Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 373

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

Well yeah, people are allowed to decide who gets their stuff when they die. So what?

Well, I have lots of opinions on this matter, but the one most topical is this: if you have a time, 50 years ago when redlining was legal, and a time 100 years ago when murder was tolerated and even encouraged in the form of lynching, and 150 years ago when slavery was legal, that is a lot of time to build up a pretty substantial reservoir of unearned, unfair, unjustified advantage. And if you have a system that allows those ill-gotten gains to legally be transferred people living in the present even though the means used to accumulate that wealth is no longer legal… well, you’ve got a problem.

I think it is wrong to simply label everything that white people have today as ill-gotten.

Me too, which is why I so carefully tagged only those gains made via slavery, etc as ill-gotten, though they are substantial. I think this moots the rest of your questions, so I’ll leave it at that.

I’m not so sure it does.

However, how do you determine, of the stuff white people have today, what is and is not an ill gotten gain via slavery? What about those white people whom are decedents of people who came to America after slavery was ended?

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

Well yeah, people are allowed to decide who gets their stuff when they die. So what?

Well, I have lots of opinions on this matter, but the one most topical is this: if you have a time, 50 years ago when redlining was legal, and a time 100 years ago when murder was tolerated and even encouraged in the form of lynching, and 150 years ago when slavery was legal, that is a lot of time to build up a pretty substantial reservoir of unearned, unfair, unjustified advantage. And if you have a system that allows those ill-gotten gains to legally be transferred people living in the present even though the means used to accumulate that wealth is no longer legal… well, you’ve got a problem.

I think it is wrong to simply label everything that white people have today as ill-gotten.

Me too, which is why I so carefully tagged only those gains made via slavery, etc as ill-gotten, though they are substantial. I think this moots the rest of your questions, so I’ll leave it at that.

I’m not so sure it does.

However, how do you determine, of the stuff white people have today, what is and is not an ill gotten gain via slavery? What about those white people whom are decedents of people who came to America after slavery was ended?

I feel like you are trying to get a clear answer, and there isn’t one for a lot of this stuff. The real question is, when faced with tough questions like this, do we default to ‘leave it as is, its too damn hard to figure out’, or do we struggle to find a solution that is better? Our approach to finding an answer matters more than our answer sometimes.

CatBus said:

Would you agree that wealth earned from slavery is ill-gotten wealth? If so, we’re pretty much in agreement.

Again what exactly is wealth earned from slavery? Also if my ancestors were slave owners, it is not my fault. I would agreed wealth earned directly from slavery is ill-gotten, but wealth that earned from slavery and then passed down from father to son to daughter to son to son to daughter to daughter to son. I don’t know. Again one could argue that all of America is ill gotten. Does that mean we should end the country and go back to Europe?

dahmage said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

Warbler said:

Well yeah, people are allowed to decide who gets their stuff when they die. So what?

Well, I have lots of opinions on this matter, but the one most topical is this: if you have a time, 50 years ago when redlining was legal, and a time 100 years ago when murder was tolerated and even encouraged in the form of lynching, and 150 years ago when slavery was legal, that is a lot of time to build up a pretty substantial reservoir of unearned, unfair, unjustified advantage. And if you have a system that allows those ill-gotten gains to legally be transferred people living in the present even though the means used to accumulate that wealth is no longer legal… well, you’ve got a problem.

I think it is wrong to simply label everything that white people have today as ill-gotten.

Me too, which is why I so carefully tagged only those gains made via slavery, etc as ill-gotten, though they are substantial. I think this moots the rest of your questions, so I’ll leave it at that.

I’m not so sure it does.

However, how do you determine, of the stuff white people have today, what is and is not an ill gotten gain via slavery? What about those white people whom are decedents of people who came to America after slavery was ended?

I feel like you are trying to get a clear answer, and there isn’t one for a lot of this stuff. The real question is, when faced with tough questions like this, do we default to ‘leave it as is, its too damn hard to figure out’, or do we struggle to find a solution that is better? Our approach to finding an answer matters more than our answer sometimes.

I am open to Affirmative Action if that is what you mean, but I don’t think I am open to passing a law requiring all white people to give 50% of all they own to someone who is non-white. I am also open to suggestions.

Did the death tax only apply to white people? What about rich black people? Surely they didn’t earn their wealth via slavery. What about white families that clearly earned their wealth after slavery was ended?

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

At just the very highest levels (people with more than 5 million dollars in wealth), there is currently an inheritance tax that was set up for the purpose of lessening the grip of “power” families that essentially become a perpetual un-elected ruling class. Of course, Trump wants to get rid of this because it affects his family. And, when he chants “we’re going to get rid of the death tax!”, that’s exactly what he is talking about – ensuring his ancestors continue to have power over yours.

