on covid-19 patients. ~a
[2020-07-10 19:33:21] - mig: https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/10/opinions/the-letter-harpers-cancel-culture-open-debate-yang/index.html To your point, you don't even have to necessarily disagree to be open to criticism.... just raising a different issue is enough: "As the streets fill with protesters shouting "Black Lives Matter," they're metaphorically shouting "Our Words Matter."" -Paul
[2020-07-10 19:10:30] - (And yes, I trimmed out some important softening words just to fit within the word limit, apologies. I wasn't trying to misrepresent, so please read that section for yourself). -Paul
[2020-07-10 19:09:52] - "The rest of the BREATHE Act is dedicated to reallocating funds saved from closed prisons and a greatly shrunken police force to community and social programs — to more equitable public housing, Medicaid expansion, and pilot programs for universal basic income and universal child care [...] give reparations to the descendants of enslaved people." -Paul
[2020-07-10 19:09:06] - https://www.thecut.com/2020/07/what-is-the-breathe-act-and-would-it-defund-the-police.html Here's another example of what maybe some of BLM stands for. Believe it or not, I'm not super opposed to a lot of the policies listed here, until they get to... -Paul
[2020-07-10 19:00:49] - a: And frankly, I suspect that a plurality if not majority of ALM supporters would say that. -Paul
[2020-07-10 18:59:08] - a: "if I had to assign my own core tenet for ALM that is obviously biased by what I believe it would be that police misconduct and killing of people is tragic no matter the race" -Paul
[2020-07-10 18:58:26] - Daniel: The tearing down of statues and renaming of things and recasting of roles and the ideas that in some ways people of a certain race should only deal with other people of the same race (doctors, businesses, etc). All of the other things I mentioned before. -Paul
[2020-07-10 18:53:37] - paul: http://www.alllivesmatter.com/ . . . "we are surrounded by so many amazing living things" seriously though, have you given us the tenants of alm yet? sorry, i've been busy today, so if you already provided it, i'm not being a jerk, i just didn't see it. ~a
[2020-07-10 18:39:58] - "but a lot of what is going on surrounding BLM right now that has to do with race I attribute to BLM as well." I'm not sure what you are trying to communicate here. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 18:39:33] - Paul: The top two things listed there I feel like are bullet points for what I said. They go on to have other things sure. Is the point there that they have other issues lumped in? Sure. That starts to look more just like a laundry list of Dem priorities in general though. I don't think its the healthcare bullet point that is causing BLM protests in the street though. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 18:31:09] - Daniel: And I know you probably reject it, but a lot of what is going on surrounding BLM right now that has to do with race I attribute to BLM as well. Heck, even the ACAB stuff. I see a lot of it intertwined by people on social media. -Paul
[2020-07-10 18:30:18] - Daniel: https://blacklivesmatter.com/blms-whatmatters2020-goals-and-focus/ I know this doesn't speak for all BLM, but it is the website with the name, so it is probably as official as we'll get? Look at some of the campaign focuses... -Paul
[2020-07-10 18:29:29] - Daniel: Sure, and I can be on board with that core tenet (and if I had to assign my own core tenet for ALM that is obviously biased by what I believe it would be that police misconduct and killing of people is tragic no matter the race). The problem is all the baggage surrounding it. -Paul
[2020-07-10 17:19:22] - I think that would be where I agree with you and Paul. I don't think you have to be 100% aligned or unable to critique. Thats part of what I see as the harpers letters point. I think in my head ALM is anti BLM and opposed BLM in my head is bad. Critiquing BLM while supporting the core tenet I think is good/fine. I do agree that there would be those that get upset for critique / criticizing. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 17:06:33] - My biggest issue w/ BLM right now is from my view, it looks like most of it takes a you must believe 100% of all our wants or you are a horrible white supremacist. It's not too dissimilar from the God-Emperor Trump crowd where you can actually align 95% with Trump's policies but if you dare criticize his demeanor even a tiny bit, the maga-ties come for you like they did for Jeff Flake. - mig
[2020-07-10 16:23:32] - Systemic racism being a tricky thing and pervasive throughout culture leads to things like wanting to deal with confederate statues. But I don't think thats where it starts. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 16:22:40] - Paul: I typed this yesterday "If I were to define the core tenet of BLM it would be that systemic racism is a big problem still and causes black lives to suffer perhaps most notably and visibly in their interactions with police." -Daniel
[2020-07-10 16:13:44] - I can only be 50/50 on SC2 tonight. Depends on if Gurkie wants to go to sleep early.
