Re: tree_Maybe Wants to Talk About Systematic Racism in the
Posted: Mon June 22, 2020 6:46 pm


Is the most absurd thing ive ever read about this.If everyone woke up tomorrow with no memory of the history of racism, we'd all be better for it.
Good thing we're erasing history by removing the Confederate monuments!Strat wrote:Is the most absurd thing ive ever read about this.If everyone woke up tomorrow with no memory of the history of racism, we'd all be better for it.
I don't see those as the same at all. The "get over it" is ridiculous and erases peoples experiences. Colorblindness was taught as the pinnacle of goodness for decades.durdencommatyler wrote:"move on" and "get over it" are just as racist as "color blindness."
I can't wait until rebranded syrup unites us.E.H. Ruddock wrote:White people not caring is a huge part of the problem though
These things are important.verb_to_trust wrote:I can't wait until rebranded syrup unites us.E.H. Ruddock wrote:White people not caring is a huge part of the problem though
The only syrup I use has to have Maine or Canada in the name.verb_to_trust wrote:I can't wait until rebranded syrup unites us.E.H. Ruddock wrote:White people not caring is a huge part of the problem though
Yes, that was worded poorly. There is indeed a problem and we should all work to fix it, but it's not EVERYWHERE and in every one. Find the problem then work on fixing it. Imagining it to be where it isn't is counterproductive and dangerous. Just wanted to clear that up. Now I'm done.durdencommatyler wrote:"I don't see a problem so there is no problem" isn't an argument, tree.
One thing that might be useful is to stop thinking about your own perception and start engaging with the perceptions of those who are most affected and seeking justice/reform. I understand that it can be difficult to expand beyond one's own perception. I know that from personal experience. It's something I have struggled with. But it's necessary work if you really want to understand it and progress.
What about white homeless people?Bammer wrote:I viewed a seminar / town hall type of thing yesterday and one of the panelists (who appears to be well educated and well respected in this arena) made the outright claim that homelessness simply would not exist if it weren’t for racism.
Thoughts?
If you target services toward minorities, but allow anyone to use them equally, you'll scoop up a lot of homeless whites while you're at it.wease wrote:What about white homeless people?Bammer wrote:I viewed a seminar / town hall type of thing yesterday and one of the panelists (who appears to be well educated and well respected in this arena) made the outright claim that homelessness simply would not exist if it weren’t for racism.
Thoughts?
One assumes that, if they were educated about and well respected regarding this topic, they said more than one sentence about it. Stripping the claim of all content leaves people with nothing but a contextless proposal and their own pre-existing suppositions.one of the panelists (who appears to be well educated and well respected in this arena) made the outright claim that homelessness simply would not exist if it weren’t for racism.
I wanted to add to this.B wrote:If you target services toward minorities, but allow anyone to use them equally, you'll scoop up a lot of homeless whites while you're at it.wease wrote:What about white homeless people?Bammer wrote:I viewed a seminar / town hall type of thing yesterday and one of the panelists (who appears to be well educated and well respected in this arena) made the outright claim that homelessness simply would not exist if it weren’t for racism.
Thoughts?
We're beginning to be able to discuss just how preposterous the movement is. Which does not mean that the fuel that is driving it isn't based on something very important. The frustration about an economic system that is rigged against many people, millennials through debt, many populations, based on where you are born and grow up, what kinds of schools are there. The frustration is real. It is bewildering to everybody. It seems to be that either you land on the "I'm in favor of these protests" side and therefore "I accept their discussion of what has taken place and what should happen now", or "I reject these protests and I believe civilization is pretty fair and I'm not listening". The right position is in the space that has not existed until now, or has struggled to exist and so far failed to get a foothold, which is "how can we discuss the actual problem without embracing this lunacy?" And it is lunacy. The idea of removing the police is basically a gun to the head of the Republic.