The lord giveth the lord taketh away. sort of.

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by steve knight, Mar 24, 2017.

  1. steve knight macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #1
    Sad old church was lost but it may have been contaminated by white supremacist cooties already.

    Fire Consumes North Dakota Church Owned By White Supremacist
    Neo-Nazi fears stabbing of black man may lead to ‘unfair’ discrimination against white supremacists


    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...upremacist-murder_us_58d418cce4b02d33b749bb7b

     
  2. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #2
    Seems like you are combining two different issues
     
  3. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #3
    How many white supremacist threads can there be at once? one is suffering the faith of god and one may suffer (G)
     
  4. jkcerda macrumors 6502

    jkcerda

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2013
    Location:
    Criminal Mexi Midget
    #4
    There was a member here that would argue most threads would have some level of white supremacy:p
     
  5. HEK Suspended

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #5
    Yeah and until we get a choice of white letters on black background, I say my iPhone screen is supremely white.
     
  6. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #6
    Doesn't iOS control have an accessibility panel like OS does where you can invert? :) At one point I think I was using it to be able to read one of Bloomberg's experiments in how to present a web page but it may have been on a laptop.

    I was just reading some book review in the WaPo, about a book that apparently waded through tons of social media posts and mea culpa op-ed pieces and came to the conclusion that focusing on "white privilege" doesn't really help illuminate solutions to our assorted inequities or majority-committed iniquities either, might even make things worse, so that forum member you alluded to may not be accomplishing whatever he or she imagines. Here's the review, it's a slog since the whole "white privilege" thing has its own minefield of already trite references, which the reviewer tries to summarize. Read the last three paragraphs including his one-liner at the end, it's enough lol. I think the book itself will never make my list.

    For myself I was kinda fond of one of the reviewer's opening remarks about the book, which he pegs thus:

    The result is “The Perils of ‘Privilege,’ ” an often lively and more often meandering book that will be of intense interest to the sort of people who are up on the latest cultural criticism on the state of our cultural criticism. Unless you are steeped in the privilege debates already, the book will be most striking for its obsessively narrow focus, and for its expenditure of Bovy’s analytic and writing talents on a work that explores the vicious and petty ways people talk about a concept more than it interrogates the truth of the concept itself. If this book constitutes a “takedown” of the privilege orthodoxy, as the author suggests, it is very much an inside job.
    It's entirely possible the author will think that review was a hatchet job...
     
  7. WarHeadz macrumors 6502a

    WarHeadz

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2015
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #7
    Why are all white supremacists Trump supporters?
     
  8. steve knight thread starter macrumors 68020

    steve knight

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2009
    #8
    trump is their god.
     
  9. Zombie Acorn macrumors 65816

    Zombie Acorn

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    #9
    Unfair discrimination of white supremacists? Lol
     
  10. VulchR macrumors 68020

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #10
    Perhaps this wasn't arson - at least I hope so. Good thing nobody was hurt. If it was arson, it shouldn't be condoned or tolerated. Ever.

    In this case it will only fuel the paranoia of a group of people who are already flirting with being wholly unhinged.
     
  11. ibookg409 Suspended

    ibookg409

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2016
    Location:
    Portsmouth, NH
    #11
    Why were all black panthers and La raza racists Obama supporters?
     
  12. Dagless macrumors Core

    Dagless

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Location:
    Fighting to stay in the EU
    #12
    I wonder this. There's certainly a stereotype, I've noticed it here in the UK too. Every loosely-known Brexit supporter I know here posts racist tripe on Facebook. It's a stereotype that I'd love to look into more.
     
  13. BeeGood macrumors 68000

    BeeGood

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2013
    Location:
    Lot 23E. Somewhere in Georgia.
    #13
    Because they all have one thing in common. Varying degrees of xenophobia.

    -White supremacists tend to be xenophobic.
    -Trumps rhetoric fuels xenophobia
    -And at least a small part of the support for Brexit was motivated by xenophobia.
     
  14. LizKat macrumors 68040

    LizKat

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2004
    Location:
    Catskill Mountains
    #14
    Maybe they're not. I'd suggest that racism is not the real propellant under our political differences today anyway.

    Now, IF white nationalists tend to favor Trump and IF members of the Black Panthers or La Raza tended to favor Obama, there are more than a few reasons past race that may have been in play: political platform preferences, common sense assessments of how pols' past promises stacked up, wishes, hopes, dreams, rage at "the machine". And I can seem any of those voters becoming disappointed at performance of their choices, and flipping a vote out of disgust. Our politics may stay pretty chaotic for awhile but I can see some good coming out of it. It's becoming harder to predict where it's safe to throw big money into political races.

    I can see some disgruntled Scots-Irish-American living in Kentucky in 2012, maybe voted for McCain in 2008 and next faced with a choice between, Romney and Obama, deciding to go for Obama, figuring a vulture capitalist (well... "a rich guy") is not going to find a lot to flip in a stone broke county and a black guy might at least have more heart for the poor.