-Paul[2020-07-10 16:12:51] - I don't think it's fair to associate that with today's movement, but there is an extremely strong correlation between BLM and all those things I mentioned, right? I mean, names don't change and actors don't get recast and statues don't get torn down right now if it weren't for BLM, right? -Paul
[2020-07-10 16:11:46] - But if BLM stands for anything, beyond the inarguable (at least to anybody here, I assume) literal idea that Black Lives Matter.... what does it stand for? Just like how it's hard/impossible to pin core tenets on ALM, the same is true for BLM. I would love to see a list of core beliefs. Last time I saw them (many years ago), there was a lot of socialist stuff on there. -Paul
[2020-07-10 16:10:07] - To me, Trump and Pence are two people. Yes, they have a big platform and a lot of power, but they still only represent two people who I don't think anybody would say even represents leaders of ALM. They're just people who use the slogan. So I just see two ALM supporters who have horrible views. Big whoop. -Paul
[2020-07-10 16:08:52] - aDaniel: "your inclusion of those messy associations is not fair or balanced" "I'm still not sure what the core tenet is of ALM is" And that's the problem! There really isn't some well-defined set of core beliefs for either of these movements, right? I actually think the associations with recasting characters is far fairer than ALM's association with Trump, but I can understand the argument against. -paul
[2020-07-10 16:02:04] - a / paul / mig: I could be on SC2 again tonight cause Andrea will be busy. /shrug -Daniel
[2020-07-10 16:01:11] - a: I'm not upset or anything about sc2, was just curious. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 15:43:03] - I think critiquing BLM is fine and good. The hegs statue being a good example. Censoring golden girls seems dumb. But opposing BLM is a different thing than critiquing it. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 15:40:58] - daniel: i've been really shitty at showing up for sc2 recently. sorry about that. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:40:25] - that's a good point. i think daniel has done a good job explaining what blm means, but a bad job explaining what alm means. paul, please define the core tenant of alm: keeping in mind that we strictly *don't* want your definition, but how the leaders of the "movement" would define it. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:40:04] - sorry. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:39:55] - i never added it to my calendar
~a[2020-07-10 15:39:38] - a: What happened to sc2 last night? I stayed up way to late with Dewey playing and now I'm super tired today. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 15:38:53] - I agree that there are messy associations on both sides (ahem Stephen Jackson oof) but I think the core tenets of BLM are WAY better than the core tenets of ALM as I see them. The same way that the literal meanings is 100% for alm I think the core tenets of the movements is 100% BLM. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 15:37:48] - I'm still not sure what the core tenet is of ALM is. I propose that its just pro status quo, anti police reform, anti examining things for systemic racism. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 15:28:05] - i think your best argument yet is the anti-semetic stuff. i only digested some of that news. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:24:50] - paul: both sides have messy associations. but your inclusion of those messy associations is not fair or balanced. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:24:16] - paul: yes, trump/pence are the promoters of alm. nobody in blm has said we should recast characters or blacks seeing black doctors. the statues/riots thing is fine, you can include that, but it can't be the "bedrock" of the movement, unless the "bedrock" of police protection has to be killing black people. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:23:50] - But if ALM gets Trump and Pence, then BLM gets their anti-semetic leaders too. Both sides have messy associates. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:22:01] - And removing episodes of Golden Girls with mud masks and other things. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:21:40] - a: Right! Okay, so now we can talk about whatever political movements are behind them (which is hard to do) or the kind of cultural movements associated with them. And if want to associate ALM with Trump and Pence and denying systemic racism or whatever else (which I will admit is fair, to a degree), then it is also only fair to associate BLM with things like tearing statues down and recasting characters and blacks seeing black doctors...
[2020-07-10 15:17:26] - paul: if we're going with literal meanings only, alm is better 100% of the time. luckily we aren't. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:16:58] - a: Let's do narrow literal meanings then, because I feel like this would be extremely short and one-sided. ALM or BLM? Which is better? If we're just going with literal meanings how can you NOT choose ALM? -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:15:06] - a: I've been arguing it when that was what Daniel was arguing, but recently it seems like we're kinda shifting to the deeper meanings behind it? Or at least he is with ALM.
-Paul[2020-07-10 15:14:14] - a: Do 75% of ALM people not actually believe all lives matter? Probably! And you can always go to the "why do you care about white cops kills blacks when black on black homicide is like 100x worse" argument. I don't think either is particularly helpful here. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:13:59] - paul: i'm pretty sure you've been doing nothing but argue over the literal meanings of alm and blm. if you weren't arguing over the literal meanings of them what have you been arguing? ~a
[2020-07-10 15:12:41] - a: Ah, okay, but that's kinda the opposite of what I am saying. I think it's still to be arguing over the literal meanings of these things (but if we did, I still don't see how BLM would trump ALM) much like it would be silly to argue over the literal meanings of pro-life and pro-choice. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:11:20] - "I do think there are topics that people don't feel are up for debate" I am so, so against this, and this is one of my biggest pet peeves. It seems like instead of trying to have a legitimate debate about issues, a lot of people are taking to just ruling their side as obviously right and any disagreement is off-limits. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:11:01] - i quoted it. the one that starts with "peoples words are often meaningless". at the end i made the "pro life" analogy with "alm". ~a
[2020-07-10 15:09:42] - a: Sorry, I'm trying to catch up, what message did I miss? Why is it ironic that I am pro-choice? What argument did Daniel steal? -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:08:44] - a: I am a little suspicious, though, of how they are counting things. The report mentions, "tax avoidance", which to me calls to mind perfectly legal methods of minimizing taxes like tax loss harvesting. If they are counting that as "unpaid taxes", then that would be really disingenuous in my mind. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:07:22] - a: I have literally only spent a few minutes looking into this, but it wouldn't surprise me if the top 1% was responsible for a large percentage of unpaid taxes because they also pay a large percentage of the paid taxes too. That's how our tax system is set up. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:06:39] - the irony of all of this is that paul is pro choice. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:04:14] - paul did totally ignore my message though, so i guess you got through to him hah. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:03:28] - daniel: "peoples words are often meaningless. what if we could somehow prove that like 75% of the people who say "all lives matter" don't actually care about "all lives"? like maybe you're in the minority here, paul, in that you say "all lives" and actually care about "all lives"? it's like saying "pro life" people care about "life" when it's clear by their actions that they only care about fetuses before they're born." from tuesday. ~a
