/pol/ has started an initiative to post up “It’s Okay To Be White” Flyers - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=Lambeth;52858141]The problem with this comparison is that I don't think SJWs will ever try to kill me.[/QUOTE] Maybe not you, but there are examples, like those guys who killed police officers in the name of BLM. With that said, I didn't know murder was the only metric we looked at for bad consequences of ideas.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52858156]Maybe not you, but there are examples, like those guys who killed police officers in the name of BLM. With that said, I didn't know murder was the only metric we looked at for bad consequences of ideas.[/QUOTE] Violence isn't at the core of the movement, unlike for white supremacists. No, but I'd argue that it makes one objectively worse than the other.

[QUOTE=djjkxbox;52855525]What about ghosts of black people?[/QUOTE] It's okay to be spooky.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;52858141]The problem with this comparison is that I don't think SJWs will ever try to kill me.[/QUOTE] He's talking about how the ideology is fallacious. The fact that one of those groups is more violent and dangerous than the other has nothing to do with this. [QUOTE=Lambeth;52858208]Violence isn't at the core of the movement, unlike for white supremacists. No, but I'd argue that it makes one objectively worse than the other.[/QUOTE] Okay. One is objectively worse. So what? It doesn't mean that the not-as-bad group is any less fallacious and it doesn't change anything regarding his argument.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;52859177]He's talking about how the ideology is fallacious. The fact that one of those groups is more violent and dangerous than the other has nothing to do with this. Okay. One is objectively worse. So what? It doesn't mean that the not-as-bad group is any less fallacious and it doesn't change anything regarding his argument.[/QUOTE] Comparing something like White supremacy to "Social Justice Warriors" is dumb because Social justice warrior isn't an ideology, it's an insult.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;52859300]Comparing something like White supremacy to "Social Justice Warriors" is dumb because Social justice warrior isn't an ideology, it's an insult.[/QUOTE] Given his wording, its perfectly clear what he was trying to describe with that term even if the term has lost essentially all meaning.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;52859177]He's talking about how the ideology is fallacious. The fact that one of those groups is more violent and dangerous than the other has nothing to do with this.[/quote] It has everything to do with it. For one thing "SJW" is a largely meaningless term that means different things to different people. "SJWs" aren't a cohesive group with some kind of manifesto. A Nazi or a white nationalist is very specific identity and these people self-identify as such. [quote]Okay. One is objectively worse. So what? It doesn't mean that the not-as-bad group is any less fallacious and it doesn't change anything regarding his argument.[/QUOTE] He's being intellectually dishonest by making a broad comparison about Nazis and "SJWs" as "these groups are both fallacious." The point is it's really questionable and intellectually dishonest when Nazis are organizing and in some cases assaulting people and you get a bunch of vague "whataboutism" from right-wing ideologues like sgman about college liberals and "tumblr SJWs", whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean. One group is far more of a threat to his beloved Western civilization and it's not the left-wing keyboard warriors who disagree with him politically.

I saw a few of these posters in Chicago this weekend.

[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52859633]A Nazi or a white nationalist is very specific identity and these people self-identify as such.[/QUOTE] If there's anything I've learned from the Nazi hysteria over the last few months, it's that there are an awful lot more people to whom these labels are applied by external parties than those who personally and willingly identify with them. I don't see anything wrong in explicitly defining what a 'SJW' is and then applying the label to whomever it fits. So what if it's not a label people personally identify with? [editline]6th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52859633]One group is far more of a threat to his beloved Western civilization and it's not the left-wing keyboard warriors who disagree with him politically.[/QUOTE] One of these groups has near ideological supremacy in institutions of learning and considerable influence socially and politically. The other is unilaterally hated and has a few thousand adherents [i]at most[/i], none in a position to do more than commit petty violence and stir up drama for their five minutes of TV infamy. These forces are not on such totally equal ground that the only thing that matters is the intent of their beliefs. If we're speculating on threat posed, a widely influential movement can do far more damage than one that is more extreme in its views but has no ability to carry out its goals.

