To be fair he presented it like a retard but he does have a point in some ways, there's hateful morons justifying criminal acts on the basis of an entitlement complex.
I had to stop part way through. About after the point where he started characterizing the poor, unemployed, and criminal- specifically blacks in this case- as entitled, tatoo-covered lazybodies, and then pulled out the bootstraps argument.
All those black people should just get shit jobs. They'll work their way up. Nevermind the fact that ghettos and impoverished areas that typify the areas where these riots occur don't have many jobs available typically, and nevermind that basically every actual study (sociological, economic, and political science) backs up the position that there are immense issues with the current system that lead to these conditions, and that these conditions tend to lead to riots and violence and crime, nah mate, it's just that blacks are lazy and entitled idiots who should get over racism, bend over, and take the sub-par minimum wage in the ass until they can afford to make a couple bucks on top of that. What an entitled twat.
Is the violence and rioting reprehensible? Sure. But happy, satisfied people don't riot. Instead of putting the blame on the typically impoverished minority, why not put the blame where it belongs: on the system that consistently fails to provide for its lowest and continues to perpetuate systems that make escape from poverty difficult and enhance racial divides?
[IMG]http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/05/02/us/02baltimore_officers2/02baltimore_officers2-articleLarge-v3.jpg[/IMG]
Half the cops charged are black. How is this anything to do with race?
I can see this being a south park episode where everyone gets pissed off and destroys the town until they see the cops and then Randy says "Oh they're black. Well I guess its time to go home then."
[QUOTE=I Am A Rock;47652789][IMG]http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/05/02/us/02baltimore_officers2/02baltimore_officers2-articleLarge-v3.jpg[/IMG]
Half the cops charged are black. How is this anything to do with race?
I can see this being a south park episode where everyone gets pissed off and destroys the town until they see the cops and then Randy says "Oh they're black. Well I guess its time to go home then."[/QUOTE]
The female cop's last name is White.
Checkmate, you racist.
[QUOTE=I Am A Rock;47652789][IMG]http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/05/02/us/02baltimore_officers2/02baltimore_officers2-articleLarge-v3.jpg[/IMG]
Half the cops charged are black. How is this anything to do with race?
I can see this being a south park episode where everyone gets pissed off and destroys the town until they see the cops and then Randy says "Oh they're black. Well I guess its time to go home then."[/QUOTE]
Because the skin color of the officer has next to nothing to do with whether or not the police act as agents of white supremacy.
[editline]3rd May 2015[/editline]
unless you think obama becoming president means racism is over lol
[editline]3rd May 2015[/editline]
i recognize this is probably difficult for yall to grasp, but here is a quote which may illuminate it? It is about Michael Brown but it deals with the grammar of civil society that i've been talking about already at length.
[quote=Fred Moten]"We need to understand what it actually is that the state is defending itself from and I think that in this respect, the particular instances of Michael Brown’s murder and Eric Garner’s murder are worth paying some attention to because what the drone, Darren Wilson, shot into that day was insurgent Black life walking down the street. I don’t think he meant to violate the individual personhood of Michael Brown, he was shooting at mobile Black sociality walking down the street in a way that he understood implicitly constituted a threat to the order he represents and that he is sworn to protect. Eric Garner on the every day basis initiated a new alternative kind of market place, another mode of social life. That’s what they killed, ok? So when we say that Black lives matter i think what we do sometimes is obscure the fact that it’s in fact Black life that matters. that insurgent Black social life still constitutes a profound threat to the already existing order of things."[/quote]
Wow, it's not even safe for abstract concepts to walk the street anymore!
[QUOTE=Mingebox;47653286]Wow, it's not even safe for abstract concepts to walk the street anymore![/QUOTE]
All I can see is the sarcasm but tbh not sure exactly what point you are trying to make / what you disagree with? Clarify?
O'Reilly doesn't seem to understand where these people are coming from. When people say these rioters are misdirected, and they're lashing out, that is not tacit approval. They are able to empathize with why these people are doing what they do, but O’Reilly doesn't understand that disapproval and empathy can exist at the same time. These are not justifications or excuses, just statement of fact; people are riotinig because they feel they have been slighted.
"It's the fault of America because we don't provide jobs for everyone. [B]Instead of pinpointing the real problem, and then trying to solve it, you get crazy justification for the reason why Americans are hurting other Americans[/B]. If you can't make big money, then go ahead and sell heroin, they say [citation needed.]"