[2020-07-10 15:03:15] - daniel: you stole my argument
~a[2020-07-10 15:02:56] - Daniel: I'm saying both are political movements with political goals they are trying to achieve and we should be debating that rather than if we can paint the other side into being racist. -Paul
[2020-07-10 15:01:50] - Daniel: I mean, if we were arguing about pro-life and pro-choice the same way we argue about ALM and BLM, we would be so mad at each other and saying stuff like, "I can't believe you are anti-life!" or "How can you be against freedom of choice!" -Paul
[2020-07-10 14:59:29] - Daniel: "Its like how pro life doesn't actually mean you are pro all life" Yes, and being pro-choice doesn't mean you are actually pro-choice when you don't support any kind of economic choice. I actually thought of this same example yesterday. Pro-life can have the literal meaning of being for life... or it can mean anti-legal abortion. -Paul
[2020-07-10 06:20:14] - I haven't seen anyone get mad at the harpers letter per se. I haven't seen anything about it other than on here to be honest though. I think the letter is fine and the idea of allowing for debate is fine. However I do think there are topics that people don't feel are up for debate and thats where the rub comes in I imagine. -Daniel
[2020-07-10 05:41:54] - daniel: "The "wrong opinions" that people are getting mad at are those opinions which are to say that black lives don't matter, that we shouldn't deal with racism, etc." Do you think that's what the Harpers letter was saying? Because people are getting really mad at it. - mig
[2020-07-09 20:37:47] - a: Alex is in public school and Nathan goes to daycare. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 19:50:02] - hah, this is today, "on July 9, 2020, [paul manifort] was taken back into federal custody for violating the terms associated with his early release due to his being observed eating out" ~a
[2020-07-09 19:48:33] - lame that she left off roger stone though. ~a
[2020-07-09 19:46:43] - paul manafort and michael cohen return to prison. daaaamn. daniel, are your kids school aged yet? ~a
[2020-07-09 19:42:25] - richest 1% responsible for 70% of unpaid taxes. i believe it. apparently the underfunded irs is intentional: it's cheaper/more-efficient for them to go after small-time tax law breakers, and so underfunding the irs is really good for the richest political donors who are ok with fudging their tax forms. thoughts? ~a
[2020-07-09 16:15:05] - store=story. ~a
[2020-07-09 16:12:42] - paul: "all of the hardware is there": is the store i keep hearing, but i don't know if i believe it. the model 3 doesn't have lidar. to have an actual self driving car (level 3 according to the 2015 definitions) might require lidar. lidar isn't super expensive, but it's . . . kinda expensive? ~a
[2020-07-09 16:04:43] - paul: probably level 2 according to the old 2015 definitions, sorry! i've never actually been in a model 3, but i've read some. you can't sleep in a model 3; you're still (as of 2018 at least) required to have your hands on the wheel and be ready to take over with like ~0.5 seconds notice. if things have changed recently (since 2018?), i dunno. ~a
[2020-07-09 15:52:20] - they would say "all lives matter", so we should make sure we protect everybody equally. that includes black people, white people, and blue people. imo it's bullshit, because they do actually believe exactly what you said (that the status quo is good), but it's not what they would argue. which is why i was saying, people often say one thing and do another. it's a big problem when the media doesn't do anything about it. ~a
[2020-07-09 15:51:09] - a: I assume so, so what are the tenets of ALM? -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:50:26] - daniel: you know he's going to say they're different. no person arguing alm would argue that as their tenants. ~a
[2020-07-09 15:49:39] - If you have different core tenets I would be interested in your definitions. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:49:25] - If I were to define the core tenets of ALM it would be preserving the status quo, not looking into systemic racism, and not supporting police reforms. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:48:41] - -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:48:38] - If I were to define the core tenet of BLM it would be that systemic racism is a big problem still and causes black lives to suffer perhaps most notably and visibly in their interactions with police. I support the idea that this should be addressed and dealt with. I think there are many other satellite issues around it (statues / anti antisemi / farakan segregation stuff) that can be critique and don't have to be supported as part of BLM.
[2020-07-09 15:45:21] - ALM only became a thing in response to BLM as a counter idea. So claiming it has a different central tenet just seems confusing to me. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:44:28] - Its like how pro life doesn't actually mean you are pro all life when as soon as the person is born you no longer give a shit about supporting them. Just because the words are all lives matter doesn't mean they suddenly get to altruistically claim they support all people when they don't. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:42:24] - Paul: Is there a different central tenet to ALM? -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:42:12] - Paul: Yes. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:42:01] - Because I think the core concept of BLM is good and worth pursuing and valid. I think the core concept of ALM is to deny BLM and to preserve the status quo and to say that police should continue to treat them poorly. If you would like to argue a different central tenet to ALM I think you could try but would probably fail. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:41:23] - Daniel: And on the flip side, you are assuming all the worst of "ALM", that the core tenet is some sort of denial of black lives mattering or has some sort of racist underpinnings or whatever. -Paul
[2020-07-09 15:40:30] - You have a lot of words to choose from if you want to espouse the idea that all humans are important if that is the concept you believe and that you still want to support the idea of blacks rights to treated wtih dignity and respect by authorities. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:39:41] - Paul: It would depend on the context but in most cases I can currently envision yes. Because I would assume that the person stating All Lives Matter doesn't actually believe it and just wants BLM people to stop having attention / talking / acting. I get its part of your point but All Lives Matter doesn't really have a lot of good faith from me currently. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:39:33] - Daniel: Basically what I am getting at (and have been trying to explain for the past 48 hours or so) is that I think you are giving all of the the benefits of the doubt to "BLM" in terms of believing it is just about the idea of Black Lives Mattering and all of the other things associated with it is just secondary noise that isn't as important. -Paul
[2020-07-09 15:38:04] - Daniel: And what do you think about somebody being fired for tweeting "All Lives Matter"? -Paul
[2020-07-09 15:37:21] - Daniel: "I don't support "All Lives Matter" as a response to "Black Lives Matter'" Do you support the reverse? Black Lives Matter as a response to All Lives Matter? -Paul
