I Pit Martin Hyde

The difference is one poster is carrying water for immorality and one is not. Right and wrong matter.

Of course they do. I was just commenting on general posting style (in response to a post talking about the same thing) as opposed to political leanings or whatever they are advocating (either poster).

Sorry, I meant to make clear I was agreeing with you. The SDMB has high tolerance for acerbic posters who are right or at least well meaning. Not so much when they’re wrong or excusing it.

He made a lengthy post here about his changing views on the Republican party and his break from them as a still-conservative-but-never-Trumper. I thought it was fairly well said.

Was it in a Pit thread? I tend not to moderate my already low tolerance any number of fallacies or pointless debate tactics, in the Pit. Not saying that’s what you did, but I am way more of a hostile debater in the Pit, even in the Pit threads others seem to think are “GD-style”

Also, as any race thread will show you, “inflammatory” is in the eye of the beholder.

Some people seem to think, for instance, that standing up for racists, transphobes or misogynists just to make a rhetorical point, is not inherently bad. In the Pit, I’m free to disabuse them of that stupid notion. Again, not saying that’s what you did, just pointing out where I come from when I post in the Pit.

I see the whiny little genocide denialist has run crying like a little baby to ATMB to repeat his lie that I called him a Nazi.

Calling your low information, low intelligence posting style in which you rage out everytime you are wrong and attempt to scare people by slandering them with the racist title is no more “debate” than a bum fight in the street.

And yet, still no link to me calling you a Nazi…

What a pathetic little whiny lying baby-man you are.

I remember when Martin condemned every single black person in America for the flaws of the great minority (note that I linked to two posts in the same thread) – and did it knowingly and purposefully.

But I think he’s changed a lot since then. Hopefully he doesn’t feel that way any more.

He appears to have had a career where people were required to Respect His Authority and Defer To His Wisdom. Because this was the nature of the hierarchy.

And when he interacts in the real world, the fact that some do not automatically agree with him is jarring. So he therefore simply goes to the default of thinking that these people who do not Respect His Authority must be fools and idiots and merely worthy of derision and insults.

What in this thread, or any of his posting this week, leads you to think he’s really changed?

I swear, iiandyiiii, sometimes you’re so Pollyanna about some clearly racist motherfuckers, it saddens me a little.

I’m not going to relitigate a thread from 7 years ago, I stand by everything I said in the thread you linked and it was all fully explored in that thread and does not need re-explored here.

I am the eternal optimist. Maybe it’s a privilege.

In any case, I haven’t followed much of his very latest posts (I usually gloss over the standard Pit flames unless I’m directly involved) – it’s his very large turn against the Republican party, by my memory anyway, that give me some hope he’s changed.

EDIT: I guess I was wrong. Hyde, apparently you’re (still) a racist, and fuck you for standing by placing that blame and burden on millions of strangers you’ve never met, including some of the finest humans in the world.

You seem to have a real hard on for the fact I was a desk jockey for a long time. I guess in this den of imbeciles, emotionally damaged rejects and mentally ill, the fact I held a job from the ages of 21 to 52 or so is something that is notable and weird to you, even moreso the fact it was a job that involved a lot of bureaucratic red tape in part of day to day life. I.e. the whole point I mentioned it–that I have no problem abiding by the (sometimes ever-shifting) rules of this message board, so whoever it even was who speculated I’d get banned or whatever from the boards is sadly mistaken.

From perusing that thread I see you cried about it 7 years ago and you’re crying about it now. I suggest you find a new hobby crybaby.

Thought you were better than this. Thank you for educating me on how wrong I was.

I don’t think I had much opinion of you before this. But from looking at the previous thread and your reaction in this one, I can’t say I’m particularly concerned about your thoughts or opinions. You seem to not be a very insightful or intelligent person. You also appear to be part of the group of people who believe “everything is racist”, which is unfortunate because that’s as major “brain death” mentality that unfortunately poisons every thought you have. Nothing I said in the linked thread or this thread, was racist. The fact you choose to view it as so shows a defect in both your character and your reasoning, and I truly hope you revisit the facts at hand and correct yourself.

You admitted placing blame and burden on people, not based on their individual behavior, but due to the color of their skin, and doing it purposefully. Not everything is racist, but that is.

That isn’t the definition of racism. For example the white community in Americas has lot to answer for–for example we have benefited from centuries of de jure racial preference in the laws and economy, after that was reformed, we continued to benefit from de facto racial preferences in many of the structures of society (i.e. systemic racism.) Pointing out this burden of the white community is not racist against whites.

Pointing out that people of European ancestry have a moral burden towards Native Americans is not racism. Pointing out that the Japanese have a moral burden over their treatment of other peoples of East Asia in the early 20th century is not racist against the Japanese.

It is recognizing that the group you are part of has some collective flaws and sins. Racism would be to attack these groups for their racial differences, and race typically means the superficial physical traits of a person or sometimes that combined with their ancestry. No one is saying white people have these moral burdens because of the color of our skin, or that the Japanese do due to the presence of the epicanthic fold around their eyes. Race as it is culturally understood, largely does not exist, there are few consistent DNA markers that correlate with anything we identify as race. Race is a cultural construct, and rarely one that serves a positive purpose. Race as a construct relies very heavily on very superficial differences between groups of people, and racism is bigotry and prejudice against someone specifically because of their membership in these ill-defined cultural constructs.

Critiques of the “white community”, “black community”, “Korean American community” et. al. are perfectly valid, with context, and do not innately entail racism. They certainly could if someone was making racially prejudiced comments.

I don’t think I disagree with any of this. The context you provided was ignorant and prejudiced. You said “Black America” looks “pretty bad”. Black America only looks “pretty bad” from an ignorant, racist perspective. With a complete understanding of American history, “Black America” looks pretty damn good.