Another "I can't breath" death: Police Reform & Protests in the USA

[Elegiac]

Well, I maintain the book easily paints a portrait of Robin DiAngelo as possibly having no friends and not having the ability to comprehend human interpersonal interaction or friendship without the mediation of some institution or officialdom.

Notice how there's a lot of (baseless) conjecturing about the sort of woman that DiAngelo is and not actually any refutation of the notion of white fragility.

[Kasierith]

You're right, let's pivot away from the more HR centric world of DiAngelo and get down to brass tacks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXxzaYCveNw]

Is this a truthful summary of education in America? It's not something I had personal experience with, at least in Russia it was more balanced, with the Mongolians being among the greatest expanders of knowledge due to bringing isolated concepts and expanding them to a truly international scale, but I'm kind of incredulous that education systems would skip entirely over the massive contributions of the Mongols, Chinese, Japanese, and Arabs. Hell, the enlightenment was imported from the Islamic golden age. And that's just modern science.

[Elegiac]

I donated money at the time because that's all I had. I'm not currently living where there are any candidates up for election supporting racial justice that I could weigh voting for. I stand with and support members of the black community. At the end of the day I still have to go to work to pay my mortgage.

And honestly, I think this is the best place to be: Treat everyone with dignity and respect, including black men and women. Support them, and confront racist sentiments from anyone you hear it from (which I had to do on one occasion). I think if people are doing these things they're doing all that can reasonably be asked of them. If one is in a position of great power perhaps they could do more, but the vast majority of us are not in positions of great power.

You voted for Trump in the last election and have expressed continued desire to vote Republican despite the known fact the party has been largely coopted by white supremacists.

So, no. You're not "doing what you can", you're doing the bare minimum of performance to avoid being scrutinized as a racist.

[Theodarzna]

Is this a truthful summary of education in America? It's not something I had personal experience with, at least in Russia it was more balanced, with the Mongolians being among the greatest expanders of knowledge due to bringing isolated concepts and expanding them to a truly international scale, but I'm kind of incredulous that education systems would skip entirely over the massive contributions of the Mongols, Chinese, Japanese, and Arabs. Hell, the enlightenment was imported from the Islamic golden age. And that's just modern science.

Jane Elliot, equally a poorly made consultant looking for a job. Elliott is considered to be the forerunner of HR diversity training. She is essentially the pioneer of this grift.

I swear nobody is able to conceive of anything outside of office politics, and all solutions lead back to forking over cash to self-appointed augurs who can see your spiritual corruption and help you momentarily reverse it, you know for a fee.

[Dacien]

You voted for Trump in the last election and have expressed continued desire to vote Republican despite the known fact the party has been largely coopted by white supremacists.

So, no. You're not "doing what you can", you're doing the bare minimum of performance to avoid being scrutinized as a racist.

I voted for not-Hillary, not for-Trump. I had to pick somebody, and I didn't think she was good for the country. I was also concerned about the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court with Scalia's seat open, it becoming lopsided to the left.

The problem with the Democratic Party, particularly the progressive wing, is that they stand in opposition to almost every issue I care about, all the way down the line. I guess that sort of puts me in this trap where not voting for the Democrat makes me a racist, or racist enabler, as the argument seems to go.

I'll just have to live with that accusation.

[Elegiac]

Jane Elliot, equally a poorly made consultant looking for a job. Elliott is considered to be the forerunner of HR diversity training. She is essentially the pioneer of this grift.

I swear nobody is able to conceive of anything outside of office politics, and all solutions lead back to forking over cash to self-appointed augurs who can see your spiritual corruption and help you momentarily reverse it, you know for a fee.

I mean you'd see plenty of them if you didn't habitually put the people who caught you out in various acts of plagiarism or lying on ignore, lol.

- - - Updated - - -

I voted for not-Hillary, not for-Trump. I had to pick somebody, and I didn't think she was good for the country. I was also concerned about the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court with Scalia's seat open, it becoming lopsided to the left.