[2020-07-09 15:35:33] - Reading about the Hegs statue it seems dumb that it was pulled down. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:34:41] - If someone said BLM on twitter / facebook /reddit / the street. I would just nod and say yes rather than feel the need to correct them with ALM. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:33:50] - I support the idea that everyone matters. I don't support "All Lives Matter" as a response to "Black Lives Matter' -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:31:06] - Daniel: "I wouldn't claim that the BLM movement is perfect so if you want to critique it sure but I think thats different than being opposed to it." But see, this is getting back to the previous point. Let me ask you this: Do you support "All Lives Matter"? -Paul
[2020-07-09 15:30:41] - That seems a good response rather than I don't like Black Lives Matter and I think instead that All Lives Matter. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:30:27] - Daniel: https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/wisconsin/2020/06/24/hans-christian-hegs-abolitionist-statue-toppled-madison-what-know/3248692001/ The statues of abolitionists? Also of people like Frederick Douglass, Grant, Washington, Jefferson. Heck, even for those confederate statues I think it should be done within the rules instead of vigilante style. -Paul
[2020-07-09 15:30:21] - Like if you are only concerned about side issues why not say I support the core concept of Black Lives Matter but I have concerns about its satellite issues and the violence that sometimes spins off of the protests. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:26:08] - I wouldn't claim that the BLM movement is perfect so if you want to critique it sure but I think thats different than being opposed to it. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:25:22] - "other segregationalist stuff" I think this is out there but I don't think its the main thrust and more just a effect of more air time / media space being given to the whole spectrum of black leaders which includes those more in the Farakahn (sp?) direction. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:24:07] - oops typing failure - Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:23:50] - other segregationalist stuff
[2020-07-09 15:22:39] - The "wrong opinions" that people are getting mad at are those opinions which are to say that black lives don't matter, that we shouldn't deal with racism, etc. There hasn't ever been the complete freedom to say what you want without repercussion so I'm not sure that BLM changed that. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:20:50] - Tearing down which statues? I've seen stuff about a few questionable statues but don't think its the majority. So sure I"ll give you that maybe like 5% to many statues were removed. Policing of speech? I think this is fuzzy but if you say shitty things and people get mad like isn't that the same as ever? Yes people are getting mad over more things now but maybe don't say shitty things? -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:16:09] - Daniel: "what is the good faith argument against BLM?" Plenty. There's what Miguel said, but also the tearing down of statues, the policing of speech, the firing/punishing of people for having the "wrong opinion" or quoting the wrong things. The idea that blacks should only go black hospitals or patronize black businesses or other segregationalist stuff. -Paul
[2020-07-09 15:07:49] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tex8jHx4pSs this is a conversation that I think highlights some of the problematic aspects of some of the stuff coming out of BLM (purging of white voice actors from nonwhite roles, master/slave, claiming dog whistles when none are actually there, etc). - mig
[2020-07-09 15:06:47] - different tack*
[2020-07-09 15:06:02] - Paul: Perhaps in a different tact what is the good faith argument against BLM? I still don't understand that side. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 15:03:51] - Paul: To be fair I noticed I switched a word. You said majority believe narrow definition of BLM and I switched to all. I think maybe a majority believes narrow definition of BLM but not enough people or believe strongly enough to have held police accountable over the years. So hard to say. In a strict sense of how would they reply on a poll? Probably. In the sense of actions holding people accountable? Seems like no. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 14:57:47] - I think you and anyone else who believes that everyone matters including black people could say "Everyone matters therefore Black Lives Matter" and it would be fine. But if you / pence / whoever refuse to say black lives matter and will only say all lives matter then it seems that the part you don't want to say is black lives matter. So I don't understand where the good faith argument is? -Daniel
[2020-07-09 14:51:48] - Paul: "Since I think we both agree that the majority of people are behind the narrow, literal meanings of the slogans" I disagree. I do not think all people agree with the narrow literal meaning of BLM. I think if that were true then perhaps Floyd would be alive. -Daniel
[2020-07-09 14:48:12] - a: For the sake of our autonomous driving bet, does the Model 3 as it currently exist count as a level 3 or level 4 car? -Paul
[2020-07-09 14:47:38] - I suspect we're going to see a rude awakening for higher education as they try to charge full price for remote learning in the coming year. I think that bubble is getting close to popping. -Paul
[2020-07-09 14:46:57] - Daniel: So it's not just about black lives mattering, but also the concepts of white privilege and tearing down statues and quotas and affirmative action and other things. If you want to just deal with the narrow definition of if black lives matter or not, then it seems unfair to include the baggage of All Lives Matter. -Paul
[2020-07-09 14:44:01] - Daniel: I'm saying whether you like it or not, "Black Lives Matter" does have baggage beyond the narrow and literal idea that Black Lives Matter (much like how All Lives Matter also has baggage). Since I think we both agree that the majority of people are behind the narrow, literal meanings of the slogans, we should be talking about the baggage involved for both. -Paul
[2020-07-08 23:41:25] - tbh even if the prices drop from what they're at now (deflation?), it still will be ridiculous. ~a
[2020-07-08 23:40:24] - what? it's only doubled since we graduated. ~a
[2020-07-08 19:29:40] - Different subject but oof: https://i.redd.it/xcdto6rnan951.jpg That hurts my two child raising wallet. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 19:06:58] - And my larger point is that while cops are the tip of the spear per se the rest of us allow it to happen which again feeds the idea that black lives don't matter if for so long we haven't / don't care that cops kill them. Hence BLM protests. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 19:04:33] - Also "or "Black Lives Matter" that we only refer to it in the literal sense that pretty much nobody disagrees with". I would strongly disagree with this statement of yours. Thats the ENTIRE point of where BLM comes from is that cops keep killing them and treating them like they don't matter. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 19:02:49] - I think its more just upset/annoyed that the phrase "All Lives Matter" has added bagged but I don't really get that as all phrases gain / lose significance and meaning over time as the the context of time changes. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 19:01:08] - I still don't know if you actually are on team "All Lives Matter" or just upset that the literal three words have gained baggage in the context of national discourse such that if you say use those three words your more nuanced position is lost. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 18:58:12] - I don't think its a super secret dog whistle. I think saying "All lives matter" in response to "Black Lives Matter" is very explicitly and non subtly saying I don't want to focus on black peoples problems and I wish to stop dealing with them. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 18:55:40] - Paul: I'm not sure I understand. I think equally no one disagrees with the concept of everyone mattering. Its only the response of "All Lives Matter" to "Black Lives Matter" because people want to say that cops / whoever else also matter (which they do) but isn't the focus. Like if someone says "Save the Rainforest" and you respond with "Save ALL Forests" doesn't that seem kind of missing the point? -Daniel