    And I can see that same guy in 2016 deciding 4 years of giving a shot to the guy with a heart didn't put coal back on its feet nor bread on the table and meanwhile the kids have left the nest and live in Kansas City or Chicago and there's no one left to fix cars or sell bread and butter, and the only reachable Walmart has closed up shop.

    And now, even this soon into Trump's presidency, I can see voters rethinking their choices after all the dust that the wretched AHCA bill's demise kicked up before it was pulled. Of course it's too soon to see whether that will translate at the ballot box to a party flip, or a push to one wing or the other of the Republican Party.

    The same is going on with the Democrats, where the DNC may stick to its shopworn top-down ways, but the progressive wing aims to make itself into a grassroots force likely to create a more noticeably independent caucus on the Democratic side of the aisles going forward. After all, the progressives are already holding weekend seminars to organize for the 2018 races and the DNC is apprarently still focused on planting media pieces trying to revive Clinton.

    All in all the experiences of 2016 make me understand more of what drives the voters who have turned the House Freedom Caucus into a force. I don't think the caucus-hostage-taking route works very well but I certainly understand the drive.

    Bit by bit we all learn it's depressing to peg expectations on politicians since they're all beholden to interests parked on K street in DC. Trump promised something different. It sounded different enough to give it a shot. We've focused on his election and his antics since then, but the shift meanwhile to voters' having become more discerning about promises vs performance (on both sides of the aisle) is probably the more startling story that's starting to play out in the House of Representatives now.
    .
    If you look at what's happening in both parties, it's clear that Americans realize yes/no or left/right is not the whole picture of most questions, nor the solution to any question of political significance. And they are starting to make those realizations clear at the ballot box, so ending up with representatives that more finely tune their political preferences past This Party or That Party. We may be headed back to that more negotiation-capable kind of House , where there are enough "factions" on both sides of the aisle to enable some cross-party dealmaking just because of overlap across parties in a few caucuses. Blue dog Dems and moderate Republicans are on speaking terms... which is a start. Maybe some of those anti-crossparty rules that tend to obstruct bipartisanship in the House will fall away again over the next few years. The voters foot the bill for Congressmen's paychecks. We get a say in those arcane rules.

    What may not have struck the consciousness of caucus-minded voters quite yet is that even after one refines one's choice of representative to more fully define what one expects of a political party --and so of a particular caucus-- is that after the elections, comes governance. After the members all take their seats, they do still have to govern, and so still need to arrive at a way to move forward on issues of pressing concern to the country as a whole.

    Negotiation in democratic process does not mean tyranny of a majority, but it also doesn't mean hostage-holding by a minority. Hands down, Americans don't like the idea of government shutdowns and they don't really like the idea of a caucus blowing up legislation either. It's possible that pressure from voters to perform may finally override the big monies that support the re-election campaigns of hand-picked House members. It's unlikely that voter choices to "throw the bums out" in the very near future will result in "real change". Still, the likely churn in red-blue seat counts makes it much harder for big money to decide what seats to focus on, so they may go back to throwing money at armies of lobbyists figuring to work with whoever wins.

    Starving the pols of re-election money they can take for granted is a step in the right direction; it makes the representative have to think about who elected him versus who makes appointments to sway him in his office after the fact. And of course that's a reason for voters to pick up the phone and remind their Congresscritter who elected him.

    Look at the House Freedom Caucus. Their coats are on pegs paid for by the likes of the Mercers and the Kochs, but in 2018, the Kochs and Mercers are going to have to pitch their House money into 52 swing districts where progressives are organizing to flip the seats. That won't be some sets of primary races where the Kochs can hope to edge the moderates out in a "safe" red district. That's 52 races in purple districts where progressives figure to pick up the disappointed Trump voters. And white nationalists are sometimes just disappointed populists.

    It's only when we are disappointed that our xenophobia comes into full flower. When things are rosier for everyone, those concerns subside, and that's true all over the world. As long as we allow opportunistic charlatans like Trump and his crew to strengthen the hand of the oligarchs and kleptocrats, political factions that are focused in race or ethnicity will continue to strengthen as well. But the bright side of factionalism turning up at the ballot box is that even though it's harder to govern, it's also harder for the big money to know where to place its bets.

    So on topic: Talk about the lord giving and the lord taking away. When a door closes, try a window... we'll never get anywhere in America unless we look at each other's situations and put the blame where it belongs. We get to vote for who writes the laws. The laws never seem to favor the little guy. What's up with that? Throw them out until the tables turn. We need more laws that favor understanding that global economies are here to stay and everyone needs to be helped to be able to thrive in them. That means negotiations across the aisle. When voters seem to demand it, as just happened in the demise of the AHCA bill, it's a message straight from America to K street: stop the thievery and let us make the Congress respond to our actual needs.
     
  15. HEK Suspended

    HEK

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2013
    #16
    Because underneath the orange tanning spray he is white.
     
  16. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #17
  17. satcomer macrumors 603

    satcomer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    The Finger Lakes Region
    #18
    O he's yours! You can't stop to criticize Trump at every turn. Go outside and breath fresh air once in while and realize the forum isn't the end it's just a bunch of nerds posting alll day instead of working!
     

Share This Page