[QUOTE=catbarf;52859781]If there's anything I've learned from the Nazi hysteria over the last few months, it's that there are an awful lot more people to whom these labels are applied by external parties than those who personally and willingly identify with them. [/QUOTE] The fact that a small group of people use 'Nazi!' as a pejorative term does not change the number of people who self-identify as nazis and also does not change the fact that such groups do exist whereas SJW is a meaningless pejorative term which could describe anybody or anything the speaker takes issue with. The actual number of self-identified Nazis and the effect they have is less than the number call people "Nazi!" claim but more, I think, than you're suggesting. An idiotic person saying the sun will rise tomorrow does not, by virtue of saying it, cause the sun to refuse to rise. We must separate the hysteria from the facts, not rely on [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism]whataboutisms[/url] to offhandedly dismiss any problem we don't wish to believe in. [editline]6th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=catbarf;52859781] One of these groups has near ideological supremacy in institutions of learning and considerable influence socially and politically. The other is unilaterally hated and has a few thousand adherents [i]at most[/i], none in a position to do more than commit petty violence and stir up drama for their five minutes of TV infamy. These forces are not on such totally equal ground that the only thing that matters is the intent of their beliefs. If we're speculating on threat posed, a widely influential movement can do far more damage than one that is more extreme in its views but has no ability to carry out its goals.[/QUOTE] When you aren't talking about any specific groups or people, you can flip this around: [QUOTE]One of these groups is made up of powertripping student groups with no actual, institutional power or any power at all outside of a university campus, whom everyone who goes to a university can completely ignore except paranoid reddit and 4chan posters who use them as a scapegoat for everything based on conspiracy theories about Cultural Marxism and how communists are secretly taking over the country and whom are, finally, unilaterally disagreed with by most people even on their supposed side of the political spectrum. The other is an amalgam of political agitators and domestic terrorists whose actions lead to actual deaths and grevious injury, whom are also receiving tentative support and tacit approval from the current presidential office and whom are also causing massive unrest and social divisions within western countries.[/QUOTE] Which specific people or specific groups do you believe have ideological supremacy and institutions and considerable influence socially and politically?

It's not a comparison though? He wasn't comparing which one is worse, that would be a comparison. He just pointed out a similarity in ideology. It's like if he said "thieves and murderers are similar because they both hurt other people for their own personal gain" to which you insist on making clear that murderers are objectively far worse than thieves. Okay? So what? It changes nothing. Just because murderers are worse it doesn't mean that thieves are good people all of a sudden, they still share that trait. Just because nazis are more dangerous and violent, that doesn't mean that people on the left who think that race is a very important factor are any less fallacious. You are arguing beside the point. His point isn't "they are just as bad" his point is that some people on far left and far right think in similar ways (the difference is only in the direction they want to push). That they make the same mistake.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;52861004]It's not a comparison though? He wasn't comparing which one is worse, that would be a comparison. He just pointed out a similarity in ideology. It's like if he said "thieves and murderers are similar because they both hurt other people for their own personal gain" to which you insist on making clear that murderers are objectively far worse than thieves. Okay? So what? It changes nothing. Just because murderers are worse it doesn't mean that thieves are good people all of a sudden they still share that trait. Just because nazis are more dangerous and violent, that doesn't mean that people on the left who think that race is a very important factor are any less fallacious. You are arguing beside the point. His point isn't "they are just as bad" his point is that some people on far left and far right think in similar ways (the difference is only in the direction they want to push). That they make the same mistake.[/QUOTE] Watcha mean by "people on the left who think race is an important factor"?

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52861020]Watcha mean by "people on the left who think race is an important factor"?[/QUOTE] People who complain about white people, who think you can't be racist (or it's okay) towards white people, who think (all) white people own something to black people, who judge the value of an opinion based on the color of skin of the person saying it, people who would have no problem starting a sentence with "you're white so..." or "all white people should/are..." and so on. Now don't get me wrong, sometimes it is an important factor when say a racial group is being discriminated already and we're talking about help or solutions but never on the individual level. If you judge a person by their skin color you're right down there with the nazis to me.