[2020-07-08 18:52:49] - Daniel: I submit that if we are to debate in good faith, when we discuss, we discuss on the same level. I don't think it's right to say for "Black Lives Matter" that we only refer to it in the literal sense that pretty much nobody disagrees with but for "All Lives Matter" it's always some super secret racist dog whistle. -Paul
[2020-07-08 18:46:53] - Paul: It depends on the context. If you talk about the idea of everyone mattering I think most people (almost all?) would agree (hopefully). If you are talking about the response "All Lives Matter" to "Black Lives Matter" I think you would have way less people agree though still some clearly. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 18:40:15] - Daniel: So, there are two ways to read "Black Lives Matter" and "All Lives Matter", right? We're either talking about the literal meaning (ie, Do black lives matter? Do all lives matter?) or we talking about some movement / deeper ideas associated with those phrases. -Paul
[2020-07-08 14:34:52] - oops - *I didn't read* missing a key not there. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 14:34:18] - I didn't know what a TERF was until like last week so I'm probably not the best resource for that but I read any 'anti-trans dog whistles' in the harpers letter either. -Daniel
[2020-07-08 14:28:25] - If someone can educate me on where there's any "anti-trans dog whistles" in that open letter, please do. - mig
[2020-07-08 14:28:01] - circling back to the letter, I do think if we are talking about "good faith" it has to include both sides. because when I see bullshit like this, I don't think there's much good faith anywhere around. - mig
[2020-07-08 12:08:36] - daniel: I'm pretty sure NFL is happening unless the players totally rebel or the US government tells them no. - mig
[2020-07-07 22:34:54] - On a different topic has anyone heard anything definitive about the NFL? I'm seeing more fantasy things popping up but I'm not sure how much to pay attention since I didn't know if they were still doing season as normal? -Daniel
[2020-07-07 21:10:15] - peoples words are often meaningless. what if we could somehow prove that like 75% of the people who say "all lives matter" don't actually care about "all lives"? like maybe you're in the minority here, paul, in that you say "all lives" and actually care about "all lives"? it's like saying "pro life" people care about "life" when it's clear by their actions that they only care about fetuses before they're born. ~a
[2020-07-07 20:14:26] - -Daniel
[2020-07-07 20:14:24] - https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2020/06/12/amid-protests-majorities-across-racial-and-ethnic-groups-express-support-for-the-black-lives-matter-movement/ So I would contend that this survey supports my overall position. That because most seem to support the BLM movement that then your survey would fit better if people are interpreting the question about the concept of everyone mattering vs the response "All Lives Matter" as a counter point.
[2020-07-07 20:09:50] - Comic relief: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3scAvPTTd4M -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:42:40] - Maybe its the implied part that we are reading differently. I read the statement "Black Lives Matter" as being "Black Lives Matter Too" and maybe you read it as them saying "Only Black Lives Matter"? -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:40:31] - what concepts? the concept that everyone matters is a concept that I think everyone would agree with. I don't understand that part of you statement. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:39:10] - Paul: Sigh.... You still are not getting it. The belief that everyone matters is not racist and I think a super majority of everyone would agree to that. The statement "All Lives Matter" as a response to "Black Lives Matter" is a completely different thing. Just because the three words are the same doesn't make it the same. The word fuck is the same word but it has so many different meanings based on context. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:38:51] - Daniel: Either we're talking about the concepts or we're talking about movements and stuff behind them. If you want to just keep defining one (BLM) as the concept that virtually nobody disagrees with while trying to cast the other as some secret racist dog whistle then I don't think we're going to come to any agreement here.
-Paul[2020-07-07 19:37:24] - ALL LIVES MATTER. I mean, you can't just keep alternating and hiding behind, "Oh, you don't think Black Lives Matter? Huh?" while also taking the opposite side and say, "Oh, All Lives Matter is just a racist term with baggage." -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:35:37] - Daniel: Sure! Maybe that's a reason to not assume that people who say "All Lives Matter" are automatically trying to use the most racist and baggage filled connotation? Regardless, it seems hard to argue that 60% of Americans would be find admitting to a belief that has baggage as a racist term, doesn't it? -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:34:34] - I do think debating BLM seems hard because what is the side you are arguing? BLM is arguing that black lives do indeed matter. The other side is arguing __________? -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:33:54] - I think you would get VERY different responses for those questions. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:33:43] - Thats why I think its a weird survey and I would want to see the question. Was it is the idea that all lives matter more representative of your beliefs or the idea that black lives matter more representative? Or was it does the political idea behind "All Lives Matter" more represent your vs the political idea behind "Black Lives Matter" more represent you? -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:31:25] - Daniel: It's a phrase that 60% of Americans say most closely represents their beliefs. You might think it has too much baggage, but the majority of Americans apparently disagree? I mean, why does All Lives Matter have too much baggage but Black Lives Matter does not? -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:28:45] - Which I think comes back to the main concern of the letter. It seems like it is unacceptable to a lot of people to even debate things like BLM or removing statues or blackface or white privilege or anything else related. -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:27:52] - The baggage isn't just Trump. Its a shit ton of people. So again its not just Orange Man Bad. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:27:09] - Paul: debate with different words that don't have all the baggage? Thats my point. That there is a broader context and if you want to debate your point without that baggage use different words (like I've provided an example for several times now). -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:25:22] - Daniel: "Its the literal phrase "All Lives Matter" as a response to the phrase "Black Lives Matter"." But isn't that how a debate works? You state your opinion, I respond with my opinion. The idea that it is okay to say "All Lives Matter" but not in response to "Black Lives Matter" is basically saying debate isn't allowed. -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:23:15] - Daniel: Oddly enough, they don't have the exact phrasing like they usually do, but it does say, "when asked which of the statements is closer to their own". -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:23:05] - If you Paul or whoever want to make the statement "Everyone matters including black people. Black Lives Matter. So we should work to fix problems inherent in our system" that seems good to me. But that a long hashtag. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:21:50] - I love the headline, though: "30% Say Black Lives Matter More Than All Lives"
