It works just fine. It’s not perfect, but it works fine.
Do you have an example in mind?
Sure. A man is hanging from a tree.
Then just say it, say it again if you really need to, and then… stop.
Move on, ignore the thread if you have to, but this constant harping on one point is sad. I hope you’re not like this in real life. That would be pathetic. In fact, I can’t imagine it: Following strangers home from the bus, yelling over and over “You can’t be 100% sure!” at them…
Okay, since men can hang from trees without racism involved, you can’t be sure that “a man is hanging from a tree” involves racism.
In other words, the statement “any time a man is hanging from a tree, it must be a racist act” is silly.
This test is nothing more than the “plausible alternative” but without the black victim and Republican convention that makes people use their own (ironic) prejudices to make hasty judgments.
YOU are the one following me. If you don’t like my posts, don’t read them and don’t comment on them.
You really are proposing that after a lynching we should “wait for all the facts” before accusing those poor lynchers of racism? And you think you are the one with credibility? I’m stunned.
Uh, NO.
There was NOTHING about “lynching” in the example!
YOU threw that in later.
“A man is hanging from a tree.” Nothing about lynching, or the victim’s race. Or even if the man is dead, or hanging from a rope, or didn’t hang himself, or whatever.
You don’t have any of that information yet.
Do you understand now?
Your reaction helps prove my point - you assumed “man hanging from tree” meant a lynching because it came up in this thread about racism. You didn’t even realize you were assuming it.
After reading this thread two things are obvious to me:
First, this was an act of blatant obvious vulgar racism.
Second, absolutely nothing you post will get Lance Strongarm to admit this. Nothing. That post you’re thinking of right now? it’s very clever and on point, and it won’t do a bit of good. So no reason to post it is there?
(And if anyone says “it’s for the lurkers,” if they don’t already get it, your post won’t work on them either.)
Some people never learn.
No, they sure don’t!
You really can’t follow abstract thinking, can you?
RNATB gave an example about how your idiotic standard for racism would excuse the vast majority of vile racism. You said it would not, do you have an example? And he said “A man hanging from a tree”, as an example of racism that your impossibly high bar would give the pass to.
So we KNOW that the man is a black man, because that was the POINT OF THE THOUGHT EXPERIMENT.
I’m done with you, you’re don’t have the mental horsepower.
Stop it. You are wrong about this. You don’t seem to understand what’s going on.
It would excuse nothing. It is not a test for whether something is racism. Not at all.
No, it is NOT. Just the opposite.
You are completely confused.
You are the one who doesn’t get it. It’s human nature to think that when you dont’ understand something, you’re right about it and everyone else is wrong. Doesn’t make it right. It’s too bad, if you took the time to listen you might get it.
(White) bad guys hang (white) guy in a Western movie.
Someone commits suicide by hanging.
Someone having fun by hanging by their legs from a tree.
All these, and others are possible under “A man hanging from a tree.”
You don’t know it’s racist until you learn that it’s a black man on a noose in Alabama put there by white men (and even then, it’s not 100% since other motives can still apply).
That’s the point.
Not hard to understand.
And when we find him hanging there, perhaps we can use Occam’s razor to cut him down. <yawn>
I’m beginning to wonder if we’ve found a new contender for Most Ridiculously Pedantic Poster title.
My argument isn’t pedantic or ridiculous. It makes perfect sense.
You guys just can’t handle uncertainty, or fairness, or you don’t have the wisdom to allow for either.
I’ve got a new example for you to run my test on.
Someone who is about to speak at a convention is disrupted by chants from the delegates.
I’ll even spot you the ethnicity of the speaker, if you really want it.
100% certainty of racism?
This *particular * convention is a testament to our worst fears being realized.
It is the specifics of what happens here that makes it far more convincing. So somebody gets shouted down at a convention, was this an inocuous display of displeasure at a group not being heard or did it morph into something else? Here’s an eyewitness from Harper’s Magazine
At the very least I think we have a contender for the most unintentionally ironic post.
It was undeniably racist! There’s not other possible explanation! Reading Harper’s to get “the specifics of what happened” is unnecessary!
:rolleyes:
(You realize that this is the same Harper’s report I posted, in which a perceived act of racism at convention was explained to be nothing of the sort, right?)
Then WTF lance?
Those motherfuckers are racist. They saw what they saw. They were there. You not so much. It took the convention apologist to tell them it wasn’t. Yeah.