The long Western legacy of violence against Asian Americans

[Dill]

(03-18-2021, 10:03 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: People who are intelligent would be able to understand the explanation given.

Not at all.  Your statement was so off base and displayed a fundamental lack of understanding of the points being made.  Based on your history in this regard I have to think you've realized you painted yourself into a corner and are trying to pontificate your way out.  I'll let everyone else reading this thread draw their own conclusion.  I for one am confident of the points made on my end.

Maybe just man up and take the L on this one?

People who claim intelligence should be able to explain. 

Your comments on "revisionist history" and "reverse racism" sounded pretty "off base" to me, displaying a "fundamental lack of understanding of the points being made"--including a profound misunderstanding of reverse racism.  Yet it never occurred to me to just claim that, and then if you had questions, impute some deficiency to you in lieu of answers. I was prepared to demonstrate, because I can; you weren't prepared to follow. 

Now I'm prepared to follow; you aren't prepared to demonstrate, because you can't. 

My "history in this regard" is that I have not developed a system for dodging questions and arguments by dismissing others as "disingenuous" or unintelligent. I respond to arguments with arguments, not ad hominem. To me, no one, no argument, is beneath reply. 

Your history: this is the 3rd thread this week in which you plunged into a topic overconfident and underinformed. Best example: your own thread, forcing an insubstantial transcription error, whose context you misunderstood, into the demise of modern journalism.  With similar high drama, you jumped into this thread reading "white supremacy" and "revisionist history" into works by three Asian women trying to raise national awareness about anti-Asian violence. Well not at the expense of white people--not on your watch.

Rather than actually considering the "long Western legacy of violence" against Asians, you set about insuring there'd be no singular blame of white people and the "West." Your assessment of Ms. Hu was "We're not going to solve racism with racism."  So was she "solving racism with racism"? This Asian was directing "racism" at people of European ancestry?  If we want to stop violence against Asians, then we have to see "the whole problem," which apparently extends to recognizing individual acts of racism among/between minorities but stops short of the systemic racism which excludes those minorities. And you weren't going to pursue any analysis you suspected might implicate Trump, whom you don't support. "Racism" against Trump won't help anyone understand the current round of violence against Asians, right? But before that question can be answered, you are "done here."

Almost. You couldn't resist jumping into my post to Hollo about replacing labels as an exploratory tool and misreading that too. The black history analogy was doing nothing more than extending a point Hollo had already made about "Western Civ" as used by right and left commentators. THEN I moved to the issue of stereotypes about men who blame women for their sexual problems, which I suggested arose with crime data--meaning the provenance of such stereotypes is not the same as "Asians can't drive" or "Blacks are lazy."  After another of your many ham-fisted attempts to paint Dino in a negative light, regarding no issue on my table, you decided my analogy, which addressed the principle of replacement in general, was all wrong because it didn't involve "negative tropes" of Black people. Like my point went right over your head. It didn't require a "negative trope" about Black people.

But now you want me to "man up" so you don't have to provide the requested explanation, or demonstrate you actually understood the point of my post. Logical/language analysis is work. It requires patience and a common effort towards understanding terms. The only other options are silence or a flurry of Parthian accusation of the sort you lobbed at Dino, in lieu of substantive analysis.