Race baiting media at it again...

Originally posted by Surtur
Well at least this is consistent. This country really needs to do away with all "okay for one race, but not the other" bs. So no words that only certain races can say, no topics only certain races can discuss, and no actions certain races can take that are not okay for others.

Oh and definitely no immediately jumping to speculation about things. You want to call someone racist this day and age? You need more then "dude had the word white tatted on him". This wasn't white power, it wasn't a tatoo of a black man hanging from a tree, it wasn't an image of this guy wearing a KKK uniform.

Every tatoo has a certain intent, so why not find that out before jumping to conclusions? This wasn't a life or death situation, nobody was in any danger. For all I know he could be the grand wizard of the KKK, but his specific tatoo doesn't tell us that.

Even worse, do you read motherf*ckers tatoo's if you see a person with one? I sure as hell don't take the time, even if I'm shaking their hand. So people get pissy with Hilary, this was just probably one of a crap load of people she shook hands with that day. Unless a tatoo is of massive size of has a variety of bright colors..I tend not to pay it no mind. So even if someone wanted to say "this tatoo is racist"...changing that to whining about Hilary doesn't fly unless you know she specifically knew this guy was a white supremacist.

This is the world we live in: immediately accuse people of racism. That is our new thing. Even if we don't know this person and even if we really don't have much of a leg to stand on in labeling them racist..we will STILL do it.

This is very sad, because I thought you were making some effort to engage in reasoned debate, but in fact you are just utterly rejecting anything that does not line up with your blinkered worldview.

You are wrong to talk of ""okay for one race, but not the other" bs." As explained many times earlier, this is an ill-considered position; what you mistake to be equal treatment does in fact end in drastic inequality and unfairness. By perpetuating this position, you are perpetuating inequality.

Your comment about intent is simple deflection of the issue. No single credible scenario has even given at any point as to how this could not be a racist tattoo. The only vague possibility is that it is a reference to someone's name, but that possibility is so remote as to not be worth considering, and it still comes down to appreciating the signals of how you present yourself. It is not- I need to emphasise this very strong- NOT in any way unreasonable to read that tattoo with a negative connotation. It is, however, very disingenuous for you to try and claim moral superiority by saying "let's just ask him what it is about". That is false morality- it is simply avoiding the actual issue. An attempt to cloud the argument by pretending to sound reasonable when in fact you are not.

We do NOT live in a world where we immediately accuse people of racism- this is again a false moral stand you are taking to cloud the issue. We DO, however, live in a world where severe racism issues are very real and judgements such as this are reasonable. Of course, much of the problem of racism is not just found in the individual race haters. It's the people who are utterly unable to shift and expand their cultural understanding of the world to see the nuances of this sort of thing that perpetuate the issue by raising fake moral objections and enabling the issue to get worse.

The sad thing is that you apparently genuinely feel you have some sort of moral position here. A shame. You need to widen your perspective quite considerably- you simply don't understand the issues.

Meanwhile, please cut down on the swearing.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Do you think the same thing when you see a tattoo like this?

Also how do you know for sure he was racist, it didn't say white power. It said white, so until the person can be affilated with some group or ideology, this is all speculation is it not? If a black person had a tattoo saying "black" or "thug life", would he be an ******* too? Because we know its cool to be black and rep that status, however the same does not go for white's.

Fair enough?

To your "White" tattoo comment. No, we don't know for sure if that guy had racist intentions, for all we know his last name is "White" and he tattooed it on his arm or any number of other none racist intentions. But as pointed out, the history behind "White Pride" in America is closely linked with racism and oppression of others, so it's not surprising for people to react negatively to such a tattoo.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
Also how do you know for sure he was racist, it didn't say white power. It said white, so until the person can be affilated with some group or ideology, this is all speculation is it not? If a black person had a tattoo saying "black" or "thug life", would he be an ******* too? Because we know its cool to be black and rep that status, however the same does not go for white's.

Fair enough?

As noted, a black person with a tattoo saying 'black' is not the same as a white person bearing one saying 'white'.