The problem with the Democratic Party, particularly the progressive wing, is that they stand in opposition to almost every issue I care about, all the way down the line. I guess that sort of puts me in this trap where not voting for the Democrat makes me a racist, or racist enabler, as the argument seems to go.

I'll just have to live with that accusation.

Indeed, because as has been pointed out to you repeatedly almost every issue you care about is a position that has been engineered to maintain the very systems of oppression and exploitation that anti-racists fight against ranging from immigration to abortion. The very notion that the US' center is further to the right than the rest of the world is a symptom of that system - but again, that isn't acknowledged as a problem by y'all because doing so would reveal the complicity.

So once again, this is why we don't believe you when you say "you're doing what you can to support the cause" because you are not. You're doing exactly what people like Theo bitch at Democrats for doing - performative gestures with the goal of avoiding further scrutiny while still passively or actively supporting the system.

[Endus]

I donated money at the time because that's all I had. I'm not currently living where there are any candidates up for election supporting racial justice that I could weigh voting for.

The phrase in bold suggests two things;
1> There were such candidates on your ballot, and
2> You chose not to support them and their platform of racial justice.

I stand with and support members of the black community.

Are you standing on picket lines, as part of the Black Lives Matter protests, even if at personal expense? We know you're not voting for candidates seeking to reform these matters; you admitted that.

Saying you "stand with and support" people is the "thoughts and prayers" approach to social injustice. It's how you pat yourself on the back for not actually doing anything at all to help.

At the end of the day I still have to go to work to pay my mortgage.

"Choose".

The word is "choose".

You chose that mortgage. You chose that lifestyle. You chose what you were willing to do to maintain it, and you chose what injustices you would overlook in that pursuit.

It's a choice, not something you "have" to do.

And honestly, I think this is the best place to be: Treat everyone with dignity and respect, including black men and women. Support them, and confront racist sentiments from anyone you hear it from (which I had to do on one occasion). I think if people are doing these things they're doing all that can reasonably be asked of them. If one is in a position of great power perhaps they could do more, but the vast majority of us are not in positions of great power.

Confronting instances of active racism is not enough. It doesn't do anything to address systemic inequities. And no; it doesn't take "great power". It takes the collective will of many. You're just not willing to contribute.

[Kasierith]

Jane Elliot, equally a poorly made consultant looking for a job. Elliott is considered to be the forerunner of HR diversity training. She is essentially the pioneer of this grift.

I swear nobody is able to conceive of anything outside of office politics, and all solutions lead back to forking over cash to self-appointed augurs who can see your spiritual corruption and help you momentarily reverse it, you know for a fee.

I don't exactly find the video by her compelling. The state of education in America I can see, sure, but the rest seems.. very dated. Unable to accept that the darkness of skin color is a result of melanin as a result of genetics and light exposure? The spurious "oh i have black friends but I can't name any of them" trope?

[Theodarzna]

I don't exactly find the video by her compelling. The state of education in America I can see, sure, but the rest seems.. very dated. Unable to accept that the darkness of skin color is a result of melanin as a result of genetics and light exposure? The spurious "oh i have black friends but I can't name any of them" trope?

Like DiAngelo, she is just the first bloodless ghoul to help HR fire people and invent a whole new arena for grifting. Diversity Training is a multibillion industry and Jane Elliot pioneered it. DiAngelo is just the latest to craft an amazingly opaque treatise in wait Taibbi rightly calls out as "Hitlarian Race Science" but it woke and helps petty tyrants in HR maintain an even more deranged panopticon of dread and paranoia in America's toxic office spaces. Also, it makes a bunch of otherwise worthless individuals some money. I do have to hand it to them; they got a market got people to pay money to get their racism-thetans cleansed.

[Zython]

That is the magic of DiAngelo, rejecting her books premises means you need it even more, how conveniant. For just 25,000k you can get to OT V: A new Anti-racism for OT's

I'm sure you say the same thing about books talking about the Holocaust.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, I maintain the book easily paints a portrait of Robin DiAngelo as possibly having no friends and not having the ability to comprehend human interpersonal interaction or friendship without the mediation of some institution or officialdom.