So with those peeps being a fringe group, is it necessary to acknowledge them? We know they're wrong so why do we need a poster to say that?

honestly the only solution is to put a poster on top of it saying "it's okay to be you" that way everyone is respected equally regardless of whatever you are race/gender/etc wise. it also doesn't cut out the previous statement and instead includes it in a better one.

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52861134]So with those peeps being a fringe group, is it necessary to acknowledge them? [/QUOTE] Why are you guys saying they are a fringe group or only on tumblr or only on the internet? They have a good presence on college campuses (both among students and teachers), they have a good presence [I]among[/I] people protesting against nazis and there are politicians also repeating some of their talking points, like Justin Trudeau or Jess Phillips. A good chunk of BLM was like that. Like, you can see these people in real life. Go to any left leaning protest and you will find some of them. They are not a boogeyman. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52861134]We know they're wrong so why do we need a poster to say that?[/QUOTE] Oh come on. We know nazis are wrong, why do we need countless posts saying that? We know Trump is wrong, why do we need mountains of posts saying that? [editline]6th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Wii60;52861180]honestly the only solution is to put a poster on top of it saying "it's okay to be you" that way everyone is respected equally regardless of whatever you are race/gender/etc wise. it also doesn't cut out the previous statement and instead includes it in a better one.[/QUOTE] I'd say the solution is to put a poster saying "it's okay to be white, it's okay to be black, it's okay to be gay, it's okay to be straight, don't let anyone tell you otherwise". And I bet both the nazis and the people I was just talking about would be equally outraged.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;52861197]Why are you guys saying they are a fringe group or only on tumblr or only on the internet? They have a good presence on college campuses (both among students and teachers), they have a good presence [I]among[/I] people protesting against nazis and there are politicians also repeating some of their talking points, like Justin Trudeau or Jess Phillips. A good chunk of BLM was like that. Like, you can see these people in real life. Go to any left leaning protest and you will find some of them. They are not a boogeyman. [/quote] So you've made a claim justifying their posters because of the prevalence of racism against whites. You give examples to try and lend credence to this phenomenon, thus validating the need for these posters. You start with students which aren't exactly widespread, in some unis/colleges yes they're common but overall they're a very small, albeit very vocal, minority. Then you cover teachers, I found an example of a teacher saying "to be white is to be racist". Sure you can use that to back up your point. Not exactly widespread though is it. Then you list Justin Trudeau or Jess Phillips?? Definitely not anti-racists. You've basically picked two people who discuss privileged and social justice and tried to use them to back up your "white racists are everywhere" narrative. This is bs. Jess Phillips was accused of being racist herself when she said pakistanis import wives to round immigration law, maybe she's just racist against everybody!! If you expand your definition of "anti white racist" from "anti white racist" to "anybody who discusses privileged or racism" then of course you'll be surrounded by "anti white racists". Only they won't actually be anti white racists. [quote] Oh come on. We know nazis are wrong, why do we need countless posts saying that? We know Trump is wrong, why do we need mountains of posts saying that? [/quote] whatabout... whatabout... whatabout... Trump is in charge of a country. Nazis are literally killing people. Tumblr clowns and over zealous students are.. doing what? something beatnik I imagine. Probably painting each other's faces in eco friendly neon paint for their ballpit rave. [quote] I'd say the solution is to put a poster saying "it's okay to be white, it's okay to be black, it's okay to be gay, it's okay to be straight, don't let anyone tell you otherwise". [/quote] wouldn't be a very effective /pol/ troll campaign/racist dogwhistle then would it?

