darth_ender

A Monster Calls

Tragic and amazing. I loved it!

I would like to say that I appreciate a little more normalcy in your debate points, general. Though your view remains very pessimistic, it’s much more realistic in approach, and it’s more enjoyable engaging in conversation with you this way.

By my calculations (though I’m no accountant), 1/3 is not a majority.

Though he has an extremely loyal base, he has also created a great rift on the Republican side. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Party refused to nominate him as their candidate. He’s political cyanide for many in Congress.

yhwx said:

Well, they’ve now tooken down my thread.

Corektion

^You spell dumn rong!

DominicCobb said:

darth_ender said:

DominicCobb said:

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?

what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.

I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.

What if the person eating the apple gets food poisoning, and the other person doesn’t believe them, or says they need to get over it?

I’m not at all suggesting the person eating the apple shouldn’t have an opinion of greater importance. I’m simply saying they may have something to contribute. What if the non-apple eater had never tasted apple, but happens to know the many health benefits of apples? What if he’s never had that Fuji apple the first person is eating, but he’s had golden delicious and might have some unique contribution to the broader discussion if afford in general?

I’m not suggesting that white people can’t talk about race. If so I’d be a hypocrite.

Then I think we’re in agreement.

Deleted

DominicCobb said:

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?

what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.

I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.

What if the person eating the apple gets food poisoning, and the other person doesn’t believe them, or says they need to get over it?

I’m not at all suggesting the person eating the apple shouldn’t have an opinion of greater importance. I’m simply saying they may have something to contribute. What if the non-apple eater had never tasted apple, but happens to know the many health benefits of apples? What if he’s never had that Fuji apple the first person is eating, but he’s had golden delicious and might have some unique contribution to the broader discussion if afford in general?

yhwx said:

I’m not sure why people have the idea that Frink and only Frink has the ability to declare what people should and shouldn’t be offended by.

He runs the forum. Didn’t Jetrell Fo inform you of this during the orientation?

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

I’m saying that he can have an opinion if he wants to. Being white doesn’t make him incompetent or irrelevant when talking about non-white issues. He might not understand the full scope of the experience, but that doesn’t invalidate his opinion.

I agree with all of this, by the way. He can always have an opinion, and he can talk about non-white issues. I’m white too. I’m saying that if a bunch of black people think something is offensive, it might just be offensive despite the white dude who doesn’t think it’s offensive. If there’s any doubt, I’m going to go with the people who have the full scope of the experience.

And as I said, if it’s something ludicrous like Jack Black having to change his name to Jack White, that’s a different story because you aren’t going to find a bunch of black people complaining about that.

darth_ender said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?

what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.

I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.

I feel there is plenty of room for multiple races, including the privileged majority, at the table of discussion. I feel like your above post was the first to truly acknowledge that.

Take Affirmative Action as an example. Minorities are not proportionally represented in certain work environments (particularly white color jobs) or in higher levels of education. So institutions might lower their standards for particular races in an effort to create a nominal representation.

But then think of the white guy with the 3.9 GPA who is not admitted to the elite school of his choice, but learns that the black gal with the 3.4 was. He might feel some resentment. Simply saying, “Oh, you’re a privileged white guy and you’ll find another school,” does not necessarily solve his feelings of disappointment or frustration. It might exacerbate feelings of resentment towards African-Americans he already held. Similarly, the 3.4 black student may not be as prepared for school and might be unable to make it through the program, owing to the challenges of attempting to make it through a school of intense standards. Perhaps this student might have had better success at a less prestigious school.

Bear in mind, this is in no way stating one race is inherently more intelligent than another. I feel this is obvious, but I worry that my words might be misinterpreted.

Back to my example, hey, we want minorities to be able to reach their dreams. Many do, in fact, come from an underprivileged environment, possibly in some urban school where the educational standards were not as high. This presents a challenge when trying to overcome the disadvantaged position of society. Lowering standards is a sort of an opportunity to get a foot up from that disadvantage. On the other hand, it could also be an opportunity for greater failure. And though the elementary education of the two students in question was not equal, will creating different standards for the same students now at the university-level somehow create equality? Probably not.

