User Tag List

First 2345 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 44

  1. #31
    Senior Member Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6?
    Posts
    2,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    This is nonsense, and it's demeaning nonsense. You're pretty much saying, "Black people cannot be expected to be held to the same standard as white people."
    No, that is not what I'm saying at all. But that's what I knew you would say, because you have an incredibly simplistic view of race and power dynamics in America. Such is what comes with viewing things strictly at the individual level, as Libertarians often do.

    They are voting for an effect, a consequence. This effect is the diminishing of a power imbalance. The power imbalance is a wrong in our society, and they are voting to correct the wrong.

    A white person voting for a white person because he is white is voting to uphold this wrong power imbalance. There is no reason to do this that is not malicious.

    THAT SAID, I still think that it's not a very good idea to vote on race alone, no matter what race you are. I have great hope in Obama; I believe he will do great things for our nation--but if I'm just going by the color of his skin and not his platforms, I don't know that he's going to enact anything real to correct the power imbalance besides be a black man in office. But being a black man in the office of potus IS significant; it IS a start because of its symbolic value. But one should hope--expect--that he does something beyond exist as a symbol. I believe very much that he will.
    INFJ

    "I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. You can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

  2. #32
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen View Post
    No, that is not what I'm saying at all. But that's what I knew you would say, because you have an incredibly simplistic view of race and power dynamics in America. Such is what comes with viewing things strictly at the individual level, as Libertarians often do.

    They are voting for an effect, a consequence. This effect is the diminishing of a power imbalance. The power imbalance is a wrong in our society, and they are voting to correct the wrong.

    A white person voting for a white person because he is white is voting to uphold this wrong power imbalance. There is no reason to do this that is not malicious.

    THAT SAID, I still think that it's not a very good idea to vote on race alone, no matter what race you are. I have great hope in Obama; I believe he will do great things for our nation--but if I'm just going by the color of his skin and not his platforms, I don't know that he's going to enact anything real to correct the power imbalance besides be a black man in office. But being a black man in the office of potus IS significant; it IS a start because of its symbolic value. But one should hope--expect--that he does something beyond exist as a symbol. I believe very much that he will.

    Actually, it is what you are saying. Frankly, it's frightening that someone with a high-functioning mind would believe this. "Correcting a power imbalance?" And you have the audacity to call ME "simplistic?" You think that a black person voting for a black person because "He looks like me, and we should get some of the power here!" is anything but atavistic? That type of behavior represents our basest tribal instincts. There is absolutely, POSITIVELY no way you can hold that behavior from a black person is OK, but the same behavior from a white person is not OK, unless you are a racist or a hypocrite. I find delicious irony in the fact that you call my worldview (taking each person on his or her own merits) "simplistic," when it is actually light-years more nuanced than your apparent "black vs. white" mentality.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  3. #33
    Senior Member Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6?
    Posts
    2,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Actually, it is what you are saying. Frankly, it's frightening that someone with a high-functioning mind would believe this. "Correcting a power imbalance?" And you have the audacity to call ME "simplistic?"
    You effectively deny the existence of a problematic hegemony in America by presenting voting as MERELY an individualistic act, and you also deny it by only talking about racism at an individual level, which is not where racism does the most ultimate harm. Individual racism is REALLY BAD. Institutional racism, hegemony, is worse because it is insidious and systematic.

    There are LEVELS at work here, and you always deny the levels.

    There is absolutely, POSITIVELY no way you can hold that behavior from a black person is OK, but the same behavior from a white person is not OK, unless you are a racist or a hypocrite.
    You can, and I just typed a whole lot of shit out, but I really need to just do my job now instead of rehashing an argument that I spelled out beautifully for you in the racism thread months ago when I was out of school for the summer.
    INFJ

    "I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. You can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

  4. #34
    @.~*virinaĉo*~.@ Totenkindly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    FREE
    Enneagram
    594 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    42,333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    This is nonsense, and it's demeaning nonsense. You're pretty much saying, "Black people cannot be expected to be held to the same standard as white people."
    What?

    It really doesn't sound like what she was saying at all... although I've read enough of your posts to understand why you might take it that way.

    So you don't agree or don't understand her POV.

    Instead of assuming lots of negative things about her character or intelligence (which is something I find to demeaning, to be honest), why not use it as an opportunity to see things from another perspective?

    Take your shoes off, put her shoes on, and step into her framework instead of constantly trying to redefine her into a negative view based on your own strongly held assumptions.
    "Hey Capa -- We're only stardust." ~ "Sunshine"

    “Pleasure to me is wonder—the unexplored, the unexpected, the thing that is hidden and the changeless thing that lurks behind superficial mutability. To trace the remote in the immediate; the eternal in the ephemeral; the past in the present; the infinite in the finite; these are to me the springs of delight and beauty.” ~ H.P. Lovecraft

  5. #35
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jennifer View Post
    What?

    It really doesn't sound like what she was saying at all... although I've read enough of your posts to understand why you might take it that way.

    So you don't agree or don't understand her POV.

