Black Panther movie

[SlackerInc]

I went to look for more info about Keillor, and it appears that in the interim, more accusers have come forward—so I retract him as an example. Sad.

I will say that it’s absurd to, for a different example, take all the episodes of “Louie” (one of the great TV shows of all time) off of FX, and block the release of his movie. (Fortunately, it appears Louis CK has bought back the rights to that film. If he offers it on his website for five or ten bucks, I will definitely pony up.)

@MrDibble

*I *did? I thought it was you who quoted the racist imperialist flunky first?

I quoted Mill (who was not a racist imperialist flunky), but not in the context of colonialism. I know you’re a little slow on the uptake, so I will try to explain it to you in terms you can understand.

Just because you happen to have a job mopping the floors at a sardine cannery (good, honest work—nothing to be ashamed of), that doesn’t mean when I say “Dibble is a dumbshit” I’m disparaging the seafood packing industry!

@MrDibble

I could give a fuck that Mill was better than, say, Columbus. What he wasn’t better than was no colonialism at all.

Obviously, Wakanda had no use for a J.S. Mill. They already had their own, two of them in fact. And they lived a century earlier (or maybe a millennium? Sure, why not) and were twice as smart.

The actual, real life Africa would have been better off, net, without colonialism (although, again, there is still nuance to be teased out here). But would they have been better off without a hypothetical colonialism administered by a British government full of nothing but Mills? That I doubt.

@BigT

If you think Muslims have a hair texture, then you are clearly talking about an ethnicity or race, not a religion.

Is the point of all this to just draw SlackerInc out into revealing all the bigotry we already know about? He’s an Islamophobe and White Nationalist. He’s made that quite clear.

The weird thing is that he’s also anti-Trump, so he might actually be doing some good in the alt-right community. He can agree with them on stuff and still tell them how Trump is bad. The rest of us can’t do that.

I have in fact done that, by getting my Trump-voting cousin into Sam Harris. (He can’t bring himself to support Democrats, but he has at least renounced Trump and says he won’t vote at all in the future—which is a half point for the good guys, so I’m satisfied.)

I’m certainly not a “White Nationalist”. :rolleyes:

And yes: Islam is a religion. There are white Muslims, like John Walker Lind. But you’re trying to have it both ways. The only reason TWC defends Muslims so vociferously is because they see them as generally nonwhite, and they don’t like to see straight white guys talking shit about nonwhites. Which is understandable, but overly simplistic, thinking. You have all these rednecks who talk shit about Islam because it ain’t the true religion of Jeebus; so TWC thinks “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, but it ain’t necessarily so.

If Islam were more like Mormonism, practiced by all kinds (hence the purpose of those missionaries) but predominantly by white people, TWC would not abide its oppressive ideology toward women, gays, artists, freethinkers, etc. This is one of those things that’s not even arguable. To dispute it would be so absurd, I’m going to predict none of you will even try.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iiandyiiii]

I’m terrified of these mysterious TWC, whose views are alien to me and the vast majority of liberals I know. What can I do to sign up to fight these terrible, awful people (who definitely exist and aren’t figments of the imagination)?

[MrDibble]

@SlackerInc

I quoted Mill (who was not a racist imperialist flunky)

You might want to tell that to that guy I quoted before spouting all the racist, imperialist shit - you know, John Stuart Mill.

but not in the context of colonialism.

Dude, you’re spouting the hypocritical words of a racist, imperialist flunky in a thread about Black Panther. Just because you can’t read subtext (or, seemingly, text) doesn’t make the rest of the world illiterate.

I know you’re a little slow on the uptake

Says the guy who can’t remember the 80s…

, so I will try to explain it to you in terms you can understand.

I doubt you have the facility, but good effort, you!

Just because you happen to have a job mopping the floors at a sardine cannery (good, honest work—nothing to be ashamed of), that doesn’t mean when I say “Dibble is a dumbshit” I’m disparaging the seafood packing industry!

…or not. You’re aware your floundering takes place in a larger context, right? You’re not having several separate threads, each their own unique brand of insane on your part.

