Facebook Follies of Friends and Families

[Oexmelin]

It's also a different time. We aren't in the sixties.

Highly debatable that the dynamic that King identifies - moderation vs radicalism - is somehow entirely different today. The terms have shifted; the interaction, not so much.

If you are in the US, and want progress, everyone agrees you have to get rid of the current President, and the pack or regressive Republicans who support him.

Clearly not everyone, or it wouldn't be an issue.

This task will be made easier if those who identify as progressive Democrats don't go around trash talking about whites.

The whole difficulty here, is that many people will insist that attacking "whiteness" is attacking them personally. It's not. It's attacking something which used not to be attacked -- which used to be the standard by which normalcy was identified. If, at any time the issue is raised, you scoff at the fact that you could actually be part (and beneficiary) of a system that is admittedly enforced by "those" assholes, I feel you kind of correspond to what King was denouncing. Considering some of the regular abuse some people face, *every day*, I have more time and patience for their anger, as obnoxious and clumsy as it may be, than I have about white offense.

The point is not that people should feel ashamed of being white, or male (or black, or female). Rather, it's to recognize how certain types of behavior are defined, determined, and assessed very differently for all of these groups. And to say, "I am going to do what I think is right, dammit", runs also the risk of being blind to the fact that 1) sometimes, "what is right" looks, and feels quite different depending on your circumstances and 2) the capacity to do so, is quite unequally distributed. If, in the face of an injustice, I lose my temper and insult a cop, I will most likely live. If my nephew does that, he may very well die. And that is utterly independent of the fact that I may be an asshole, and my nephew the most gentle and soft-spoken person out there.

[Darth Wagtaros]

Indeed. I don't give a damn if people hate me for the color of my skin or my gender, I am going to do what I think is right. People hating others who are different than themselves is about as natural and normal as it gets. I was just taken aback to see it coming from people I otherwise respect.

Look, you guys are 100% correct that it shouldn't happen. It's wrong no matter how it's done. But I also know that sometimes giving as good as you get has an affect. Good, bad, or indifferent, that's where this stems from.

To whom?  The web is full of pissy old white dudes who blame affirmative action for all their ills. Listening to them and listtening to you, I don't see much diff.  Seriously. 

Why would I work with someone who would treat me as they would someone who we are supposed to be morally opposed to?  I know its hard, everybody self identifies as a victim, and therefore feels they are right to toss around insults.

[Camerus]

I'm with those who find racist name calling and scapegoating counterproductive... assuming our goal is to create a more pleasant and just society.

Of course, that's probably not actually the motivation for most people who engage in such behavior.

[dps]

the Klansmen will all vote for Trump

You sure about that?  The California branch of the Klan endorsed Hillary in 2016.  And I know people who still vote straight Democratic tickets 'cause Lincoln freed the slaves and Lincoln was a Republican.  Granted, those guys are just a small minority nowadays, but they still exist.

[Iormlund]

I don't think the way forward for society is pitting collectives against each other. I think the way forward is positive and individual-based, not negative and collective-based.

Great, how do we get there? Systemic discrimination isn't going to disappear because we decide to assert we are all unique, great individuals.

Familiarity.

The first step was the hardest one, minorities putting themselves out there. That's pretty much done all over the West. Unlike what happened just a few decades ago, we are all used to -- for example -- openly gay people. That's how you get laws to change and younger generations to accept the new norm.
Some of that can be done through the media, but it is getting harder due to echo chambers. The main other tool is personal contact. It is much easier to accept someone you like.
What's left are predominantly rural, older and/or reactionary folk, which is what Meri seems to think every white man is (thanks, by the way). There's not really much you can do about those. But they'll die out, eventually.

[Oexmelin]

There's not really much you can do about those. But they'll die out, eventually.

Current context hints that the theory/hope of inevitable demographic change (which is dubious in any way) may very well be kept in check by strong political reaction, and the overall undermining of liberal regimes. And that reactionary suburbs do not need to be located in the boondocks.

[Iormlund]

I would like to put forward Spanish law as an example of how not to do things. It is an interesting case of how overreach can harm feminism.

For some time now the law is not equal for men and women here. This was done to protect victims of domestic abuse. Predictably, it has led to widespread cases of false accusations, especially when child custody is involved. 80% of those cases are deemed without merit, yet false accusations rarely prosecuted (about 0.1%).

This mess has been a godsend to our own reactionaries, who have cleverly rallied in defense of men whom the law has made powerless, their homes and kids taken away from them, etc. After losing votes from the right, our very own Boris is veering in that direction, trying to recover those votes. In other words, a law supposedly drafted to help women has helped turn a significant part of the parliament against women rights. Moreover, a majority of the population, liberals and women included, think feminist legislation has gone too far and should be dialed down.

The best part? The law did not help lowering domestic violence murder rates.

[Iormlund]

There's not really much you can do about those. But they'll die out, eventually.

Current context hints that the theory/hope of inevitable demographic change (which is dubious in any way) may very well be kept in check by strong political reaction, and the overall undermining of liberal regimes. And that reactionary suburbs do not need to be located in the boondocks.

Those political reactions are largely a result of diminishing economic opportunities and rampant corruption, not of growing minority presence (see for example London vs Little Britain). Treating all white men like trash is not going to help tax billionaires or develop communities. It is certainly not going to win their help to further any political agenda.

[Oexmelin]

Who treats all white men like trash?

[viper37]

Look, you guys are 100% correct that it shouldn't happen. It's wrong no matter how it's done. But I also know that sometimes giving as good as you get has an affect. Good, bad, or indifferent, that's where this stems from.

let's say two men are standing behind you in the elevator.  You feel a hand reaching for your butt.  Turning back quickly, it's obvious which one of the two did it, he's the only one with a free hand as the other one is texting on his phone.

A) You slap texter, as that will feel good and teach the grabber a good lesson.
B) You slap both of them because you are an equal opportunist and it is a well known fact that all men are pigs.Do you think you changed anything about indecent behavior?

[Berkut]

My impression is that it's rarely a good idea to alienate natural allies.

Allies should believe in equality not because they see friends they want to help, but because it's the right thing to do.

Allies are hardly the same as friends. Is hurling abuse at natural allies the right thing to do, or is that done for other reasons?

"I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to 'order' than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice."

But still I agree abuse might feel good as an outlet but ultimately not effective.

It's also a different time. We aren't in the sixties.

If you are in the US, and want progress, everyone agrees you have to get rid of the current President, and the pack or regressive Republicans who support him. That will undoubtedly come down to convincing a sufficient number of the amorphous mass of whites who are not Klansmen (the Klansmen will all vote for Trump) to come out and vote Democrat.

This task will be made easier if those who identify as progressive Democrats don't go around trash talking about whites.

Go away closet Conservative!

[The Minsky Moment]

I am not dehumanising or demonising anyone.

Underachiever.

[merithyn]

What's left are predominantly rural, older and/or reactionary folk, which is what Meri seems to think every white man is (thanks, by the way). There's not really much you can do about those. But they'll die out, eventually.

I don't, actually. I take issue with exactly the men you're talking about. When speaking of White Men as a pejorative, that's whom I'm speaking of.

[garbon]

It's cute that Berk thinks he's in the closet.

[Tamas]

I don't, actually. I take issue with exactly the men you're talking about. When speaking of White Men as a pejorative, that's whom I'm speaking of.

Yes, but actually no. If you talk about white men, you talk about, you know, white men.

Can't you see you are using the exact same excuses racists do when talking about blacks/arabs/whatever? "Yeah I have no problem with the good ones, it's the bad ones that are the problem".