He then goes on a tirade about how people can't read or write, or speak English. That everyone who is rioting clearly has a false sense of entitlement. And that because people like this exist, it applies to all people in those situations. He says politicians are justifying the rioting as a consequence of us not providing jobs (I haven't seen politicians justify the protests yet.)
This is my favorite part. He says that if you are educated and you work hard, you can get a job. Muh bootstraps, etc.
He opens up this tirade by saying that we should pinpoint the issues that are causing riots, which are lack of good education for poor and minorities and lack of good employment opportunities for poor and minorities. His solution to this problem is to [I]get educated and to get a job[/I]. I shouldn't have to explain how lazy this thought process is.
[QUOTE=Flameon;47653395]All I can see is the sarcasm but tbh not sure exactly what point you are trying to make / what you disagree with? Clarify?[/QUOTE]
I'm not sure what there is to disagree with considering your quote to "illuminate" is a borderline incomprehensible, but as best as I can decipher, he's apparently a psychic who can read the minds of cops and tell that they run around killing black people because they represent some vague concept that sounds like it only exists in his head.
I agree with him about jobs on a principle level, but that doesn't exactly agree with the reality of our economy. "If you get an education and you work hard, you will get a job," might have been true a few decades ago, but now there are whole swaths of people who can't even get an education in the first place, even more who can't get jobs regardless because smaller businesses and industries sort of imploded over the last ten years.
As SGTNAPALM said, while this is mostly a result of people not having proper jobs or education, it's ass-backwards to blame it entirely on the people themselves. Violence is of course not the answer, and the riots themselves are fucking stupid, but when people like O'Reilly are constantly shooting down education taxes/programs and mocking the people that support that kind of stuff (I know Obama has gotten tons of flak for putting money into "useless" projects like that instead of blowing up more arabs), can you really blame the rioters?
Like come on man, that's like drowning someone and blaming them for being too lazy to find some air underwater.
[QUOTE=Mingebox;47653527]I'm not sure what there is to disagree with considering your quote to "illuminate" is a borderline incomprehensible, but as best as I can decipher, he's apparently a psychic who can read the minds of cops and tell that they run around killing black people because they represent some vague concept that sounds like it only exists in his head.[/QUOTE]
In a nut shell what Moten is saying here is that 'the police' are not here to protect people from objective violence or immorality, but rather serves a political purpose in attempting to script and discipline bodies to take certain forms. So, (Mike Brown: get off the street!) or (Eric Garner: do you have a license to sell those cigarettes?!) or (Freddie Gray: what kind of knife is that??). Or look at O'Reilly critiquing how black people have the audicity to expect to get a job covered in tattoos or not-dressed "properly", etc.
More so, Moten is making an arguement here that what really governs anti-black violence is a dynamic which implicitly assumes those with certain melanin contents are unruly bodies which must be kept track of with your hand on your hip - just incase they step out of line. It has nothing to do with the intentions of police officers. In fact, if anything, he gives Darren Wilson the benefit of the doubt by saying he probably didn't even 'mean' to violate Brown's personhood. But intentions are distinct from consequences. This is an arguement about the structure of our society, about its political ontology (in short: its culture, its governing assumptions and expectations, etc). Which is why it doesn't matter who the AGENTS of society's persecution are - what matters is the content and character of its victims.
TL:DR - Dave Chappel skit about Clayton Bigsby.
Give it another read is my advice to you.
[QUOTE=I Am A Rock;47652789][IMG]http://static01.nyt.com/images/2015/05/02/us/02baltimore_officers2/02baltimore_officers2-articleLarge-v3.jpg[/IMG]
Half the cops charged are black. How is this anything to do with race?
I can see this being a south park episode where everyone gets pissed off and destroys the town until they see the cops and then Randy says "Oh they're black. Well I guess its time to go home then."[/QUOTE]
A quote I heard from a black father who was on some TV show addressed this scenario. He said something along the lines of this: I tell my son to be careful around police, not white police.
It's not about white police shooting and killing black men (although that is the case much of the time) it is about police as a whole shooting unarmed black men. You are smart enough to figure that out I know you are.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47640810]he's capable of being smart.[/QUOTE]
His networth is approaching $100 million
He's capable of being a hell of a lot smarter than those of us here
[editline]3rd May 2015[/editline]
You can call him despicable but never underestimate this channel
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
