Aha!
You need to follow me around and translate. I’ll pay big money.
Ah! So its a serving of haute snark?
Well, then it was okay-because see, that was to beat the Commies.
Then take credit for your fantastic entrepreneurial venture there, conservatives! Degrading the African American community AND fighting Communism-- that’s multitasking at its best.
I knew. I was just piggybacking on your post to support what you said. As 'luci quoted: “Get your foot off my Grandmother’s neck! NOW, Godamnit, not one toe at a time!” is the right response to civil rights abuses, civility be damned.
YOU FUCKING DUMBASSES!!! THE ONE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER! I DON’T CARE WHAT YOU’VE BEEN TAUGHT, GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK FUCKING SKULLS!
Ahem…pardon.
Actually, leftie incivility began when the huge baby-boom generation embraced long hair and dippy clothes and ridiculous modes of behavior and found themselves at odds with the rest of the country.
It soon became obvious that the only way that drugs, a careless, crappy appearance, and the freedom to do define what was right by what they wanted rather than by what common sense would dictate would become allowable, was to throw out societal norms as they existed at that time and create a new society altogether.
“The Establishment” was polite, so fuck politeness! “The Establishment” had manners, so fuck manners! “The Establishment” liked to dress up, so fuck dressing up! “The Establishment” was against promiscuity, so fuck like bunnies! “The Establishment” was against drug use, so embrace drugs like manna from heaven.
Etc., etc., ad infinitum, and you very predictably get to where we are today.
This meme that crassness and vulgarity was necessary to end racism is simply a dodge.
A challenge to SA:
Find a single “liberal” poster in this thread who has argued that “crassness and vulgarity was necessary to end racism”.
I fear you are responding to voices in your own head.
SA, **tomndebb **had a very good post responding to a lot of the arguments you are making. Are you going to try to respond to him, or should we just take it as an article of faith that you are right and he is wrong?
[Silly hypothetical classroom bullshit follows.]
And yet I’m a guy who doesn’t like to kill anything and even captures insects in the house and sets 'em free outside.
Who’da thunk it, huh? So much for your silly little hypothesis.
And on preview:
Why limit it to this thread? I’m talking about society as a whole and this board as a whole. I’ve heard it argued over and over around here that civility had to go in order to eliminate racism, and you either damn well know it or you spend a lot less time around here than I would think.
I had a girlfriend like you once. Her default assumption was that my motivation was the effect of my actions upon her. It doesn’t seem good manners to be so self centred, but what would I know.
Depends on whether or not I find the time. tomndebb is fond of episodic posts that require considerable time to answer, and given that they are usually full of things I take issue with, answering them puts quite a strain on time allocation and my ability to respond to other posters. As a result, I often have to just let 'em slide by, even if it creates the impression I have no response.
That would be ideal. 
And now, I have a busy day tomorrow so I must bid you adieu.
Ri-i-i-ight. It could not possibly have been that having faced extremely hateful behaviors from the Right for the simple act of failing to get a timely haircut or mentioning that blacks should be permitted to vote or buy nice houses, that the boomers simply responded in kind.
Common sense: the sum total of one’s prejudices.
Mods and Rockers, (or frats and grease), for example, could never be legitimately accused of having a careless appearance. Hippies, against whom the charge of “careless” dress might have been laid, were always a fringe element and were pretty much apolitical. Yet all those kids were subject to arbitrary punishment or harrassment at one time or another. So it seems to come back to being punished for nothing more than being different. That was a good example of “manners” that you wanted them to emulate. In my memory, a very large number of the people who threw out “manners” were people who had been subjected to arbitrary slights and punishments for the horrendous crime of not looking the same as some other people.
I came into this thread thinking that you simply suffered a sense of loss regarding some aspects of your memories of childhood, and had created a set of villains against whom you could rail at that loss, supported by more than a bit of confirmation bias and faulty memories from forty years ago. However, you are now just flinging stuff against the wall and hoping it will stick. You are making up a history that you would never be able to demonstrate with actual references to actual events in a coherent timeline (which might be why you have avoided actually providing any historical support for your odd claims).