Some people make friends outside of Hollywood pedophile circles, Theo.

- - - Updated - - -

For the book discussion, I find it suspect that the same people who refuse to read citations linked on this very forum have actually read the book in the first place.

In fact, watch this: Hey, @Theodarzna, cite a line from page 87 of the book.

[Levelfive]

Man, imagine thinking you're making some sort of counterpoint against an essay entitled White Fragility by getting viscerally tilted at someone suggesting that systemic racism is a bad thing that will require systemic solutions.

Like I said, it's the same sort of quackery that climate change deniers like to toss out every time Greta Thunberg is mentioned.

If you want to make money in climate science, you go work for industry. If your motive is profit--prior to 2 months ago, anyway--there's almost no dumber way to go about it than trying to talk to white people about racism, unless of course you're claiming they're the victims of it. What a dumb, transparent feint.

[Kasierith]

For the book discussion, I find it suspect that the same people who refuse to read citations linked on this very forum have actually read the book in the first place.

In fact, watch this: Hey, @Theodarzna, cite a line from page 87 of the book.

"To challenge the ideologies of racism such as individualism and color blindness, we as white people must suspend our perception of ourselves as unique."

@Endus I believe that individualism is one of your core tenants. That people should rise or fall on their own merits, by their own actions. I believe this line in particular should be of particular concern for you.

[Zython]

"To challenge the ideologies of racism such as individualism and color blindness, we as white people must suspend our perception of ourselves as unique."

@Endus I believe that individualism is one of your core tenants. That people should rise or fall on their own merits, by their own actions. I believe this line in particular should be of particular concern for you.

That's page 89, not 87. Nice attempt, though.

[Kasierith]

That's page 89, not 87. Nice attempt, though.

Not on kindle it ain't.

I'm going to let you in on a secret. A secret that's been plaguing peope for years, an insidious truth bringing no end of grief to people all over the world in literary discussions. Be careful.. its going to blow your mind.

Different versions and editions of the books don't always line up with the exact page.

You are welcome.

[Theodarzna]

Not on kindle it ain't.

I'm going to let you in on a secret. A secret that's been plaguing peope for years, an insidious truth bringing no end of grief to people all over the world in literary discussions. Be careful.. its going to blow your mind.

Different versions and editions of the books don't always line up with the exact page.

You are welcome.

How embarrassing. Like there are multiple print editions and the kindle version. But moreover, what sort of game is this? A test if I still physically own or have the book laying around? Basically, these people are angling for a "Dunk on" but won't actually touch the critiques of the book. Their mad, so sad.

[Endus]

"To challenge the ideologies of racism such as individualism and color blindness, we as white people must suspend our perception of ourselves as unique."

@Endus I believe that individualism is one of your core tenants. That people should rise or fall on their own merits, by their own actions. I believe this line in particular should be of particular concern for you.

First, you're misquoting her. That sentence ends with "must suspend our perception of ourselves as unique and/or outside race." Emphasis mine. It then continues;

"Exploring our collective racial identity interrupts a key privilege of dominance - the ability to see oneself only as an individual. We need to discuss white people as a group - even if doing so jars us - in order to disrupt our unracialized identities.

For people of color, the privilege of being seen (and seeing themselves) as unique individuals outside the context of race cannot be taken for granted. Talking about race and racism in general terms such as white people is constructive for whites because it interrupts individualism. But racial generalization also reinforces something problematic for people of color -- the continual focus on their group identity."