People have to stop being culturally and historically blind, else they will continually mis-understand.

I mean the problem is real racism exists in this country, no doubt about it. So how about for a change we focus on the shit we know is racist?

Has anyone even researched who this person was? Or know anything about them at all? Besides that one photo? I sure as hell don't, which is why I'm saying I just don't know. Could be racist, could be something else. So I sure as shit wouldn't make a big stink over it until I knew more.

"Big stink" in this case being Hillary Clinton removing the photo from twitter?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
As noted, a black person with a tattoo saying 'black' is not the same as a white person bearing one saying 'white'.

People have to stop being culturally and historically blind, else they will continually mis-understand.

How is it not the same? I dont accept that, at all.

Originally posted by Robtard
That guy in the pic is definitely a an *******, a stupid ******* to be exact.

To your "White" tattoo comment. No, we don't know for sure if that guy had racist intentions, for all we know his last name is "White" and he tattooed it on his arm or any number of other none racist intentions. But as pointed out, the history behind "White Pride" in America is closely linked with racism and oppression of others, so it's not surprising for people to react negatively to such a tattoo.

I think the thread has jumped to conclusions. All we have is a tattoo saying white. Could mean anything. Hilary like a good politician is just covering up her tracks. And thats why this became a big deal more then it was.

Now as far as their past Bill passed laws to honor the confederate flag, his mentor and person he looked up to was a member of the KKK. Bill was also apart of a white only golf coarse and on the clinton/gore ticket, he had campaign pins with the confederate flag.

So why is this not considered racism from the media and public opinion?

Originally posted by Bardock42
"Big stink" in this case being Hillary Clinton removing the photo from twitter?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
As noted, a black person with a tattoo saying 'black' is not the same as a white person bearing one saying 'white'.

I understand perfectly, I just disagree. I know the story, to you if a person is white and proud it means they are proud in a "we are superior" kind of way. But for black people it doesn't mean that. Because historically people having that type of pride were racist.

Originally posted by Bardock42
"Big stink" in this case being Hillary Clinton removing the photo from twitter?

Because people whined over it and she knew they would. If this wasn't just some random voter she met I might get it, but it appears it was just some random dude. Who gives a shit? Does it mean she is racist? No.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I think the thread has jumped to conclusions. All we have is a tattoo saying white. Could mean anything. Hilary like a good politician is just covering up her tracks. And thats why this became a big deal more then it was.

Now as far as their past Bill passed laws to honor the confederate flag, his mentor and person he looked up to was a member of the KKK. Bill was also apart of a white only golf coarse and on the clinton/gore ticket, he had campaign pins with the confederate flag.

So why is this not considered racism from the media and public opinion?

The differences have been pointed out. But I have no real objections to what you said there, politically. It's a none story that was made into one by whiners.

To the Confederate Flag business, I'd guess it was a political move to ingratiate himself with moderate-right Southerners. If you want to dig up Bill's past, sure. Not sure this is the thread for it.

Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
How is it not the same? I dont accept that, at all.

As noted, that's because you are totally blind to historical and cultural nuance and don't want to accept anything outside of your narrow field of view.

You don't even want to begin to engage with the wider cultural argument- you think everything can be argued from a blank slate and then use that as a weapon to say people are being unfair on whites by applying double standards.

But that whole situation is a monstrously immoral fake- it's not a blank canvas we are starting from. It's a culture and history where white power has been nothing but evil and oppressive- a sign of evil and an obstacle in the struggle for civilization, where black power has been a fight against oppression, and the civil rights movement a huge step forward in US civilization.

It is, really, monstrous to try and argue the whole thing starting with the assumption that all cultural expressions are even and neutral, because by doing so you are just cutting out all of the generations of pain and suffering- up to this very day- that minorities have had to suffer that make their messages fundamentally different to a white man expressing the same for his culture. I wish to god it WAS a blank slate everyone was working from, but it's not, and it's never going to be one whilst people are in such denial about it.