-Paul[2020-07-07 19:19:52] - The entire point of this isn't that people don't think everyone matters. Its the literal phrase "All Lives Matter" as a response to the phrase "Black Lives Matter". The way it is used is to say please stop arguing / protesting / talking about how black lives have issues. We don't want to hear / talk / deal with that. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:17:35] - Paul: Thats a weird survey. I'm not sure how to take it. I don't think its racist to think everyone matters and I'm not sure if thats not just what the survey is saying. I don't think that the survey says that 60% of people would insist on saying "All lives matter" when someone says "Black Lives Matter". I guess I would want to see the survey question itself. It seems awkwardly phrased. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:13:13] - "I just started insisting to you that "Black Lives Matter" is racist? Can we make that happen too?" If you could make a case that convinced enough people then yes? Its all just what people believe the words mean. So yeah you can make words mean anything. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 19:06:31] - https://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/social_issues/30_say_black_lives_matter_more_than_all_lives Sorry, apparently my timeline was off. As of last month, 60% of Americans harbor racist beliefs still. -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:04:53] - Daniel: Sure, language can change, but there's a difference between language changing and policing of language. Do we have any evidence that "All Lives Matter" just a few years removed from being something 60% of Americans believed (including a number of prominent blacks) is now a racist term? How did this get decided? What if I just started insisting to you that "Black Lives Matter" is racist? Can we make that happen too? -Paul
[2020-07-07 19:00:45] - a: https://www.newsweek.com/seattles-autonomous-zone-protesters-demand-race-based-health-carewould-it-work-1511163 Another example of me looking at the harsh/angry side of things and seeing this as people of a certain race wanting to associate less with other races and instead associate more with their own. -Paul
[2020-07-07 18:44:11] - that was a weird sentence. I'm not sure that made sense. Orange Man Bad is not the reason that All Lives Matter gets people upset. Though I'm sure it helps to contribute. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 18:43:22] - I mean we are getting back into some but just to be clear its not Orange Man Bad is the reason that "All Lives Matter" gets people upset. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 18:43:09] - I also don't think its "Orange Man Bad". Its a refusal to acknowledge specifically that black lives matter. That those lives specifically should be a point of focus for "the system" because "the system" has worked against them for so long that in order to fix things we need to focus on that which needs fixing. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 18:40:12] - Its not just trump though. If it was literally only trump though I don't know maybe that would still have the same effect just cause of his bully pulpit but its a lot of people which is what changes the meaning somewhat of "All lives matter". Language evolves and always exists in the context of the times. I'm sure phrases like "toss your salad" didn't used to have sexual meanings or whatever other slang phrase that comes and goes. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 18:29:06] - Ugh, anyway, I've written and deleted like 5 things, but I'm not going to get into this again. I just hate hate HATE this idea that somehow saying All Lives Matter is the same thing as "black lives don't matter" because Trump once used those same words and Orange Man Bad. -Paul
[2020-07-07 18:23:29] - Paul: I'm not sure I get your question still but I would agree with the article that we shouldn't have to choose between BLM and fighting against antisemitism. I get that they point stuff out but thats literally the first I had heard of it so while I'm fine with them writing the article and being proactive about trying to keep that sentiment from growing I'm not sure I would call it a major issue either. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 18:17:19] - Daniel: https://jewishjournal.com/commentary/opinion/317074/we-should-not-have-choose-between-advocating-for-black-lives-and-fighting-against-anti-semitism/ You can also do a search for black lives matter and anti-semitism. -Paul
[2020-07-07 18:12:42] - mig: I don't think that article somehow says its ok to spread covid. It just said BLM protests might be worth it for some epidemiologists. I think thats a far cry from where those parents ended up in FL. They ended up in the completely ignore science camp and killed their child. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 18:11:16] - Paul: Can't read the article cause of paywall. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 18:09:26] - https://www.afr.com/world/europe/why-black-lives-matter-protests-are-a-catalyst-for-anti-semitism-20200623-p555ch So a few people using a phrase for bad ends poisons it for all? -Paul
[2020-07-07 18:04:54] - daniel: if experts decide that convid-19 isn't a big deal when it comes to their political preferences, can you blame normies if their advice is ignored? - mig
[2020-07-07 17:50:29] - https://floridacovidvictims.com/2020/07/05/carsyn-leigh-davis/ This is fucking tragic and seems like a direct outcome of anti science / anti vax / anti expert beliefs. I hope they are charged with something (negligent homicide at least?) and spend time in jail. I can't imagine doing that to my kid. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 15:45:23] - Because when people like pence literally can't say the words "black lives matter" its harder to take it in good faith that he actually thinks that. (https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/19/politics/mike-pence-black-lives-matter-all-lives-matter/index.html) -Daniel
[2020-07-07 15:44:20] - It would do more to restore the 'good faith' part of the argument / debate. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 15:43:53] - Other people are out there using words to and if you want to distinguish yourself from pence maybe don't use the exact same words as him. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 15:43:43] - Paul: I think if you think that everyone matters and that everyone should be treated well (which is a very undestandable and good position) you would be better served by saying "everyone matters therefore black lives matter" than by saying "all lives matter". Which maybe seems dumb and illogical but is somewhat how communication works. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 15:39:51] - Paul: I think that goes to the good faith part. I don't think a lot of people make the all lives matter arguement in good faith. I think they make it in order to keep the status quo where not all lives matter the same. Maybe you are an exception and being hyper literal but then that I think is missing the point. I do not think that Pence is making an all lives matter argument in good faith. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 15:29:00] - ease the rage induction.