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52861347]So you've made a claim justifying their posters because of the prevalence of racism against whites. You give examples to try and lend credence to this phenomenon, thus validating the need for these posters.[/QUOTE] Okay so you have twisted my argument from "they are not a fringe group that barely exist in real life - here's my justification" to "there's a need to keep posting about them - here's why". Yeah my post makes no sense in that framework. Thank god it wasn't my argument. My argument is they are not a fringe group, not that it's the most important topic to discuss. This thread shouldn't be about that group of people. It was just an observation about a similar way of thinking in certain aspect. Not that they are equally bad or anything. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52861347]You start with students which aren't exactly widespread, in some unis/colleges yes they're common but overall they're a very small, albeit very vocal, minority. Then you cover teachers, I found an example of a teacher saying "to be white is to be racist". Sure you can use that to back up your point. Not exactly widespread though is it. Then you list Justin Trudeau or Jess Phillips?? Definitely not anti-racists. You've basically picked two people who discuss privileged and social justice and tried to use them to back up your "white racists are everywhere" narrative. This is bs. Jess Phillips was accused of being racist herself when she said pakistanis import wives to round immigration law, maybe she's just racist against everybody!! If you expand your definition of "anti white racist" from "anti white racist" to "anybody who discusses privileged or racism" then of course you'll be surrounded by "anti white racists". Only they won't actually be anti white racists.[/QUOTE] Now you twisted my words from "people on the left who think race is an important factor" to "anti white racist" you even put it in quotes like that's what I literally said. Yeah my post makes no sense if I was talking about "anti white racist" specifically. Thank god I wasn't. I'm not talking about black supremacists or whatever, I'm talking about left leaning people who think race is an important factor by which you can judge an individual. The examples I gave about what they'd say were not complete. They would also say shit like "you're a white male, therefore" etc. It's a widespreed way of thinking. I know people like this in real life, you had a poster like this in this very thread. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52861347]whatabout... whatabout... whatabout... Trump is in charge of a country. Nazis are literally killing people. Tumblr clowns and over zealous students are.. doing what? something beatnik I imagine. Probably painting each other's faces in eco friendly neon paint for their ballpit rave.[/QUOTE] You've made a claim that if someone is known to be wrong there's no need say they are wrong. By your own logic we shouldn't be talking about Trump or nazis. But do backpedal. And don't forget to call some fallacies. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52861347]wouldn't be a very effective /pol/ troll campaign/racist dogwhistle then would it?[/QUOTE] Who said I want an effective /pol/ troll campaign? What the fuck? My "poster" was supposed to be a reply to their poster. Did you just twist almost every single argument I made into something else?

[QUOTE=Jim Morrison;52859633]He's being intellectually dishonest by making a broad comparison about Nazis and "SJWs" as "these groups are both fallacious." The point is it's really questionable and intellectually dishonest when Nazis are organizing and in some cases assaulting people and you get a bunch of vague "whataboutism" from right-wing ideologues like sgman about college liberals and "tumblr SJWs", whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.[/QUOTE] A few responses: 1) My comparison was extremely specific, not broad. I compared how the two held the same basic view when it comes to race and ideology/culture: that they are either equivalent or that race is more important. 2) I specifically said about SJWs, "or whatever you would like to call them," because I know that people get in a hissy fit about that term, even though we all know what it means. With that said, I also gave a specific example of their arguments as it relates to my point. I mentioned how universities are praised for racial diversity without any care for a diversity of ideas or experiences. They would much rather have a room with a member of every skin color, but who all grew up in the same ideological bubble, than have a room of white people who grew up with a huge spectrum of ideological and cultural diversity. They give value to skin color as an inherent indicator of ideas and/or culture. They equate the two far more than exists in reality. This type of thinking is a problem, no matter which side you stand. For example, when I say, from a traditional conservative point of view, that the inner-cities have some objectively bad cultural issues right now (like having a crazy number of single mothers, not emphasizing education, etc.) I often get blowback for being racist, but that response doesn't make any sense unless you think I'm equating culture and race, which I'm not. Yes, right now, these specific cultural issues apply mostly to black people, but that doesn't mean it has anything to do with their blackness. If history were different, it could have very easily been white people. There are also a ton of black people who don't fit into these cultural norms and a ton of white people who do. We are also seeing it spread more and more into what used to be the wealthy suburbs of big cities. Note that I'm talking about the cultural ideas, not race spreading. So instead of having a real discussion about these issues, and what we can do about them, we ignore them because to bring them up is racist... because we can't separate culture and race. So to critique culture MUST also be a critique of race.