I’m not actually trying to say which is better: Affirmative Action or flat rate standards. I am trying to point out that it is a complex issue. Usually, these issues actually require people of different perspectives to find a healthy, lasting solution. Excluding whites, even whites who do not fully understand the nature of white privilege, from the discussion leads to more problems than it solves.

I Have Hard

Dude, what you do with your time is your business, but I wouldn’t announce it.

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

If someone is eating an apple and another person is just watching them eat the apple, which one has the more qualified opinion on the quality of that apple?

what exact quality of the apple are you talking about. Without tasting I can still testify to quality of how it looks and smells. Of course I can’t testify as to how it tastes unless I tasted it.

I think this exclusionary attitude again causes resentment both ways. Maybe Warbler doesn’t know about that specific apple, but then, perhaps he could offer a more objective perspective on other qualities of the apple, while the person eating the apple may be overly-concerned with the most salient qualities, such as flavor.

^I think FOS means something different when addressing Nazis and their ilk.

Man, Ronster’s posts are goldmines for this thread! I have to resist linking multiple suggestions to a single post of his!

I want to be like the Nazis

This one’s more like the opposite of a suggestion for lurkers.

I dunno. I kinda like this “guilty until proven innocent” approach. We should talk about a Constitutional amendment the politics thread!

Warbler said:

darth_ender said:

chyron8472 said:

Regarding the statues in the South, I have a feeling that there has been a certain romanticism attached to the Confederacy and/or the prominent characters involved. Similar to how pirates or cowboys are romanticized. Much of the reality has been lost and replaced with fictional motivations or made romantic with notions of “southern pride” or rebelling against The Man.

I don’t think the present-day South understands what the Battle Flag of Northern Virginia (aka the Confederate Flag) actually stood for back in the day, but rather attaches a romantic quality to it in ignorance of the reality it came from.

This is very true. I witnessed it firsthand, and at that time didn’t even recognize its fallaciousness. To Southerners, it isn’t always about slavery and racism. Yes, I remember a racist shop where they sold KKK paraphernalia and Confederate flags. However, to the majority, they see Confederate leaders as modern knights, overlooking their ideology the way we overlook the evils of, well, as to said, pirates and cowboys and such. John Wayne and Johnny Depp never raped or murdered anyone!

Wait, you are you John Wayne and Johnny Depp actually raped people? I’ve honestly never heard either one of them being accused of rape.

John Wayne and Johnny Depp have never raped anyone to my knowledge. It was a reference to the romanticism both actors have portrayed in cowboys and pirates.

Warbler said:

Frank your Majesty said:

Warbler said:

true, but it happens sometimes in society (Germany 1930s and the South of the USA) that ideas from the Nazis/KKK are more popular then the ideas of MLK. In order to make sure MLK’s freedom of Speech is protected in such an era, we protect the Nazis/KKK(unless they become violent and/or break the law).

You seem to think that the Nazis would respect your freedom of speech as much as you respect theirs.

Was MLK’s freedom of speech protected in 1940s Germany? No, they abolished freedom of speech as soon as they could.

My point is, I want to be like the Nazis.

😉

Ryan McAvoy said:

TV’s Frink said:

I know, right? Who wants to fidget with Steve Bannon’s head all day?

Baron Harkonnen’s face Doctor?

Lol!

TV’s Frink said:

darth_ender said:

TV’s Frink said:

Ok, even I think this is going too far.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/23/business/media/robert-lee-university-virginia-charlottesville.html

ESPN has removed an announcer from its broadcast of the University of Virginia’s first football game next month because he has the same name as a Confederate general memorialized in statues that are being taken down across the country.

