Maybe it’s unintentional, but I can’t imagine that people that want whites to take a knee don’t understand what kind of position that would put black athletes who aren’t currently taking a knee in.
But I’ll take just stupid over malicious. Maybe they haven’t thought much about it.
What’s that got to do with extrapolating the views of one person to “many white liberals”?
technically “persons”. Corporations are “people” too!
Incidentally, is there a lower limit to the prominence of the SJW in question in order to be included in this thread? Does any Liberal who says something stupid in a blog post, or on face book count? If so, then yes, I will concede that among the 80+ million Liberals in the US, some of them stay stupid things. But no one here has bothered starting a “Stupid alt right weenie of the day” thread with such low inclusion criteria, because there would be too many to keep up with. Heck, the entire thread could be filed with cross-postings from Stormrfront.
Well let’s get to the meat of it: do you care for the outraged citizen’s opinion? Do you not find the leftist PhD student’s opinion absurd and detrimental to liberal progress in this country?
I don’t give a shit either way. I’m not a brainless sheep who gets fed outrage by a manipulative right-wing press. I don’t have enough free time in my life to rush to post in breathless hysteria every time my grandmother forwards me an email about SJWs.
But don’t let the fact that I think you’re an easily manipulated fool deter you from posting to this thread–you probably need something to keep your little mind occupied.
Nvm
I should not have levied accusations of obfuscation. Sorry for that.
I ought to treat this author as an individual, and as such, I find his personal views idiotic and dangerous. That’s all I can speak for with certainty. Whether he is an SJW or whether such a thing as an SJW exists is not really my concern.
People on the left-wing are at least trying to fight some sort of injustice. Since these people have good intentions and have basically no effect on the world, it doesn’t bother me.
I also know what it’s like to be ridiculed for an idea that may seem a bit out there, or may not have been fully thought out. I hate it when I get dismissed without people even trying to understand what I’m trying to say.So I don’t do that to these people.
And I’ve seen the whole SJW conspiracy theorist thinking. The one where these people are out to steal the world. When all they are doing is putting forth ideas. If they are bad, no problem. If they are good, we can get better. Even with Trump in office, people act like there is some global conspiracy of SJWs taking over.
So I want to fight the ignorance here about these supposed boogeymen who are ultimately harmless. I want to put forth their concerns legitimately, and not have them dismissed. I want to stop the spread of this idea that these people who are trying to do good are the villains.
Everybody thinks that they are trying to do good and the other side are villains.
Given that some people measure success by how many people on the “other side” they hurt, I’m not entirely convinced by this. Sometimes you’ve just gotta check your hat for skulls.
He doesn’t call them white supremacists. Why would you make that up?
Precisely yes there are those on the left who take things too far, but for the most part they aren’t as harmful as those on the right. For every douchenozzle on the left who thinks that the cat in the hat is racist, there is someone on the right who thinks that Blacks should be deported back to Africa, and Muslims put in concentration camps. To my eye the second one is more of a blight to society than the first. But if I got outraged and up in arms anytime some nobody said something outrageously racist on the internet, I would have to spend 24 hours posting just to keep up with the youtube comments.
The exact wording is “White athletes still standing for the anthem are standing for white supremacy.” You may choose to split hairs and say that that is a different meaning, but if you do, I have no respect for that.
It’s a very different meaning, and the rest of the article supports that.
If they mean the same thing, why didn’t you write “In the latest…people who don’t kneel for the national anthem are standing for white supremacy”? Why the change?
The “change” is only meaningful to you, I phrased it that way because I damn well felt like phrasing it that way. And again, if you claim “people stand for white supremacy” and “people are white supremacists” mean two different things, well, I think you are being deeply pedantic.
Read the actual article, not another blog’s summary of it. He’s arguing that white players who haven’t joined the kneeling protest haven’t considered the differences between the white and black experiences, and that white privilege “skews our ability to grasp what the world looks like outside our view.”
You can symbolically stand for white supremacy without being a white supremacist: you can be duped into it, you can fail to realize the link between the symbolic actions and white supremacy (as the article suggests), you can make the stand based on other values you hold, and so on. Conversely, you can’t be a white supremacist without being a white supremacist.
It’s not pedantic, and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that both you and the blog you linked to had to change the article’s title in the same way to make it seem more inflammatory.
But he is also highlighting an important difference.
I could accurately say that all of the people who voted for Trump voted for plutocracy, because that is the obvious result of his policies. But it would be wrong to say that all those who voted for Donald Trump were Plutocrats. Most were actually not particularly well off but were deluded into thinking that an elected Trump would somehow advance their interests.
Similarly the argument of the author isn’t that all those who stand for the flag are white supremacists. He comes out and says that the players who don’t kneel are doing so because “they feel soldiers fought for their rights and blah blah blah patriotism”. Instead he is claiming that even if that is what they believe, their actions are advancing the cause of white supremacy.
Now I don’t know that I agree even with this latter statement but the statement that he thinks all standing athletes are white supremacists is a mischaracterization.
I will admit that I did use my wording to show my lack of respect for the addlepated simpleton, but there is no greater agenda behind it. I have no problem with people “taking a knee” for the pledge. I can’t remember the last time I’ve said the words to the pledge, but it was probably in primary school, and I can assure you that I’ll never say it again–not because of opposition to “white supremacy” but because of my distaste for ritual and for jingoistic nationalism.
But coming up with some tangential issue for protesting against something and then declaring that anyone who doesn’t join you supports that thing is the sign of a true idiot. If I refused to say the pledge because I don’t care for the continued presence of a US military base in Okinawa, and if I said that everyone that does is “standing up for the US military base in Okinawa”–I would be a fucking idiot. And so is the guy who wrote that article.
The article is better than its headline. I don’t agree with all of it, but I think it’s 100% true that the flag can mean different things to different people based on their experiences, that those experiences are influenced by one’s race, and these differences affect our ability to grasp what the world looks to other people.