[QUOTE=Silly Sil;52862083]Okay so you have twisted my argument from "they are not a fringe group that barely exist in real life - here's my justification" to "there's a need to keep posting about them - here's why". Yeah my post makes no sense in that framework. Thank god it wasn't my argument. My argument is they are not a fringe group, not that it's the most important topic to discuss. Now you twisted my words from "people on the left who think race is an important factor" to "anti white racist" you even put it in quotes like that's what I literally said. Yeah my post makes no sense if I was talking about "anti white racist" specifically. Thank god I wasn't. I'm not talking about black supremacists or whatever, I'm talking about left leaning people who think race is an important factor by which you can judge an individual. [/quote] So why make a poster aimed at "anti white racism" and [/quote] My apologies, I think I incorrectly inferred meaning from your posts. I was under the, perhaps misplaced, impression that you supported the posters because I thought you might believe this "anti white" narrative. Looking back your only points seem to have been: that "some people on the left" are comparably bad to nazis; And something along the lines of "we don't need anti trump posters either", now I'm assuming your intention here is to say "we don't need these posters" => we don't need anti trump posts but I'm not sure, maybe you could clarify to help me avoid misunderstanding you again? [quote] You've made a claim that if someone is known to be wrong there's no need say they are wrong. By your own logic we shouldn't be talking about Trump or nazis. But do backpedal. And don't forget to call some fallacies. [/quote] I disagree with you very much here. [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1584301&p=52847878&viewfull=1#post52847878"]Anti white racism isn't an institution problem in the US (or Europe)[/URL]. When instances of it do occur they should be challenged and/or reported but as a whole since its isolated and on individual level (cept for circle jerking students) it's fairly easy to address. And the cost of exaggerating this narrative, by saying whites are somehow oppressed, is the potential widening of the racial gap in the US and people not actually dealing with the larger institution racism problems in the US. Trump and right wing extremism is a big problem. Awareness here only helps combat the problems. When a racist group makes a statement they will dog whistle it as something benign, its important that the veil is lifted and people can see them for what they are, racists. If racism (regarding the nazis more than trump) was a small, localised issue in the US then I would say don't bother with posters but thats not the case. So you see it's nuanced, while all 3 issues (racism vs whites, trump, neo nazis) exist they are on different levels of important and the costs of pushing the "racism vs whites" narrative outweigh the pros that could come from the poster campaign. imo anyway. [quote] Who said I want an effective /pol/ troll campaign? What the fuck? My "poster" was supposed to be a reply to their poster. Did you just twist almost every single argument I made into something else?[/QUOTE] I legit didn't mean this to be a jab at you, sorry if you felt that way You suggested a more agreeable wording for the poster, which is nice; but the poster wasn't made to be agreeable, the people who made it (the guys from /pol/) have no intention of being agreeable. So suggesting an improvement, while it is a good suggestion, is sort of a moot point. This genuinely wasn't meant to take a jab at you, it was more to point out that its pointless suggesting improvements to a poster made by a group who purposefully made it with bad intent. [editline]6th November 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=sgman91;52862123]A few responses: 1) My comparison was extremely specific, not broad. I compared how the two held the same basic view when it comes to race and ideology/culture: that they are either equivalent or that race is more important. 2) I specifically said about SJWs, "or whatever you would like to call them," because I know that people get in a hissy fit about that term, even though we all know what it means. With that said, I also gave a specific example of their arguments as it relates to my point. I mentioned how universities are praised for racial diversity without any care for a diversity of ideas or experiences. They would much rather have a room with a member of every skin color, but who all grew up in the same ideological bubble, than have a room of white people who grew up with a huge spectrum of ideological and cultural diversity. They give value to skin color as an inherent indicator of ideas and/or culture. They equate the two far more than exists in reality. This type of thinking is a problem, no matter which side you stand. For example, when I say, from a traditional conservative point of view, that the inner-cities have some objectively bad cultural issues right now (like having a crazy number of [b]single mothers[/b], [b]not emphasizing education[/b], etc.) I often get blowback for being racist, but that response doesn't make any sense unless you think I'm equating culture and race, which I'm not. Yes, right now, these specific cultural issues apply mostly to black people, but that doesn't mean it has anything to do with their blackness. If history were different, it could have very easily been white people. There are also a ton of black people who don't fit into these cultural norms and a ton of white people who do. We are also seeing it spread more and more into what used to be the wealthy suburbs of big cities. Note that I'm talking about the cultural ideas, not race spreading. So instead of having a real discussion about these issues, and what we can do about them, we ignore them because to bring them up is racist... because we can't separate culture and race. So to critique culture MUST also be a critique of race.[/QUOTE] People jump to conclusions about what you said because those are typical, well known racist dog whistle talking points. Not to say you mean them as such but you can't blame them for interpreting it that way, its a failure of communication brought about by this medium and a mutual lack of deep understanding and knowledge for what one another stand for. Eg (and sorry for this) I know you're a somewhat conservative poster who acts disingenuous and ignorant about a variety of topics. I then see this dog whistling and jump to the conclusion that you know what you're actually talking about; when [b]its very possible that I'm prejudging you incorrectly and unfairly.[/b] I also bolded the education thing because[URL="https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2015/03/26/the-racial-wealth-gap-why-a-typical-white-household-has-16-times-the-wealth-of-a-black-one/#65c9eb1d1f45"] black peeps in the US are typically FAR poorer than white peeps[/URL] and poorer people are more likely to live in poorer areas which typically have worse education. Furthermore due to low social mobility people in those areas might feel less inclined to education since they have given up on the idea of escaping. So while some may say "not emphasizing education" others might say its a product of their environment. You're also right to make the distinction between race and culture, The book freakonomics addresses this with the black names thing. But lots of what happens in the US (linked in my previous post) is down to racism rather than "culturalism". Also another note being anti culture/anti religion is often a dog whistle for racism (see groups like EDL in the UK saying they're only against Islam as a religion, then they go and beat up some Sihks because of their skin colour).