~a[2020-07-07 15:27:54] - paul: from my example, the president will say there are good people "on both sides" at a white power rally. and what he will actually do is put out a full page ad asking for the death penalty of a bunch of innocent black and hispanic men. i'm not sure things are as fundamentally opposed as you think they are. ~a
[2020-07-07 15:18:40] - paul: sometimes what people say, and how they act, are different. ~a
[2020-07-07 15:12:01] - The idea that we can just shut down any and all disagreement with a position by tarring the opposition with a position which is fundamentally opposed to what it says is just so rage-inducing to me. -Paul
[2020-07-07 15:10:38] - Daniel: "All the people who don't understand that when they say all lives matter they are dismissing the struggle to get black lives to matter in order to get to all lives actually mattering." Right, and I don't want to get into this all over again, but I think this is a gross and supremely unfair misrepresentation and this is exactly the type of thing that I think is really wrong with the discourse now. -Paul
[2020-07-07 15:10:07] - also forgot that he still thinks they're guilty even after someone else admitted to the crime. ~a
[2020-07-07 15:08:53] - god, i forgot he called for the death penalty. ~a
[2020-07-07 15:04:11] - paul: people won't argue it literally, but they'll argue it. the president never apologized for being the reason five people were wrongfully convicted in the Central Park jogger case. why would you never apologize unless thought it made you look bad or you truly didn't care? ~a
[2020-07-07 15:01:58] - daniel: any weekday at 21:00 eastern except mondays. ~a
[2020-07-07 15:00:52] - a: If Paul is out for sc2 is there day that works for you? I can send out an email about it. I think I can do whenever. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 14:59:27] - I think it would be hard for me (is hard) to accept any R debating about small gov / less spending since I somewhat automatically don't think they are making it in good faith. Good faith doesn't exist in a vacuum and its been squandered a lot these days. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 14:58:06] - I guess also "good faith" is hard to define and harder still to determine. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 14:57:27] - Paul: Pence? Trump? All the people who don't understand that when they say all lives matter they are dismissing the struggle to get black lives to matter in order to get to all lives actually mattering. I mean I don't want to devolve to a different conversation but also I definitely think you could find people would argue that black lives don't matter. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 14:54:31] - Daniel: "I think its trickier when the subject at hand is whether black lives matter for example" Is there an example of any significant voice that is actually arguing that black lives don't matter? -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:54:11] - I think it gets tricky because while the idea of open debate is good there are clearly some subjects that are just stupid and deserve to be labeled as such but then the spectrum from there to "good faith disagreement" is going to change based on the person. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 14:51:47] - i have. i didn't notice them when i was scanning the list. ~a
[2020-07-07 14:51:14] - "We need to preserve the possibility of good-faith disagreement without dire professional consequences" I agree with this concept. I think its trickier when the subject at hand is whether black lives matter for example. If we are having a good faith disagreement about economic policy or even immigration policy sure but some issues are harder to have debate on. Like people arguing that covid isn't a big deal. -Daniel
[2020-07-07 14:50:37] - a: Noam Chomsky? JK Rowling? Gloria Steinem? I figured you would've heard of some of those... -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:45:58] - paul: "professors are investigated for quoting works of literature in class" i'm not sure i heard about this. i mean, i could understand this happening, but it seems like a profoundly rare event. and what's more, i could imagine situations where an investigation would be appropriate. ~a
[2020-07-07 14:43:27] - should i know any of these people? ~a
[2020-07-07 14:42:06] - https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/ Thoughts on this letter? I encourage people to peruse the signatories in addition to reading the contents of the letter itself. -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:39:46] - a: Sure, but even if there were parts of the protest that were spread out, the nexus is still packed. I mean, it's kinda apples and oranges because the protests also probably involved like 10X the people? 100X? I have no idea. -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:37:22] - a: Because he's Trump, primarily.
I know I don't say it too much because it's preaching to the choir, but I find him to be about as reprehensible a human being as possible for somebody who isn't a murderer / rapist / etc (and yes, I understand there's reason to believe that second claim is questionable). -Paul[2020-07-07 14:34:30] - paul: hmmm, ok. i guess i'm fine settling on two strikes then.
but i'll still point this out: google images of the protests are going to often show the nexus of the protest, not the "average" protester. where i was sitting (because of the pandemic like nowhere near the nexus of the protest) everybody was ~3 meters apart. whereas, the image of the trump-rally everybody is pretty-much equally distributed. ~a[2020-07-07 14:31:07] - "specifically one for Trump" because he's the incumbent? or some other reason? ~a
[2020-07-07 14:29:06] - a: If I do a google image search for "George Floyd Protest", the majority of images I see on the first page appear to be people packed together just as much, if not worse, honestly. -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:27:50] - a: Eh, for as little as I think of protests in general and this specific protest, an in-person campaign rally (specifically one for Trump) seems like all sorts of indefensible right now.
-Paul[2020-07-07 14:25:31] - i am surprised you call it a more questionable reason actually. i wasn't going to argue that because i didn't think you'd feel that way. ~a
[2020-07-07 14:24:00] - paul: ok, sorry if i'm stretching here . . . but, third strike? they're elbow to elbow. every image i've seen of the protests, and the two-three protests (riots?) i attended, people were not elbow to elbow. i'll be first to admit people were *not* 2-meters apart. but i'll risk that most people weren't touching and were almost always 1-meter apart. ~a
[2020-07-07 14:23:59] - a: And, if it matters, for a more questionable reason.