    Instead of assuming lots of negative things about her character or intelligence (which is something I find to demeaning, to be honest), why not use it as an opportunity to see things from another perspective?

    Take your shoes off, put her shoes on, and step into her framework instead of constantly trying to redefine her into a negative view based on your own strongly held assumptions.

    There is a difference between "assumptions" and "easily-made conclusions based on logic." I actually don't believe that she intends to demean anyone, but her thoughts on this matter are so twisted by ideology that it happens, anyway. The fact that she doesn't intend to do it is why she can't see that it's happening. Her POV is untenable on this matter; that's the whole point.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  6. #36
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen View Post
    You effectively deny the existence of a problematic hegemony in America by presenting voting as MERELY an individualistic act, and you also deny it by only talking about racism at an individual level, which is not where racism does the most ultimate harm. Individual racism is REALLY BAD. Institutional racism, hegemony, is worse because it is insidious and systematic.

    There are LEVELS at work here, and you always deny the levels.
    First off, voting IS an individual act. You decide the matters on your own, you register alone, and you go into the booth alone. 52+% of the voting populus =/= some amorphous aggregate of people. That's 63 million individual voters out there. Are some of them sheep? Yes, lots of them. Still, they all had to go out there and do something individualistic.

    Moreover, I NEVER said anything about institutional racism not existing! Do not put words in my mouth. What I DID say was that it's racist to vote for someone simply because of the color of his or her skin. That is irrefutable, and the race of the person voting has absolutely no bearing on the matter. Also, there is no guarantee that a black candidate would be better for the black voting populus, especially when ideology, policy, and voting history aren't taken into account. That is absurdly simplistic, and it relies on absolutely disgusting and outdated assumptions about individual political motivations. To say a black presidential candidate would be better for black people just because he or she is black is ludicrous.


    You can, and I just typed a whole lot of shit out, but I really need to just do my job now instead of rehashing an argument that I spelled out beautifully for you in the racism thread months ago when I was out of school for the summer.

    Not that beautifully, sorry.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  7. #37
    Senior Member Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6?
    Posts
    2,191

    Default

    I did make a pretty pointed statement about whether I agree with that particular voting practice. I don't. I just pointed out that it is not the same thing because the intents are different. One intends to keep a group out of power (malicious), and one intends to correct a perceived imbalance (corrective). I'm not saying that it does ultimately correct the imbalance (please see my previous post in which I explained it already), but I'm saying that there is a difference in intent, and I am judging these actions based on that. One intent is malicious. One is not. So, sure--maybe they're both racist. But a racism that prevents opportunity is worse than a racism that claims opportunity.

    Ah, fuck it. You don't understand, and you don't want to understand, and it's not my job to make you understand.
    INFJ

    "I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. You can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

  8. #38
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen View Post
    I did make a pretty pointed statement about whether I agree with that particular voting practice. I don't. I just pointed out that it is not the same thing because the intents are different. One intends to keep a group out of power (malicious), and one intends to correct a perceived imbalance (corrective). I'm not saying that it does ultimately correct the imbalance (please see my previous post in which I explained it already), but I'm saying that there is a difference in intent, and I am judging these actions based on that. One intent is malicious. One is not. So, sure--maybe they're both racist. But a racism that prevents opportunity is worse than a racism that claims opportunity.

    Ah, fuck it. You don't understand, and you don't want to understand, and it's not my job to make you understand.
    If that thread from the summer weren't enough to do the trick, then there's nothing you can do.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  9. #39
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen View Post
    I did make a pretty pointed statement about whether I agree with that particular voting practice. I don't. I just pointed out that it is not the same thing because the intents are different. One intends to keep a group out of power (malicious), and one intends to correct a perceived imbalance (corrective). I'm not saying that it does ultimately correct the imbalance (please see my previous post in which I explained it already), but I'm saying that there is a difference in intent, and I am judging these actions based on that. One intent is malicious. One is not. So, sure--maybe they're both racist. But a racism that prevents opportunity is worse than a racism that claims opportunity.

    Ah, fuck it. You don't understand, and you don't want to understand, and it's not my job to make you understand.

    I understand what you're SAYING, it's just wrong. Voting to correct a power imbalance and voting to continue a power imbalance are both wrong. Period. Voting for or against someone simply because of his or her race is ALWAYS malicious. There are not separate rules for one group than from the other. Not no way, not no how. I cannot believe someone who think that could be true in 2008. It's disappointing as an American. We should be past that.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  10. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    type
    Posts
    9,100

    Default

    Claim:

    Treating people differently, or assuming psychological traits, based on race, is racist, and strategically unsound if equality is the goal. It only perpetuates itself. Not only in "innocent" arenas, but the most dangerous ones as well.

Similar Threads

  1. Presidential Debate 2008 Reviews
    By Tigerlily in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 09-28-2008, 07:56 AM
  2. Vote Match quiz (american presidential election)
    By tovlo in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-20-2008, 06:44 AM
  3. Ron Paul Wins Another Presidential Debate
    By FranG in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 05-18-2007, 12:31 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO