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.
Ah yes, the next to last refuge of the scoundrel: hide behind rules and regulations that in reality does not defend what the scoundrel did or said.
By the way, you still have to produce a cite that showed that it was as common for white people with mental issues to be targeted back then for forced sterilizations, that whites were targeted like native Americans or other minorities where. Otherwise you were indeed telling a native American in your reply that the system was not peeing on them, but that it was just giving rain to all.
Of course, Martin Hide, instead of backing down hided behind what the rules of discussion “should be” (In the pit? Yeah, he does think that fig leaf works there), two things about that: That is the pit, and: he still pretends that hiding under more “rules” he can avoid looking as the ignorant tone deaf guy that he is.
BTW, @k9bfriender had this post about Martin Hide in the pit about Ultravires, it belongs here:
You are a pitiful little hateful man, used to getting your way in a hierarchy where anyone disagreeing with you would be punished. When anyone dares to question you, you have no recourse but to fly into incoherent insults, as you have no ability to actually reason or debate, but only dictate or rage.
You have no value on this board, and I doubt you contribute any value to anything you do or participate in. Those few social relationships that you’ve managed to maintain through fear or leverage aren’t real, they don’t like you, they just know that they will receive more abuse by leaving than by staying. They don’t respect you, they just fear your anger.
Anyway, thank you for outing yourself as a worthless ball of rage that can be ignored and dismissed without any concern of missing anything of value.
It was the Pit. It didn’t have anything to do with racism or transphobia or anything, you just took what I said the wrong way. No hard feelings, it’s hard to tell intent in a text medium and I still think you’re pretty cool.
Yes, yes… everyone who disagrees with your Delivered Widsom about your inferiors must definitely be a dirty leftist hippie who works part time as a barista.
Reminder this poster when directly challenged to produce evidence concerning factual assertions about me has refused to do so for a number of days now. I.e. this is a liar who has admitted as much.
[Putting the rule abiding hat of Martin Hide.]
Nope, this pit is about you, stop trying to get away from the rules and deal with what you are roasted for.
I actually said it was more common for racial minorities to be targeted for sterilization, so it would be odd for me to produce a cite counter to what I had already said, no? [In the post in question I mentioned there are estimates as many as 15% of the white population was sterilized vs 25 to 40% of Native Americans.] My point is that the system of eugenics based sterilization, which started in the early 20th century, frequently involved involuntary sterilization, and even continued on into the 70s when it frequently involved deceptive sterilization where doctors would tell people it was temporary or “medically necessary”, is known to have affected large numbers of people from all races. It was not a system of race based genocide. A poor policy that affects more blacks than whites, but is not specifically intended to destroy a race “in whole or in part” is not genocide, particularly when it lacks the common systemic elements the UN report I linked mentions. Under the looser definition that you are using one could argue that American police practices are genocide, redlining is genocide, school districting is genocide etc.
What a lot of stupid fucking leftists like yourself fail to mention is we, as society, didn’t develop our conceptions of genocide to give you a buzzword to shit out anytime you want to bash something you dislike. It was actually created as part of nascent international statutory criminal law. It was intended to codify some of the worst of human behaviors that are often committed at the level of the state, and to develop a framework to punish it when possible.
By turning genocide into just another word meaning “bad thing” you rob it of its intended use, to the detriment of all.
Define genocide in a way that includes: anything in which negative outcomes were more common for minorities than whites, that doesn’t also reduce the word genocide to absurdity. If you can do that I may see a point to go back and forth with you on it, as it stands now, you’ve been posting a bunch of useless shit for multiple posts now. Put up or shut up.
C’mon folks, the Nazis didn’t just sterilize Jews!
Thanks for your logical fallacy, numb nuts.
You actually said:
“That is terrible, but it was actually a common thing for people with mental health or developmental disorders in the 1970s, and that is not just on reservations.” The point that you ignore about, like a fool, is that you did the comparison as a way to turn it into a thing that affected all in the same way.
Not the case at all as you are forced to acknowledge now. And as for this certifiable stupid thing you replied with:
Just demonstrates to all that you are not only tone deaf, but a willful ignorant too. From the last article I cited, but that you showed all that you did not read:
Devastating impact on tribes
With a total Native American population of approximately 1 million in 1976, sterilization in many tribes had a devastating impact on a tribe’s survival. Pinkerton-Uri observed, “There are about only 100,000 [Native American] women of childbearing age left. A 200 million population could support voluntary sterilization and survive, but for Native Americans it cannot be a preferred method of birth control. Where other minorities might have a gene pool in Africa or Asia, Native Americans do not. When we are gone, that’s it.”
Define genocide in a way that includes: anything in which negative outcomes were more common for minorities than whites , that doesn’t also reduce the word genocide to absurdity. If you can do that I may see a point to go back and forth with you on it, as it stands now, you’ve been posting a bunch of useless shit for multiple posts now. Put up or shut up
Ninjaed the ignorant tone deaf guy by a few seconds.
Logical fallacy? It’s what you are arguing.
And three strikes means you’re out, as they say. Obviously intelligent discussion with you is not possible.