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52862217]I was under the, perhaps misplaced, impression that you supported the posters because I thought you might believe this "anti white" narrative. [/QUOTE] I don't. I know the poster is a dogwhistle. However I can understand ([U]not[/U] as in agree) what made those people write that. I don't believe that you could say white people are oppressed. I believe there are some people on the left who judge people based on the color of their skin, and those people judge all white people based on what white people did in the past - specifically colonialism and slavery. I woudln't go as far as to call them "anti-white racists" though, they might think low of white people but that's not what they are about. It's just a part of their ideology. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52862217]Looking back your only points seem to have been: that "some people on the left" are comparably bad to nazis;[/QUOTE] No, man. Come on, I even said it's not a comparison and that nazis are objectively worse. The argument wasn't about how bad they are, only that they have a similar way of thinking. It was just an observation about a similarity in a certain way. Nothing about level of threat these people pose. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52862217]And something along the lines of "we don't need anti trump posters either", now I'm assuming your intention here is to say "we don't need these posters" => we don't need anti trump posts but I'm not sure, maybe you could clarify to help me avoid misunderstanding you again?[/QUOTE] You said that if someone is known to be wrong there's no need say they are wrong. By your own logic we shouldn't be talking about Trump or nazis. I'm not saying, we shouldn't talk about nazis or Trump. I'm saying, by the logic of the claim YOU made, we shouldn't because we know them to be wrong. I don't agree with your statement, I was pointing out a flaw in your argument. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52862217]I disagree with you very much here. [URL="https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1584301&p=52847878&viewfull=1#post52847878"]Anti white racism isn't an institution problem in the US (or Europe)[/URL]. When instances of it do occur they should be challenged and/or reported but as a whole since its isolated and on individual level (cept for circle jerking students) it's fairly easy to address. And the cost of exaggerating this narrative, by saying whites are somehow oppressed, is the potential widening of the racial gap in the US and people not actually dealing with the larger institution racism problems in the US. Trump and right wing extremism is a big problem. Awareness here only helps combat the problems. When a racist group makes a statement they will dog whistle it as something benign, its important that the veil is lifted and people can see them for what they are, racists. If racism (regarding the nazis more than trump) was a small, localised issue in the US then I would say don't bother with posters but thats not the case. So you see it's nuanced, while all 3 issues (racism vs whites, trump, neo nazis) exist they are on different levels of important and the costs of pushing the "racism vs whites" narrative outweigh the pros that could come from the poster campaign. imo anyway. [/QUOTE] I think there's some big misunderstanding here man. I fucked up, I read "poster" as in "man who posted in this thread" when you were talking about the poster from the OP in your last post. I am not justifying the /pol/ poster. I only said I understand where they got the need to come up with something like that. I don't agree with their message. My apologies for the misunderstanding. [QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52862217]I legit didn't mean this to be a jab at you, sorry if you felt that way You suggested a more agreeable wording for the poster, which is nice; but the poster wasn't made to be agreeable, the people who made it (the guys from /pol/) have no intention of being agreeable. So suggesting an improvement, while it is a good suggestion, is sort of a moot point. This genuinely wasn't meant to take a jab at you, it was more to point out that its pointless suggesting improvements to a poster made by a group who purposefully made it with bad intent.[/QUOTE] I didn't suggest a more agreeable wording for the /pol/ poster. My "poster" was supposed to be plastered over their's as a response. That's what I meant.