What am I saying, of course you’re not aware - you’re probably not aware you’re not wearing pants.

The actual, real life Africa would have been better off, net, without colonialism (although, again, there is still nuance to be teased out here).

Oh, *please *do explain the nuances to us.

But would they have been better off without a hypothetical colonialism administered by a British government full of nothing but Mills?

Like I said, I don’t give a fuck if my colonizer was superficially nice. Mill’s company, like I already said, was responsible for genocidal-levels of death and misery. It matters not one flying fuck that he kept schools open, while at the same time he did nothing about the causes of famine or the opium trade.

If Islam were more like Mormonism, practiced by all kinds (hence the purpose of those missionaries)

Are you under the deluded impression Islam* doesn’t* have missionaries? Of course, just like Mormons, most of their work is directed at their own co-religionists, but they definitely do proselytize to non-Muslims as well. Something you’d know if you weren’t, in fact, ignorant of Islam. Or the attitudes of most of the people you’re railing against about Islam.

Put down the Sam Harris and go and talk to an actual Muslim, even if their hair freaks you out. Or a real flesh-and-blood liberal, even.

[Gyrate]

@iiandyiiii

I’m terrified of these mysterious TWC, whose views are alien to me and the vast majority of liberals I know. What can I do to sign up to fight these terrible, awful people (who definitely exist and aren’t figments of the imagination)?

I hear TWC is run by that Strawman Liberal person. Man, I hate that guy!

[SlackerInc]

@Gyrate

I hear TWC is run by that Strawman Liberal person. Man, I hate that guy!

I’m very much a liberal person, so I don’t. I have voted in five presidential elections, as follows: Gore, Kerry, Obama, Obama, Clinton. In four of those elections, plus some midterms, I volunteered for Democratic GOTV: going door to door canvassing starting in the heat of the summer, and calling people as the election approached.

I am trying to save good old-fashioned liberalism from what TWC is doing to it with BLM, Islamophilia, and an obsession with transgender issues.

@MrDibble

Are you under the deluded impression Islam* doesn’t* have missionaries?

My first instinct was to assume that you deliberately took an unrepresentative portion of that sentence, but then it occurred to me that you aren’t that clever and probably just didn’t understand it. So just to keep this from distorting anyone else’s understanding, here’s the fuller context:

@SlackerInc

If Islam were more like Mormonism, practiced by all kinds (hence the purpose of those missionaries) but predominantly by white people, TWC would not abide its oppressive ideology toward women, gays, artists, freethinkers, etc. This is one of those things that’s not even arguable. To dispute it would be so absurd, I’m going to predict none of you will even try.

The only reason the words “practiced by all kinds (hence the purpose of those missionaries)” are in there at all is because I pictured someone objecting that there are nonwhite Mormons. Here is my point restated without that complex sentence structure that confused you:

1. Mormons are, for the most part, white.
2. Muslims are, for the most part, nonwhite.
3. If Muslims were predominantly white, TWC would not defend them. They would attack them for their oppression of women, gays, and atheists/freethinkers, just like I do. Guaranteed.

Get it now?

BTW, I took a history seminar on Islam, taught by a Muslim professor who was also a friend (we played tennis together, and he even set me up on a date with another student). Learning I was an atheist, he gave me the book Mohammed by Maxime Rodinson, which examines the supposed prophet’s life from a skeptical European atheist historian perspective. I wonder what happens to someone caught with that book in Saudi Arabia or Iran? Those countries may hate each other, but I’m sure they can agree that ownership of this book is a serious crime.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iiandyiiii]

@SlackerInc

I’m very much a liberal person, so I don’t. I have voted in five presidential elections, as follows: Gore, Kerry, Obama, Obama, Clinton. In four of those elections, plus some midterms, I volunteered for Democratic GOTV: going door to door canvassing starting in the heat of the summer, and calling people as the election approached.

I am trying to save good old-fashioned liberalism from what TWC is doing to it with BLM, Islamophilia, and an obsession with transgender issues.

I stand with you against these mostly non-existent people. These (largely imaginary) villains must be defeated!