Since you appear to be more interested in simply having a shouting contest with others on the board, I will stop trying to interject any historical or factual references into this “discussion.”
Have fun (as I am sure you are having) and I will now get off your lawn.
Why are you such a liberal SA? Such vulgarity and incivility. Are you sure you’re not a commie?
I should have known better than to check back in to this thread. But, seeing as how I have, I’ll respond to this.
Events, schmevents! I’m not talking about events, I’m talking about millions of people as they go about their daily business.
As you probably well know, I’m rather contemptuous of the notion so prevalent around here that if some historical ‘cite’ doesn’t exist to prove it, a point has no validity.
I know perfectly well what life was like back then as I had already reached adulthood by the time all that hooey started. I can tell you, based on wide experience with people from many parts of the country, that crappy (IMO) clothes, smoking dope, listening to psychedelic music, and immersing oneself in the sex, drugs and rock-and-roll lifestyle played a many thousand times greater role in most everyone’s life than did agonizing over the plight of blacks.
And further, yeah, pressure would be put on people to get a haircut…but it was hardly “extremely hateful”. Disdainful teasing (or flat-out orders from parents) were what usually took place, and as you can tell from photos of the era, these weren’t very successful.
The notion you have that lefties of that era encountered ‘extremely hateful’ reactions to their long hair and made civil rights and the plight of blacks a major focus in their daily lives merely proves that you are the one who lacks the true perspective on that era, not me.
Well, you know, when in Rome and all that. (This goes out to you, too, Carson O’Genic, sorry to have made you feel left out. ;))
The difference between me and the average societal vulgarian these days is that I pick and choose where I indulge in it. I don’t do it in public, I don’t do it around little kids, I don’t do it around people of older generations, and I don’t do it in mixed company.
In other words, I try to be polite about my crassness and vulgarity.
But trying to be polite and mannerly around here (especially in the Pit) is like walking around Wal Mart in an ascot and spats.
Your interpretation was spot on, and you win a cookie.
Certainly when I see a post that is both predictable and dishonest I think “Hmm - that looks like something SA might have written.”
SA:
Snort!
Well, at least he’s going to be open-minded about it.
These two characteristics do not, in fact, contradict each other. RWAs only go apeshit over issues that frighten them. Obviously SA is not afraid of insects: it appears in fact that he has a higher regard for them than he does for liberals.
*Because you are in a dialog with people in this thread, and are essentially accusing us of holding these views. I’m a liberal – actually far to the left of your average American liberal – and I’ve never held that view. So who does?
Okay. Provide a quote from any well-known, generally recognized, mainstream liberal who claims “crassness and vulgarity was [sic] necessary to end racism”.
tomndebb:
I really admire your faith in reasoned discourse, but obviously you will never get anywhere with someone who is utterly immune to logical arguments and matters of fact. Your responses here have been, quite simply, like pearls before swine.
In fact, when I think about it, Swinish Artist is a more appropriate name for the poster in question.
I knew when I composed that that some schmuck would try to make hay out that sentence’s clumsy construction…but then I thought, nah, it’d be too easy and their motivation for doing so would be too obvious.
Looks like I was wrong on both counts. You went for it anyway, and your obviousness was completely lost on that beacon of intellectual brilliance, jsgoddess.
And now, as much fun as this all is, I really do have to call it a night. Plus, the thread is finally becoming tiresome, even for me. I think I’ve done my fair share of participating here, but enough is enough.
How surprising. SA retires from the field of battle once again.
Note: not a single example of the accusation that liberals believe “crassness and vulgarity was [sic] necessary to end racism” is forthcoming.
Par for the course, with SA, naturally. In his world, if he believes it to be true, that makes it true.