Righto looks like this is cleared up sorry for the misunderstanding! I goof'd

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;52862217]People jump to conclusions about what you said because those are typical, well known racist dog whistle talking points. Not to say you mean them as such but you can't blame them for interpreting it that way, its a failure of communication brought about by this medium and a mutual lack of deep understanding and knowledge for what one another stand for. Eg (and sorry for this) I know you're a somewhat conservative poster who acts disingenuous and ignorant about a variety of topics. I then see this dog whistling and jump to the conclusion that you know what you're actually talking about; when [B]its very possible that I'm prejudging you incorrectly and unfairly.[/B] I also bolded the education thing because[URL="https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurashin/2015/03/26/the-racial-wealth-gap-why-a-typical-white-household-has-16-times-the-wealth-of-a-black-one/#65c9eb1d1f45"] black peeps in the US are typically FAR poorer than white peeps[/URL] and poorer people are more likely to live in poorer areas which typically have worse education. Furthermore due to low social mobility people in those areas might feel less inclined to education since they have given up on the idea of escaping. So while some may say "not emphasizing education" others might say its a product of their environment. You're also right to make the distinction between race and culture, The book freakonomics addresses this with the black names thing. But lots of what happens in the US (linked in my previous post) is down to racism rather than "culturalism". Also another note being anti culture/anti religion is often a dog whistle for racism (see groups like EDL in the UK saying they're only against Islam as a religion, then they go and beat up some Sihks because of their skin colour).[/QUOTE] I only really have a couple responses. Firstly, if people have a lack of understanding and knowledge about another person's view, then they should ask. The fact that some people use those arguments as dog whistles is not a justification to assume everyone is using it as a dog whistle. That's how ideologues think, not people looking for an honest discussion. I would even challenge that it is "often" used as a dog whistle. There are, and have been, a ton of people who've actually tried to address the cultural issues, but are called racist for it. Secondly, I simply don't think your line about education in poor communities is true. The percentage of people in poverty who graduate high school, don't have any kids before they're economically ready, and don't get arrested is extremely small. If you don't do those things, it's very likely, even if you're from a poor family in the inner-city, that you'll get out of the cycle of poverty. It's not that people can't get out, it's that they are not brought up in a culture that emphasizes the choices that allow you to get out. So, in a sense, they are a victim, but it's of the culture. I obviously dispute the attacks of a more personal nature, but I don't see any benefit in going into them.