[SlackerInc]

I only wish they were nonexistent, and you should know better. We have already heard the cries of “Islamophobia!” ITT; and when you have people denouncing John Stuart Mill from the left, it just proves my point.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JohnT]

@HelenTroy

Hi! Your friendly, neighborhood twitter “expert” chiming in. Black twitter is absolutely a thing and glorious to behold in its ability to meme and be aware of every cultural touchstone. It also organizes for change and introduces cutting edge news.

Feminist and gay twitter are not things. Yes, these issues and groups get roundly discussed, but they are not the force of black twitter.

Sincerely,
Someone with way too many twitter accounts and followers

Do you follow Adrian C Jax? Interesting what he is trying to do. Hope he succeeds!

I also love Propane Jane and am proud she follows me back. I don’t know why, but I appreciate it.

[Kimstu]

@SlackerInc

[…] when you have people denouncing John Stuart Mill from the left, it just proves my point.

:rolleyes: Dude. However much one may appreciate various liberal aspects of Mill’s opinions on feminism, free-thought, etc., it does not require any unreasonable degree of leftist radicalism to object to some of his other opinions, such as

Despotism is a legitimate mode of government in dealing with barbarians, provided the end be their improvement, and the means justified by actually effecting that end. Liberty, as a principle, has no application to any state of things anterior to the time when mankind have become capable of being improved by free and equal discussion. Until then, there is nothing for them but implicit obedience to an Akbar or a Charlemagne, if they are so fortunate as to find one.

So no, criticisms of Mill “from the left” do not in any way prove your attempted strawman point.

[Kimstu]

@SlackerInc

I went to look for more info about Keillor, and it appears that in the interim, more accusers have come forward—so I retract him as an example. Sad.

Fine. Do you have an answer to the question about where exactly you are drawing the line between “hasty suspicion or accusation” and actual “violation of rights”, according to your own preferred definition of “rights”?

@SlackerInc

2. Muslims are, for the most part, nonwhite.
3. If Muslims were predominantly white […] They would attack them for their oppression of women, gays, and atheists/freethinkers, just like I do.

You seem to be totally oblivious of the fact that most liberals favor both defending the rights of Muslims to religious liberty and freedom from bigotry and oppression, and condemning oppression practiced by various Muslim groups themselves.

Liberal feminists were denouncing the sexism of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, for example, back when most of today’s Islamophobes still regarded the Taliban merely as “good-guy” freedom fighters against the commies.

Also, you seem to be unaware that many millions of Muslims in traditionally Muslim communities in, e.g., Turkey and Eastern Europe are as racially “white” as the average Greek or Italian person, certainly as “white” as John Walker Lindh. There is no particular ethnic identity associated with being Muslim.

[iiandyiiii]

@SlackerInc

I only wish they were nonexistent, and you should know better. We have already heard the cries of “Islamophobia!”

Are you saying that any and all criticism of any and all Muslims for any and all reasons must not be challenged? If not, then what the hell are you saying?

and when you have people denouncing John Stuart Mill from the left, it just proves my point.

So no one must ever criticize anything Mill ever said about anything?

God what a whiner you’re being. Sometimes people say shitty things, even otherwise decent or admirable people, and those things might be criticized. Quit crying about it. It’s not the fault of the shadowy/scary TWC or SJWs or whatever. It’s entirely reasonable to criticize people for saying shitty things, even if they’ve also got other good qualities.

[SlackerInc]

@Kimstu

Liberal feminists were denouncing the sexism of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, for example, back when most of today’s Islamophobes still regarded the Taliban merely as “good-guy” freedom fighters against the commies.

Indeed they were, and I was with them. I remember really first noticing them when they dynamited those statues, and I thought they should be destroyed for that alone. That was pre-“woke” era, when what I called “good old-fashioned liberalism” was less enbattled.

I feel it’s unfair to judge Mill by contemporary standards when he was writing almost 200 years ago. But how about someone like Jonathan Chait? He is pretty much my Platonic ideal of a modern day liberal thinker. And he constantly takes all kinds of heat from TWC. (I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that he’s a straight white male.)