God, the way the Republicans frame that is so slimy, but they know exactly what they’re doing. Death Tax sounds so ominous, people’s minds instantly go to “oh, they tax people for dying? that’s horrible!” but that’s not what it is.

First step to fixing the future is acknowledging the mistakes of the past.

CatBus said:

This is interesting.

When you’re marching around in public as part of a hate group, people can widely distribute photos of you and ID you via crowdsourcing. First off, a caution–be damned sure about someone’s identity before you tag them with something like this, and secondly, if you actually can positively identify any of these white supremacists, please do. They wanted to tell the whole world what they thought, so it seems proper that the parts of the world closest to them shouldn’t be left out of knowing what they think.

I don’t know what’s more precious–that Cole White lost his job at Top Dog, LLC (ohh, so sorry, it turns out “assclown” is not a legally protected class!), or that Peter Cvjetanovic is now making the media rounds saying “that’s not me in those super-clear photos!” (when it definitely is – it reminds me of when Richard Spencer recently denied he was Richard Spencer because he was too delicate of a snowflake to cope with being disliked in public). It’s like there’s consequences or something. I wonder if he’s also going to deny that’s him in those (not rally-related) photos with US Senator Dean Heller, or vice-versa.

More consequences (preferably law-enforcement-style consequences, but I’m not picky) are needed to make sure this shit gets shut down right now. Or at least make the Klansmen have to wear their goofy hoods again.

Yeah, get those Nazis! Fuck 'em, and what are the chances the angry mob of losers internet detectives get the wrong person? Next to none, I’m sure. Oh shit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/us/charlottesville-doxxing.html

Hmm, I’m suddenly reminded of /pol/'s mad attempts to find the person who committed the vehicular terror attack that day, only to find the wrong guy.

While mistakes being made are unfortunately possible (or even likely), exposing these scumbags for who they are is still an absolutely worthy effort.

Jeebus said:

CatBus said:

This is interesting.

When you’re marching around in public as part of a hate group, people can widely distribute photos of you and ID you via crowdsourcing. First off, a caution–be damned sure about someone’s identity before you tag them with something like this, and secondly, if you actually can positively identify any of these white supremacists, please do. They wanted to tell the whole world what they thought, so it seems proper that the parts of the world closest to them shouldn’t be left out of knowing what they think.

I don’t know what’s more precious–that Cole White lost his job at Top Dog, LLC (ohh, so sorry, it turns out “assclown” is not a legally protected class!), or that Peter Cvjetanovic is now making the media rounds saying “that’s not me in those super-clear photos!” (when it definitely is – it reminds me of when Richard Spencer recently denied he was Richard Spencer because he was too delicate of a snowflake to cope with being disliked in public). It’s like there’s consequences or something. I wonder if he’s also going to deny that’s him in those (not rally-related) photos with US Senator Dean Heller, or vice-versa.

More consequences (preferably law-enforcement-style consequences, but I’m not picky) are needed to make sure this shit gets shut down right now. Or at least make the Klansmen have to wear their goofy hoods again.

Yeah, get those Nazis! Fuck 'em, and what are the chances the angry mob of losers internet detectives get the wrong person? Next to none, I’m sure. Oh shit.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/us/charlottesville-doxxing.html

Hmm, I’m suddenly reminded of /pol/'s mad attempts to find the person who committed the vehicular terror attack that day, only to find the wrong guy.

I was pretty heated when I wrote this, so here’s a (hopefully more measured) part 2.

I am not particularly bothered by these people being identified. I think that the second that they decide to go public with their hatred, they need to be ready for the consequences. These people do deserve to be mocked and shamed, they’re reprehensible, but I’m really tired of people being falsely identified. This isn’t the first time people have decided that they would take matters into their own hands, only to accuse someone totally innocent. This happened with the Boston Bombing, too. I just wish that, if this witch-hunting is going to happen, people were a little more cautious about it. These kinds of accusations can seriously ruin lives, there is no room for mistakes.

yhwx said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/14/us/politics/trump-charlottesville-protest.html

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump bowed on Monday to overwhelming pressure that he personally condemn white supremacists who incited bloody demonstrations in Charlottesville, Va., over the weekend, labeling their racists views “evil” after two days of equivocal statements.

“Racism is evil,” said Mr. Trump, delivering a statement from the White House at a hastily arranged appearance meant to halt the growing political threat posed by the situation. “And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the K.K.K., neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans.”

It took him two days to come up with that. In the meantime:

This milquetoast half-condemnation isn’t going to cut it. I’ve seen people saying “he doesn’t mean it, he was pressured by the media,” and there needs to be no room for this kind of doubt.

But Trump’s never going to say what needs to be said, because even if he doesn’t support the alt-right, he definitely has no problem with their support of him.

Yeah, exposing the marchers is worthy but exposing the assaulters is necessary. Hope they all get identified soon.