Wasn't this from the He Will Not Divide Us thing? I remember in the most recent season they were gonna replace the flag with one that said this same phrase

[QUOTE=Aman;52848352]I'm living in "white guilt" of academia. My own fault for picking certain courses, profs I will never stray close to again, but it's not even that much of a stretch to say that pop marxism and things like critical race theory are the norms and pushed in humanities faculties. I understand the idea of maybe addressing these theories, but when the course practically revolves around them I feel worried. I came to university late as a 25 year old, and it's downright creepy sometimes watching the profs browbeating people down because of their opinions ones that aren't even crazy. White people = basically the root of all problems in history and today, Capitalism = root of all evil, Marxism totally hasn't been tried before. I took a course called "Contemporary Western Societies" which boils down to the west is the root of all evil. The professor required readings from a marxist revolutionary who accidentally blew himself up in a car bomb. A university down the street from mine had student made posters calling for "communist revolution". Surely others in university currently share some sentiment? I just feel so...disappointed. Before ever coming to university I thought the whole champagne socialist professor was an overblown meme. Not that it's everybody, I have some professors I love but they are a minority. Which is why I'm excited to specialize academically and leave this PC humanities trash behind me and focus solely on war and conflict and things that actually fucking matter in this world. But really I don't care about some big "culture war", neo-nazi white identity garbage, or whatever the fuck, this just reminds me of classical 2007 /b/ harmless trolling, and it's a quite funny initiative. I don't even browse /pol/ but I "support" this cause it rocks the boat and it's funny, and living in the experience of a university I'm exposed to this crap.[/QUOTE] Is this an american thing? Like I hear about this shit a lot but it's always US colleges and stuff. Is academia fucked over there or something? [editline]7th November 2017[/editline] I honestly think the best way to combat these posters isn't to take them down or leave them up, but take up a marker and write "... or any other colour" or something along those lines. Kinda gives /pol/ a taste of their own medicine.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52866137]Is this an american thing? Like I hear about this shit a lot but it's always US colleges and stuff. Is academia fucked over there or something? [editline]7th November 2017[/editline] I honestly think the best way to combat these posters isn't to take them down or leave them up, but take up a marker and write "... or any other colour" or something along those lines. Kinda gives /pol/ a taste of their own medicine.[/QUOTE] Some people had this idea and did it, "Who hurt you" and "are you ok" written in pen on it.

[QUOTE=01271;52866245]Some people had this idea and did it, "Who hurt you" and "are you ok" written in pen on it.[/QUOTE] That's awesome, it's a shame that you actually have to spend a few seconds doing some creative thinking to come up with that idea, because it's what [I]everybody[/I] should be doing but only a few are actually doing.

[QUOTE=MrJazzy;52866137]Is this an american thing? Like I hear about this shit a lot but it's always US colleges and stuff. Is academia fucked over there or something? [editline]7th November 2017[/editline] I honestly think the best way to combat these posters isn't to take them down or leave them up, but take up a marker and write "... or any other colour" or something along those lines. Kinda gives /pol/ a taste of their own medicine.[/QUOTE] It's pretty prevalent at some colleges. I have friends at ucsc and its a cess pool over there of the toxic sides of "leftist" thought. Like my friend has literally been told by her friend that the only reason why someone would find white people attractive is due to the media, and separately that she has had multiple friends not want to date people because they were white, even though they found them attractive. It baffles me how people reach these conclusions

[QUOTE=doom1337;52866594]It's pretty prevalent at some colleges. I have friends at ucsc and its a cess pool over there of the toxic sides of "leftist" thought. Like my friend has literally been told by her friend that the only reason why someone would find white people attractive is due to the media, and separately that she has had multiple friends not want to date people because they were white, even though they found them attractive. It baffles me how people reach these conclusions[/QUOTE] But isn't UCSC just a research organization dedicated to researching a particular subject? It's a college? I don't really know much about the UCSC. Is it based in the US btw?

I want people to stop postering all of the surfaces directly off campus. I don't want to see this just as much as I don't want to see any more "The only good Facist is a dead Facist" stickers.