So, as I stated on the first page- I would be wary of a black person with 'black' tattoed on them because I dislike tribalism, BUT I would not assume it was racist in the same way I would- very reasonably- with a white person sporting one that says 'white'. That is a judgement based on intelligent considerations of people, culture, and history, and that is what you need for proper, intelligent consideration of the situation.

Originally posted by Robtard
I have no real objections to what you said there. It's a none story that was made into one by whiners.

To the Confederate Flag business, I'd guess it was a political move to ingratiate himself with moderate-right Southerners. If you want to dig up Bill's past, sure. Not sure this is the thread for it.

Im showing that Hilary/Bill has had past ties with racism and the confederate flag but the media and people ignore this because its irrefutable.

And lets be real this ticket is Bill/Hilary 2016. Bill and Hilary will be running the show. The VP is just going to be public affairs.

Originally posted by Surtur
I understand perfectly, I just disagree. I know the story, to you if a person is white and proud it means they are proud in a "we are superior" kind of way. But for black people it doesn't mean that. Because historically people having that type of pride were racist.

It's not just 'to me', as if it is some sort of artistic judgement. It's a view with my eyes open- and you have failed to make any credible defence of your position.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
As noted, that's because you are totally blind to historical and cultural nuance and don't want to accept anything outside of your narrow field of view.

You don't even want to begin to engage with the wider cultural argument- you think everything can be argued from a blank slate and then use that as a weapon to say people are being unfair on whites by applying double standards.

But that whole situation is a monstrously immoral fake- it's [b]not a blank canvas we are starting from. It's a culture and history where white power has been nothing but evil and oppressive- a sign of evil and an obstacle in the struggle for civilization, where black power has been a fight against oppression and the civil rights movement a huge step forward in US civilization.

It is, really, monstrous to try and argue the whole thing starting with the assumption that all cultural expressions are even and neutral, because by doing so you are just cutting out all of the generations of pain and suffering- up to this very day- that minorities have had to suffer that make their messages fundamentally different to a white man expressing the same for his culture. I wish to god it WAS a blank slate everyone was working from, but it's not, and it's never going to be one whilst people are in such denial about it.

So, as I stated on the first page- I would be wary of a black person with 'black' tattoed on them because I dislike tribalism, BUT I would not assume it was racist in the same way I would- very reasonably- with a white person sporting one that says 'white'. That is a judgement based on intelligent considerations of people, culture, and history, and that is what you need for proper, intelligent consideration of the situation. [/B]

And when did I say I did not want to engage in a wider debate? And whats with all the "you's" and pointing fingers at me. Thats not a way to start a debate by pointing fingers. Considering I made one post disagreeing.

Originally posted by Robtard
The differences have been pointed out. But I have no real objections to what you said there, politically. It's a none story that was made into one by whiners.

To the Confederate Flag business, I'd guess it was a political move to ingratiate himself with moderate-right Southerners. If you want to dig up Bill's past, sure. Not sure this is the thread for it.

I think this whole racial thing is made into a story by PC bias whiners if you ask me.

Well, for a start, you would have read the thread first if you had good intentions there- 'as noted' was a clear reference to what was in the thread before, but instead of reading all that you just flat out rejected the idea. Secondly, your 'I don't accept that at all' comment pretty much nailed your colours to the mast.

By all means, surprise me though.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
It's not just 'to me', as if it is some sort of artistic judgement. It's a view with my eyes open- and you have failed to make any credible defence of your position.

No, I'm just not going to needlessly speculate. Maybe your eyes are open a bit too wide on this one.

Though of course, the OP? Right on the money with this being race baiting, you see that, right? That this very topic shows that? Since it got us arguing about shit NEITHER CAN PROVE.

So wow, we kinda fell hook line and sinker there.

The topic of race is an important one, I don't think every article on it is race baiting.

I think 'neither can prove' is a misdirection also. I think not only is the culture/history argument a very reasonable and well-backed position, I also think it is one that has gained widespread cultural acceptance.

And the thread long ago became focussed on the 'equal treatment' part of the argument. That's a valid debate.