Rich Men North of Richmond

[CJD]

(08-29-2023, 03:31 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I 100% agree.  The problem is exacerbated by the fact that the legacy media is scrambling to stay afloat with the proliferation of news sites available to the public.  Sensationalism is a survival strategy for them at this point. 

And this is a common problem in modern journalism.  They muddy the waters in their own stories.  The difference between me and you is I think this is done deliberately.

The difference between us is you seem to think it is done deliberately for ideological purposes and I believe it is done deliberately for monetary purposes. Sensationalism exists because our news system is built on attention, as attention leads to more money. The politics behind it are just based on who the attention is sought from. Fox News has proven that if you concentrate all your attention on conservatives, you can make just as much money as if you focus on Liberals. A spin is required to get the required attention to stay employed, so you just pick a direction. It may have something to do with your own personal politics, but I also think many "journalists" say things they don't believe because they know it will generate more attention, which leads to more money.

Quote:Racism, at a personal level, is IMO at an all time low.  Or rather, it was until very recently.  What I think is happening is a combination of factors.  Some people fear the country no longer resembling what they grew up with.  This is coupled with this belief, which is rather consistently advanced, that the US is irredeemably racist and anyone supporting it is guilty of the same.  Another issue is that many view it as a uniquely white issue, which it most certainly isn't and was vividly demonstrated during the "stop Asian hate" news cycle.  The problem isn't discussed honestly by pretty much anyone and the few people who do try and have this conversation are immediately attacked and labeled.

Outward racism (calling a black person on the street the n word with disgust in your voice) is absolutely at an all time low. But with that, came a much more insidious version of racism; the kind that you have to prove even exists.

Trevor Noah had an interesting "between the scenes" where he just takes questions from the audience while the next skit or section of the show is being set up. A person asked him "what's the difference between racism in South Africa when you were growing up (during the Apartheid), and racism in America."

I'm paraphrasing, but he said something along the lines of, "In hindsight, it was almost refreshing how forward South Africa was about their racism. They'd say "you can't do this, because you're black." And that was that. In America, the racism is much more under cover. "You can't get a loan for a home in this area. Nooo, it has nothing to do with your race, that's crazy." It's much easier fighting a racism that's in your face and obvious than it is to fight a racism that you consistently need to prove even exists."
Here's the video if you're interested.

Plausible deniability is the greatest defender of racism in today's America. Even the country "not resembling what it was when I was growing up" could EASILY be taken to be due to racism, especially if the America that they grew up in was in the 50s and 60s. This is what is so contemptuous about the phrase "Make America Great Again." ...When? What year? No one seems to have the same answer, if they're even willing to give an answer at all.

You can't read people's minds, so all you can do is interpret people's actions and the results of those actions. And that's what it's like trying to fight racism in America today. You must be a "detective of your own racism," as Trevor put it.

I don't know how people who are discussing racism honestly today are being attacked and labeled. Maybe they don't realize they are saying things that have long been used as racist dog whistles? Perhaps it's ignorance? Or maybe they aren't being as honest as you think they are?

Or maybe they're right and racism is much less common than people on the left would like to admit.

It's hard to say, because it's veiled in so many layers of deniability.

Quote:The reason I label it an agenda is because there's a clear pattern at work.  That, and the topic is never discussed in an open and fair manner.  Biden will ramble on endlessly about "white supremacy" (despite making an extremely racist statement himself on the floor of Congress) but ignoring the vast majority of shootings that he can't turn into political capital.

I'm not sure what extremely racist statement he said on the floor of Congress, but I think the whole talk about white supremacy is just a simplified concept that people latch onto (or repel, depending on what side of the aisle they sit on) without really understanding what they're actually talking about.

The fact is, this country was founded by white men, the laws were written by white men, the only people who could vote were white men (and land owners), and for a significant portion of our relatively brief history, there has been active and institutionally supported racism done to minorities of all kinds.

Most (if not all) of those laws have been scrubbed from the written laws over the last 50 to 60 years, but the people enforcing and believing in those laws are still alive and/or had children and taught them the same concepts that they learned (as all parents do). 

The best analogy I've heard about it is, imagine there's a game of Monopoly that is being played by a group of people, each of whom represent their own race/identity. At the beginning of the game, Only the white, male player is allowed to purchase the property that they land on, build on the land they purchase and collect 200 dollars when they pass go. This goes on for 200 turns. The white player has purchased almost all of the property and then, on turn 201, the rules change. Now the black player (and any other minority players) are allowed to purchase land (if they can afford it) and can collect money when they pass go.

On turn 201, is the game between all the players now perfectly fair?

What about on turn 250?

Turn 300?

On what turn will it actually be fair again?

Some would argue, it's impossible for the game to ever be fair without starting the game over or redistributing the property/money in some equitable way.

Quote:Actually, the second link I posted addresses exactly that, and it's not what you think.  I discovered that guy on Twitter a long time ago.  He's a great source for scientific evidence and actual statistics.  He consistently tweets in response to Everytown, Gifford and Shannon Watts and they never, ever respond.  He's not rude or abrasive either, he just counters their false claims with actual facts.

I checked each of the myths, I didn't notice one regarding why this is more common in America than other countries. Maybe I just read over it or it's worded in a way that didn't catch my eye. Regardless, it's more of a passing fancy of mine than an ideological viewpoint. I honestly think the damage has already been done. Gun control likely won't solve very much, if anything, at this point. But, again, not based on anything other than my own uninformed opinion, so I don't care to debate it much.

Quote:I actually had zero issue with them being expelled based on their flagrant violation of the rules.  The argument that other people hadn't been expelled doesn't really impress me.  "But he did it to" stopped being a reasonable excuse for behavior in grade school.

Politics and the "rules" for politicians are mostly an illusion. Politicians violate rules and ordinances all the time. It's all about doing what is correct vs what is politically advantageous. Did they violate some rules? Maybe, I can't say because I don't have the Tennessee constitution memorized. In the articles I've read about it, I've struggled to find direct excerpts of exactly what they did wrong, but that doesn't mean they didn't break some rule somewhere. Regardless, expelling people who are protesting the murder of innocent people, including children, is a bad look, even if it was technically a procedural violation. The Republicans were stupid to not realize that.

Quote:Which I understand.  When I take issue with it is when it is in promotion of a lie, especially a lie being told to try and curtail the rights of others.

I'm not sure what lie you are speaking about, specifically, but statements in politics are almost never black and white. Any given statement can be considered a "lie" or a "fact" based on what your presupposed biases are. There are facts and lies, of course. We don't live in a post-truth world. It's just much harder to discern now than it may have been in the past.