Hence no double quotation marks.
But if you believe no one is saying things like this, you haven’t been spending any time reading social media posts (including on this site).
I don’t think this comment is accurate.
Look, you’re straw-manning up the wazoo. I was trying to treat your straw-man as the actual argument it parodies, which is King’s argument. Nobody makes the actual straw-man argument you offered, though, so if you mean it literally, it’s just as irrelevant as every other straw-man argument.
King, given every opportunity to criticize riots, again and again turned the conversation back to the conditions that lead to riots, the injustices. He did not criticize the rioters. He pushed back heavily against those who focused on the riots as the main issue.
To suggest that this is a patronizing argument advanced by white people is historically ignorant.
If I had said anything akin to ‘no black people are defending looting and rioting,’ then your post would be a reasonable counter-argument.
However, I said nothing akin to that.
Here’s another counter to an argument I never made.
I never said anything like ‘only white people say this’ or ‘historically, only white people have ever said this’. Nor did I say anything like ‘no people who are not white say this’ or ‘historically people of color never say this.’
Strawman, know thyself.
(What I did say—visible in the actual post—is
when white people say that looters must not be criticized because the looters live under injustice, they are making a profoundly patronizing and condescending argument
That has not been refuted by anything posted to date.)
Your post doesn’t refute what I posted:
Possibly you misunderstood my comment.
Your post (the YouTube video) would adequately rebut an argument such as ‘no black people are saying that looting is justified by oppression’ or ‘only white people are arguing that looting is justified by oppression.’ The trouble is, my comment said neither of those things.
Maybe we’d make more progress if you quoted whatever part of my comment you are trying to characterize, and spelled out exactly what you think my comment conveys.
Or not. Whatever you feel worth doing.
I don’t think this comment is accurate.
I don’t think this comment is accurate.
Okay.
I think they’re both accurate.
The video didn’t refute either. If you have a source you believe provides refutation, I’ll be happy to look at it.
Meanwhile, I’ve been dipping into the mass of people posting things like ‘we shouldn’t criticize those doing looting because they live with so much injustice.’ For example:
I don’t know if ‘David Menschel’ considers himself white, black, or anything else; his avatar is a puppy. The point is there is a ton of this sort of scorn for anyone who’d criticize looting or express the opinion that looting helps Trump (it does).
Formatting these is a bear, so I’d just send people to Shaun King’s Twitter feed. He’s a fairly popular (1.1 million followers on Twitter) advocate for the ‘looting must not be criticized’ point of view, and his feed can lead to you to lots of examples of the same:
.
.
.
eta: guess I didn’t have to format those, but looks as though it would have been necessary had either tweet been longer. Good to know.
Maybe we could get back to the conventions…?
This article claims that Trump didn’t get a convention bump after all:
Also…really…if we’re expected to swallow the narrative that someone from Hawaii is inherently unqualified to comment on something because he’s “living on stolen land”…that’s just a really weak way to try to make any rhetorical argument. I don’t know how else to describe it.
If Barack Obama were to weigh in on this situation, would we say, “fuck you, Barack, everything you achieved in life is built on the stolen land of Hawaii, you don’t have a drop of native Hawaiian blood in you, you were raised in English speaking schools built on the graves of native Hawaiians so…uh…fuck you, Barack!” Is that the direction that we want to be headed in?
I had a feeling that would happen. The tRumpists in my neck of the wood have been much more visible over the last week. A group of them were holding signs on the curb near the Chik-fil-A, someone’s set up a MAGA hat pop-up store near a (closed) gym, and some asshole was flying a MAGA flag and a Confederate flag from the back of his pickup yesterday while I was driving around. But I haven’t seen (m)any Trump signs in yards and very few Trump/Pence bumper stickers. I have been seeing a lot of Biden stickers, though, and the Democratic Congressional candidate put up a huge sign on a vacant lot near my house.
tl;dr, the Trump support I"m seeing feels a bit more…I dunno, panicky? desperate? than the subtle Biden support. And I live in a very red NC county.
Totally. I think Sherrerd’s claim is ridiculous, and I think his response reveals that more fully than anything else I could say on the topic, so I’m done with it.
I agree with the ‘back to the convention’ imperative, but will answer this reply to my earlier post:
No. And the idea that anyone from Hawaii, if not one of the descendants of native Hawaiians, is contemptible for living in Hawaii, is logically true of virtually the entire population of the USA–of everyone not descended from the first-comers.
In other words, if you live in the USA and are not native Hawaiian or Pueblo or Chinook or Seminole (etc.), then you are inherently a contemptible human being. (And this would apply to the Twitter poster too, unless, of course, he is actually Ivan Ivanovich, posting from his workplace in St. Petersburg.)
This actually is the type of thing that paid operatives are up to, in advance of November 3: filling the woke with shame over their very existence, such that they will tune out politics and fail to vote.
But that’s a topic for another thread; end of sidetrack.
It’s actually not that much of a sidetrack, as Donald Trump’s whole rise to power was, in large part, a backlash against this kind of bullshit rhetoric. If the Democratic Party brand becomes “you should self-flagellate for living on stolen land”, we can look forward to not only more Donald Trumps, but eventually people who make Trump look like Mr. Rogers.
Here’s what I’m seeing in West MIchigan (fairly conservative, with pockets of liberals): LOTS of Trump signs in the rural areas. And by lots, I mean there are a good number of houses with Trump signs, but that there are a lot of houses with MULTIPLE Trump signs up in the yard. I don’t know for sure, but if I had to guess, I suspect the campaign or the local Pubs are giving them away for free. It just seems strange to see a house, normal-size lawn, with 8 Trump signs on it.
On the Democratic side, I’m seeing a LOT of signs for Gary Peters (Democratic Senator) plus Democratic House candidates, but many of those houses don’t have Biden signs. I’m wondering if the local Dem party offices just aren’t selling Biden signs yet (or have very limited amounts), and those houses that do have Biden signs have bought them off the Biden website.
This is all just observational and speculation.
Agreed, the topic of Republican tactics to get Trump re-elected—including psychological attacks intended to disgust and exhaust Democrats to the extent that they refrain from voting—is certainly pertinent to discussions of what Republicans presented at their convention.
It all kind of bleeds together, particularly since the Republicans explicitly have no platform this year. What they have is basically all anti-voting tactics. Well, in addition to ‘re-writing history’ tactics. Admittedly there was a lot of effort in that direction at the RNC. ('Trump the Successful Businessman! Trump the Friend to Immigrants! Trump the Humanitarian!')
It takes a strong stomach to attend a Trump-era nominating convention—even virtually.
eta: a thread on lefty self-flagellation, and its contribution to helping Trumpism, would seem to be appropriate at this stage of things. Not sure where it belongs, though.
Early post-convention polling isn’t looking good for POTUS: https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/30/politics/trump-biden-post-convention-polling/index.html
It is truly amazing how many things are the reason we got Trump, and how none of them are that a wide swath of our country is xenophobic cultists who made a conscious decision to vote for Trump. Nope, the reason we got Trump is because of all the sins of leftists, especially the leftists that one happens to be arguing with–which is mightily convenient, because what a powerful rhetorical blow it strikes, to tell them that they’re why we got Trump! Any argument: won and dusted!
Its been a long time since I’ve been to a concert. I didn’t know it was common for gangs to wait outside for people to leave and threaten to rape their wives (Bongino). Times sure have changed!