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[iiandyiiii]

@SlackerInc

But how about someone like Jonathan Chait? He is pretty much my Platonic ideal of a modern day liberal thinker. And he constantly takes all kinds of heat from TWC. (I’m sure it’s just a coincidence that he’s a straight white male.)

Oh no, someone criticized someone! Poor, poor Chait, writing lots of stuff (he’s written lots of good stuff, IMO, along with some stuff I disagree with) and having some of it be challenged and criticized. Thankfully, you’re here to protect him from those scary liberals who sometimes disagree with other liberals and criticize them! How dare they do that?

[Kimstu]

@SlackerInc

I feel it’s unfair to judge Mill by contemporary standards when he was writing almost 200 years ago.

:dubious: You don’t seem to have any problem with “judging Mill by contemporary standards” when he’s saying something you agree with and find admirable. You’ve been quoting him approvingly all over the shop, without feeling any need to preface your approval with disclaimers like “Now admittedly Mill was writing almost 200 years ago so his interpretation of these concepts might not exactly sync with today’s” etc. etc. etc.

Why are you trying to apply a different standard in the case of statements by Mill that we nowadays tend to disagree with?

@SlackerInc

But how about someone like Jonathan Chait? He is pretty much my Platonic ideal of a modern day liberal thinker. And he constantly takes all kinds of heat

Well, surely you’re not saying it’s unfair to judge him by “contemporary standards”? Other than that, what kind of “heat” are you complaining about Chait being given?

When I look around for critiques of Jonathan Chait, I mostly find this sort of thing:

New York’s Jonathan Chait writes today about the “dangerous consequences” of the left’s use of the label “white supremacist” to describe Donald Trump, the alt-right, and American conservatism in general. […]

Other people can argue the ideas with him. I don’t even really care about this specific piece, which, by the end, reveals itself to be just another paint-by-numbers “the greatest threat to free speech in the nation today is college students heckling an asshole” column. I just want to explain what he’s doing, and why.

While Chait might read like he’s making a sort of historical or semantic argument, he’s making a political one. He’s saying: Don’t call conservatives white supremacists […] mostly because he doesn’t like the idea of a politics in which Democrats and liberals, and not just a fringe left wing, condemn white supremacist tendencies by name. Chait is policing the way the left does politics because he does not want the left-wing style of doing politics to gain prominence.

Something that is well-known to people who’ve read Chait for years, but may not be apparent to those who just think of him as a standard-issue center-left pundit who is sort of clueless about race, is that he is engaged in a pretty specific political project: Ensuring that you and people like you don’t gain control of his party.

So, what we’ve got here is one member of a particular ideology and party disagreeing with some opinions of a fellow member of that ideology and party. As is not unusual for a day ending in “y”. I really don’t understand what about this has you clutching your pearls about the “unfairness” of it all.

[MrDibble]

@SlackerInc

My first instinct was to assume that you deliberately took an unrepresentative portion of that sentence, but then it occurred to me that you aren’t that clever and probably just didn’t understand it.

No, I understood it just fine, I just wanted to highlight the part that stood out to me - that you apparently think Islam isn’t like Mormonism in having missionaries or being practiced by “all kinds”.

Get it now?

I got your idiotic point the first time, but since points 2 and 3 clearly aren’t true, I didn’t feel the need to address it directly.

But since you seem slow of thinking, I’ll spell it out for you a little more explicitly: Islam *isn’t *given a pass on its sexism, homophobia or attitude to atheists, by me or any other liberal I know. So it’a a lie to say we give it a pass because its adherents are not White, because we’re not giving it a pass at all.

And anyway, “most Muslims” are from the MENA area, and are Caucasian, so your entire argument is wrong.

Or did you mean “Nordic” or some other Aryan synonym when you said white?

BTW, I took a history seminar on Islam, taught by a Muslim professor who was also a friend (we played tennis together, and he even set me up on a date with another student).

