Well obviously voters of a particular candidate don’t generally believe that their vote will lead to self or national destruction.
But why bring up these conditions, unless you’re more interested in the extreme takes on this issue rather than the more nuanced? I haven’t seen such “conditions” except in one-off, drive-by, thought-free posts on this topic. The serious discussion has been much more nuanced, with lots of criticism of law enforcement, but nothing like “all cops want to kill black people”.
Bringing this up seems to be a way to flippantly dismiss all criticism of law enforcement.
I don’t think it’s a serious suggestion. It’s a bullshit, flippant response to a difficult topic. And, as Ravenman notes below, there’s a long and inglorious history of white people telling black people they should move away.
10s of millions of even poorer Latin Americans have demonstrated how wrong you are. I’ll let you return to your hysteria since you’re obviously not interested in conversation if it gets in the way of dishonest virtue signaling. Sad!
You may not have intended it, but the long history of white Americans suggesting that others “go back to Africa” make your suggestion tone deaf at the very least, if not completely ignorant.
NETA:
… And even if you’re offering $200,000 or so to help finance the move of such a black family to a new country, the question still remains:
Why do you accept the mistreatment that would make them want to leave? Why not strive for police that treat blacks as well as whites, and so on?
This has been explained to you before. At some point you must look yourself in the mirror and say to yourself: “The excuse that I’m unfathomably stupid just isn’t working anymore. I have racist ideas and need to work on them.”
Oh? How is life working out for those 10s of millions? Are they happy their kids are in cages?
That’s what the Germans who supported Hitler thought. And the Jews could just move away if they didn’t feel like they were justly treated. Look how well all that went.
I agree with you. Trump voters didn’t think deeply about the consequences of their vote (or did they?). Fortunately, we may still be able to limit the extent of damage of their deplorable actions.
No it’s not. If people honestly believed what they loudly proclaimed they’d be out of town that day. I would be. And what you think I think is really inconsequential. I don’t need anyone’s approval. You honestly think I’d post on a message board of this ideological slant if a I had pathological need of affirmation and social approval of random internet posters? Some folks here obviously do with their approval seeking behavior but that’s not me.
So, since the truth is that people loudly and counterproductively exaggerate the issue it’s actual hard to find a solution to the admittedly terrible state of the justice system in the US. Anyways, there is a difference between working to solve a problem in a system you believe works and self preservation from a system that you believe wants to exterminate you. Again, it’s not my place to tell others how they should feel or what they must do. It’s my place to educate/octopusplain options. Even difficult ones. It’s a public service.
And why bring up extreme instead of nuanced? One can do one, both or any number of permutations. It’s not like participating in one aspect of a topic prevents other aspects from being discussed.
I might buy this if I saw significant serious attempts at nuanced discussion on these issues from you… but I haven’t, so I don’t.
sigh It’s a fair cop. Damn. First time in thirty years I’ve been caught like that.
It’s not dangerous. It’s informative. So it has value.
I don’t care if it’s tone deaf. I don’t buy into this concept that one has to avoid talking about issues or ideas because someone’s feelings might get hurt. One of the main reasons I reject that premise is because I think it’s a disingenuous tactic used to silence people and control what is permissible to talk about and at some level to think about. Orwellian thought policing is not for me.
Freedom of speech is constantly under attack and people have been sentenced to jail in the USA for using words. That’s ridiculous and since freedom of speech is one of my main concerns I am not going to self-censor what ideas I’ll talk about. For the most part. There are a few concepts not worth getting into even in the hypothetical on a message board. Moving to save one’s skin is not one of those concepts though.
I ain’t offering shit. If the choice is legitimately life and death then I’m grabbing my most comfortable pair of shoes and I’m hauling ass out of the deathly situation. But that’s just me.
That’s a dishonest characterization of the 10s of millions. C’mon septimus, it’s hard to take you seriously when you post such blatant nonsense.
I don’t think the US is like 1930s Germany or any of the other countries that became authoritarian. I don’t think Trump is anything like Hitler. I think that sort of nonsense is exceedingly counterproductive. Crying Nazi about every Republican since Lincoln isn’t really helpful when a real Hitler comes along.
Nuanced discussion in the past has resulted in pitting from the hive. So forgive me for not caring what the hive thinks.
So why don’t you just come out and call them liars? Because we all know that’s what you’re really trying to say. “If you don’t like it here just leave” isn’t an actual recommendation, it’s a way to call someone’s bluff. Black people in American say that they’re being treated unfairly, and you don’t believe them. Furthermore, you’re not even attempting to try to understand their perspective. “Nope!” you just say. “Not true! You’re wrong! And here’s how I’m going to prove it. Ready? READY FOR IT? Here it goes – if you really feel that way, just leave! Checkmate, black people.”
It’s not clever, it’s not helpful, and it’s a way for you to avoid confrontation by not actually calling people liars.
Is it racist? At this point if your head is so far in the sand that you don’t understand how African Americans are treated unfairly, there’s functionally no difference between your complete ignorance and someone’s malicious racism.
At least you admit that you’re not interested in nuanced discussion! With that in mind, what’s the point of any discussion with you? I guess just insults and nonsense, based on what you’ve said.
Doesn’t sound much fun to me.
You have accurately defined the words “tone deaf.” Congratulations.
Septimus, you clever, clever, sunavabitch!
This was a master plan to get Octopus to defend his racism.
I. Am. Impressed.
Oh, and I see Octopus has resorted to the “hive mind” theory of anti-assholism. Well, we are who we are.
Well that’s all there is, right? What else is there? Pitting Ditka in Ditka’s pit thread? BAH!
I don’t look at or think of black Americans as a homogeneous monolith. So, I don’t have any opinions on what ‘black America’ should or should not do. Thinking of blacks or whites as monolithic is more racist than suggesting that someone in fear for their and their families lives should take active steps to mitigate that threat.
I have admitted that the justice system in the US is quite bad. You never see me advocating extrajudicial punishments. You never see me advocating prisoner on prisoner violence. That’s despicable. Again, I am not going to write a dissertation starting with the big bang that takes into account every little bit of historical nuance when I advocate that those who feel that their lives are in mortal danger act.
You think if we were talking about the Hutus and the Tutsis or the enslaved people currently in Africa that we would need a multi-chapter preamble before we got to the point?
I don’t mind nuanced conversation. I am not going to communicate in a way merely to please others or the hive. Furthermore, just because I don’t mind nuanced conversation doesn’t mean that every time I discuss a topic I’m going to discuss every bit of nuance.
It’s like discussing certain words that are used as racial slurs. Even if don’t think they have as much impact as people like to pretend they do I don’t think it’s worthwhile to write 20 paragraphs in 100 different threads explaining something so a dishonest turd or two can take one sentence fragment and misrepresent my point. At some point the effort to go beyond a certain level has been proven to be somewhat pointless with regards to actually having a productive conversation with those who choose to engage. At some point the writing can be for other reasons.
The problem with you iiandyiiii, as an honorary ‘mean girl’, is that you aren’t entirely on the up and up with why you engage.
Sure. If that’s racist then what’s the big deal? I fully expect to see that quote taking out of context by the dishonest hive as well.
Obviously not, but I’m just wondering if you’ll communicate in a way that’s meant to be an actual discussion and exchange of ideas, rather than insults and nonsense. Occasionally you do that… but your flippant “why not leave the country?” does not remotely qualify, IMO.
This is probably meant to be referring to something in particular (the Shodan posts, perhaps?), but I’m not sure what, so I can’t really respond.