The network announced late Tuesday that the announcer, Robert Lee, a part-time employee who calls about a dozen college football and basketball games a year for ESPN, would no longer participate in the broadcast of the Sept. 2 game in Charlottesville, Va., which became the center of violent clashes this month during a white supremacist gathering.

White nationalists and neo-Nazis flooded into Charlottesville, marching through the University of Virginia campus with torches, to protest the city’s plan to remove a statue of the Confederacy’s top general, Robert E. Lee.

After the violence in Charlottesville, which left one person dead, ESPN executives and Mr. Lee decided that for his safety it would be best to have him to work on a different game that Saturday, a network spokesman said.

“We collectively made the decision with Robert to switch games as the tragic events in Charlottesville were unfolding, simply because of the coincidence of his name,” ESPN said in a statement. “In that moment it felt right to all parties. It’s a shame that this is even a topic of conversation and we regret that who calls play-by-play for a football game has become an issue.”

There definitely had to be a limit. People can’t always get worked up over such things!

Which explains why you’ve chosen a user name honoring a mass-murderer?

Two, if we’re being precise!

I should’ve gone with my initial impulse: darth_ender_adolf_stalin_mao_hannibal_bane_esquire.

JEDIT: Why didn’t I include Baron Harkonnen?

TV’s Frink said:

Ok, even I think this is going too far.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/23/business/media/robert-lee-university-virginia-charlottesville.html

ESPN has removed an announcer from its broadcast of the University of Virginia’s first football game next month because he has the same name as a Confederate general memorialized in statues that are being taken down across the country.

The network announced late Tuesday that the announcer, Robert Lee, a part-time employee who calls about a dozen college football and basketball games a year for ESPN, would no longer participate in the broadcast of the Sept. 2 game in Charlottesville, Va., which became the center of violent clashes this month during a white supremacist gathering.

White nationalists and neo-Nazis flooded into Charlottesville, marching through the University of Virginia campus with torches, to protest the city’s plan to remove a statue of the Confederacy’s top general, Robert E. Lee.

After the violence in Charlottesville, which left one person dead, ESPN executives and Mr. Lee decided that for his safety it would be best to have him to work on a different game that Saturday, a network spokesman said.

“We collectively made the decision with Robert to switch games as the tragic events in Charlottesville were unfolding, simply because of the coincidence of his name,” ESPN said in a statement. “In that moment it felt right to all parties. It’s a shame that this is even a topic of conversation and we regret that who calls play-by-play for a football game has become an issue.”

There definitely had to be a limit. People can’t always get worked up over such things!

True story: there was another missionary in my mission whose last name was Coon. Elder Coon was told he was being transferred to inner Atlanta. He was afraid of the offense his missionary name tag might cause and that he might get injured! (Nothing happened)

chyron8472 said:

Regarding the statues in the South, I have a feeling that there has been a certain romanticism attached to the Confederacy and/or the prominent characters involved. Similar to how pirates or cowboys are romanticized. Much of the reality has been lost and replaced with fictional motivations or made romantic with notions of “southern pride” or rebelling against The Man.

I don’t think the present-day South understands what the Battle Flag of Northern Virginia (aka the Confederate Flag) actually stood for back in the day, but rather attaches a romantic quality to it in ignorance of the reality it came from.

This is very true. I witnessed it firsthand, and at that time didn’t even recognize its fallaciousness. To Southerners, it isn’t always about slavery and racism. Yes, I remember a racist shop where they sold KKK paraphernalia and Confederate flags. However, to the majority, they see Confederate leaders as modern knights, overlooking their ideology the way we overlook the evils of, well, as to said, pirates and cowboys and such. John Wayne and Johnny Depp never raped or murdered anyone!

In all seriousness, this is only a semi-serious whine. No one need feel obliged to reply to anything I say. Mostly having some fun. 😃

darth_ender said:

Something deep and more thought provoking than the current conversation in the politics thread

everyone thought:

Donald Trump said:

SAD!

Attention Undone