Jesus, you’re as bad as Shagnasty. Nobody gives a fuck about your boring life when your own posts contradict your claims of knowledge by showing how ignorant you are

[SlackerInc]

Once again, I’m not sure if you’re purposely making a strawman or just lacking in comprehension. My issue is not about protecting Chait from people saying mean things about him. He will always have right wingers dissing him because he is a liberal.

My concern is that the attacks from TWC have a variety of ripple effects that are bad for Democrats:

—They make the left side of the spectrum look unappealing to moderates who might otherwise consider voting Democratic thanks to the shit show on the GOP side;

—They create internecine warfare, the proverbial circular firing squad, on the left which makes us weaker overall;

—Maybe the most worrisome: I don’t know that the kind of heat Chait gets will allow the next generation of Chaitlike writers to become established. Yes, as people will tend to say in dismissing my complaint, Chait himself “is fine”. But how about a twentysomething writer who has a similar ideology: does a magazine or website want to take on someone like that, or just go for someone from TWC who will not provoke a backlash? Or if they don’t mind stirring up controversy, why not hire a Ross Douthat center-right type instead? I genuinely hope I am worrying too much about this, but I’m not so sure.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kimstu]

@SlackerInc

Maybe the most worrisome: I don’t know that the kind of heat Chait gets will allow the next generation of Chaitlike writers to become established. Yes, as people will tend to say in dismissing my complaint, Chait himself “is fine”. But how about a twentysomething writer who has a similar ideology: does a magazine or website want to take on someone like that

This is absolutely bizarre. You’re saying that people shouldn’t openly disagree with pundits because it might prevent younger pundits who share the opinions with which they disagree from being equally rewarded for expressing those opinions?

Fiddlesticks. It is up to each individual media organ to decide how much controversy they’re willing to tolerate concerning the writings of their house pundits. It is not the responsibility of other people to refrain from publicly expressing disagreement with their house pundits’ views in order to protect young potential house pundits from the potential negative effects of controversy.

[SlackerInc]

My post #575 was intended to be a reply to post #572; but then the other two posts snuck in there while I was composing it.

Kimstu (#574): it’s not about unfairness regarding Chait. Actually, your citation was very helpful in crystallizing what I’m actually talking about—so thanks for that, and my apologies if I was not clear enough before.

I’m referring specifically to this part:

Chait is policing the way the left does politics because he does not want the left-wing style of doing politics to gain prominence.

[Chait] is engaged in a pretty specific political project: Ensuring that you and people like you don’t gain control of his party.

YES! This is precisely correct. And I am engaged in that specific political project too. In fact, it is the most important political project I see before us as a party and as a society. Which is as it happens exactly what I am also doing in the other Pit thread I am currently engaged in—the one about Bernie Sanders.

So I’m not “whining” that TWC (“you and people like you”) are being “unfair”. It’s that I see them as a cancer that must be extirpated at all costs rather than being cowed by them, as so many other mainstream liberals are.

BTW, I don’t disagree with Mill about even the more inflammatory words cited from him. At the time, I think that was a reasonable position to take.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SlackerInc]

Kimstu, this may now already be clear by my subsequent post, but I am not politely asking or pleading with TWC to show the kind of “responsibility” you referred to. I am simply denouncing them, the same way you might denounce someone you think is having a negative effect on our world. Maybe even me!

I am calling upon more center-leftists to stand up against this TWC cancer though. It’s not worth it to try to make nice with them, especially since so many of them are in red states or safe blue states anyway.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kimstu]

@SlackerInc

Kimstu, this may now already be clear by my subsequent post, but I am not politely asking or pleading […] I am simply denouncing them, the same way you might denounce someone you think is having a negative effect on our world.

You still don’t seem to be very clear as to whether what you’re “denouncing” is the content of the opinions of left-of-Chait liberals, or their actions in “attacking” and giving “heat” and “backlash” to (i.e., publicly disagreeing with and criticizing) Chait.

Complaining that open disagreement and criticism about political views “is having a negative effect on our world” (which you seem to be regarding as synonymous with “have a variety of ripple effects that are bad for Democrats”) is not a very good look for someone who professes to support liberal principles.