-Paul[2020-07-07 14:21:25] - a: But, yeah, from this one video, it looks like significantly less masks and indoors, which is two strikes against it. -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:21:02] - a: If you want to say your example is more questionable, I won't argue with you. I don't know nearly enough about the numbers involved (this is one rally, the protests were all over the country) and I assume we're just talking about Coronavirus spread and not related issues like the violence and looting. -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:18:51] - Any suggestions here for books that could be reasonably said to "speak for" the BLM movement? -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:17:43] - paul: so, equally questionable? or no? ~a
[2020-07-07 14:17:17] - a: Hopefully you realize that me criticizing a bunch of people gathering to protest doesn't mean I support another group of people gathering for a campaign rally. In fact, one might assume the opposite: that I think both are questionable. -Paul
[2020-07-07 14:14:53] - I might not be able to do SC2 this week (and definitely can't do next)... sorry. Please let me know when you decide you're playing this week and I'll see if I can make it. -Paul
[2020-07-07 13:51:16] - paul: remember when we were talking about social-distancing at the blm rallies? the ones where everyone was outside, most people were wearing masks, and all more than, say, 3 feet apart? indoors, one mask, 0 feet apart. did i mention indoors? ~a
[2020-07-07 13:33:04] - yes pls. ~a
[2020-07-07 04:37:15] - sc2 this week? -Daniel
[2020-07-06 20:20:18] - paul: mentoring people who are gay, or mentoring people who are transgendre, or mentoring people who are jewish, or mentoring people who like biking, i think all of these things are good things to do. ~a
[2020-07-06 20:19:51] - paul: i completely agree. sometimes its nice to have a safe space. like here for instance. you're allowed to say basically whatever you want, and like 90% of the time we all give each-other huge amounts of leeway. i also felt that way about the "freethinkers" too: they were basically a safe-space for atheists. ~a
[2020-07-06 20:18:01] - a: And you can certainly criticize my mindset for being naive and idealistic and unworkable, and I would even mostly agree, but I think it's something to strive for. I don't have a problem with the prior situation because I know people subconsciously probably like to hang out with people who look like themselves whether they want to admit it or not. -Paul
[2020-07-06 20:16:54] - a: I get that, and believe it or not, I honestly don't have a problem with that situation. But you have to admit that even the most open-minded interpretation is basically closer to white supremacist thinking than it is to a "let's all be color blind and just treat everybody as individuals" mindset. -Paul
[2020-07-06 20:08:39] - to = two. ~a
[2020-07-06 20:08:29] - "black board game designer...it does seem a lot more like segregation of the races than I would like" sigh, i think you gotta be more open minded. there's like to ways to look at that situation, and you appear to have picked the more harsh/angry of the two. i try to do the same when i watch white supremacists talk. i try to see their side of the argument, and usually i get pretty far! but at a certain point they do go off the rails. ~a
[2020-07-06 20:05:12] - a: Or, to bring us full circle, why did that black board game designer want to mentor other black board game designers? On some level, it's about NOT mixing races and only helping out people who look like you. I'm not saying that's wrong, but it does seem a lot more like segregation of the races than I would like. -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:59:26] - a: Or even Colin Kaepernick, who is now being heralded as a hero and prophet... he had a tweet about how July 4th is a "celebration of white supremacy". If the founding of the United States is so irredeemably tied to white supremacy, what is the endgame? -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:57:39] - a: I'm not saying they're the exact same, but I do think they are similar. Maybe "two sides of the same coin" is a good way to put it, since they kinda opposite at the same time? I'm sure you could re-use a lot of the rhetoric and just replace "white" with "black" in many cases. -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:40:10] - paul: i watched one documentary in the past 10 years. i'm no expert. ~a
[2020-07-06 19:39:31] - paul: you're allowed to have those feelings, but i definitely disagree. i don't think blm and white privilege is the same thing as separating the nation into two parts as richard spencer/jared taylor are promoting. ~a
[2020-07-06 19:37:49] - a: Sorry, I'm not as familiar with white supremacist newsletters like you are.
-Paul[2020-07-06 19:36:54] - a: Right, and a lot of the rhetoric I am seeing on the left (focus on white privilege and black lives matter and only the appropriate minorities can play minority roles etc) seems closer to that kind of thinking than it does to my own personal thinking. Both sides seem more interested in drawing clear divisions between the races. -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:34:41] - paul: lol there's a huge typo at the top of your newsweek link. they said "american resistance" and they meant to say "american renaissance".
btw, i mentioned jared taylor earlier. he's mentioned in the documentary i touched on earlier (and his organization that the typo was about). ~a[2020-07-06 19:29:28] - paul: richard spencer had some ideas along those lines that kinda blew my mind away (lets ignore the literal "revolution" he wants to happen first), he thinks we need two nations. split the US in half: one half for each race (white and black only i guess). he also (!) suggested that gay people would be allowed on both sides. he doesn't like gay people, but he recognizes that they'll be born on both sides. ~a
[2020-07-06 19:23:12] - a: https://www.newsweek.com/alt-right-anti-semitism-black-nationalist-unite-714434 Here we go: "An ideological alliance between white and black nationalists makes some sense on a political level. Both groups want to form a country without the other one in it." -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:22:06] - paul: you could use any of them. most of them believe this. youngest to oldest: richard spencer, jared taylor, david duke (last two are about the same age actually). ~a
[2020-07-06 19:21:50] - a: https://www.nytimes.com/1985/10/12/us/white-supremacists-voice-support-of-farrakhan.html I guess they also are united against the Jews, ironically enough. -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:20:49] - a: I can't speak too much more to that, but it does strike me that both sides seem far more obsessed with race than I am comfortable with, so there is some similarity there. -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:19:20] - a: There's a "horse-shoe theory" of the far right and far left that says that they are actually, in many way, more similar to each other than they are to the center. A common example I think is that both Louis Farrakhan and... some white supremacist whose name escapes me, agree that whites and blacks should not mix and live separately. -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:16:04] - paul: something that surprises me is a lot of white supremacy groups like to point out that a bunch of asian races are smarter than whites/europeans. i'm not meaning this to comment on your whole ranking thing, but it's something i observed when watching a documentary on the alt right. (documentary is called "alt-right: age of rage". it's on netflix. it's about the charlottesville protest/murder, but lots of other stuff too) ~a
[2020-07-06 19:15:46] - Or apparently now a half white half Jewish girl can't voice a half black half Jewish girl because I guess her non-half-blackness trumps the fact that she is half Jewish? -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:11:57] - a: And it also goes to the discussion around Buttigieg, and if it was okay to basically dismiss him as just another white male or if he could count as a disadvantaged minority on account of him being gay. -Paul
[2020-07-06 19:11:24] - eventually we'll all be multiracial, and we'll find something else to discriminate on. ~a
prev <-> next