I don't own a copy, so that's about as far as I'm getting from free previews, but it clearly indicates that you're misrepesenting what she's fundamentally driving at. I do support the spirit of individualism, in a society free of prejudices like this, but I'm fully in agreement with DiAngelo that it's a power framework used to prop up systemic racism. Black Americans (to pick by no means the only global example, but one relevant to this thread) are treated as individuals largely only when it's convenient to keeping them or other black people down. Floyd's individuality only emerged when it was deemed "important" to point out his criminal background, when it was irrelevant, in an effort to justify his murder. Successful black Americans are held up as "the good ones", and used to argue that it's clearly possible for a black person to "make it" in America, and thus the reason for continuing demographic divergences between them and other racial groups, that must mean they're just inferior and have thus earned that poverty, or something. Successful black people are always held up as exceptions, criminals are treated as descriptive of the group. Because individualism is wielded as a tool of power. Because the same consideration is not applied to white people; success is just natural, and criminals are the exception, there.

Or, to sum up in a few short sentences; I'm all for individualism. Society is not. And I have to deal with society as it is, not society as I believe it should be.

And really, once you stop editing her quotes and trimming out context, I don't think my position and DiAngelo's are really showing a lot of space between them, here. But again; I don't own the book and haven't read it, and wouldn't have even done this amount of research into it if you hadn't deliberately pinged me, despite me admitting that much earlier. And to make Zython's point a few pages up; I only got this far because page 89, where you quoted from, is in Google's free preview. Page 90 is not, which is why I cut off the quote where I did.

But I'm gonna admit where my information is limited, and I'm gonna quote her as completely as I can. And you didn't. And that makes me doubt your good faith, here.

[Zython]

How embarrassing. Like there are multiple print editions and the kindle version. But moreover, what sort of game is this? A test if I still physically own or have the book laying around? Basically, these people are angling for a "Dunk on" but won't actually touch the critiques of the book. Their mad, so sad.

It's to prove that you're basing the book on things you heard second hand, rather than reading the book yourself. And considering that you refuse to engage with me directly, my reasons for suspecting that you're arguing in bad faith are valid. And I think anyone not trying to get into your pants would agree with me.

[Kasierith]

First, you're misquoting her.

Context doesn't really change the issue I have with that particular line. But if you agree with her that individualism is conditional, and secondary to the racial backdrop in assessing individual people, I'll leave you be at that.

My argument there isn't that we should start treating white people collectively, but that we should be treating people of color individually.

And to make Zython's point a few pages up; I only got this far because page 89, where you quoted from, is in Google's free preview. Page 90 is not, which is why I cut off the quote where I did.

Interesting... so if Zython is going off the pages on the google preview as well, he likely does not own the book either. Unless your contention is continuing Zython's, that I do not own the book? A paltry argument, but if you wish to continue it lay out your terms.

But I'm gonna admit where my information is limited, and I'm gonna quote her as completely as I can. And you didn't. And that makes me doubt your good faith, here.

A rather odd statement, coming from someone who routinely and admittedly snips quotes due to them not being overly relevant to the point you're trying to make. You're guilty of tens of thousands of posts in bad faith, if that were the case. Though I wouldn't necessarily agree.

[Endus]

Context doesn't really change the issue I have with that particular line. But if you agree with her that individualism is conditional, and secondary to the racial backdrop in assessing individual people, I'll leave you be at that.

And now you're making shit up and pretending I said it.

I did not say what you're claiming. I don't see how you could possibly have derived that honestly.

My argument there isn't that we should start treating white people collectively, but that we should be treating people of color individually.

So, you've ended all forms of racism, systemic and otherwise?

Until that happens, what you're talking about is impractical idealism that is disconnected from the reality of society as it actually exists.

Interesting... so if Zython is going off the pages on the google preview as well, he likely does not own the book either.

Why would you presume that?

A rather odd statement, coming from someone who routinely and admittedly snips quotes due to them not being overly relevant to the point you're trying to make. You're guilty of tens of thousands of posts in bad faith, if that were the case. Though I wouldn't necessarily agree.

Horseshit. I expect better of you than this.

[Kasierith]

And now you're making shit up and pretending I said it.

I did not say what you're claiming. I don't see how you could possibly have derived that honestly.

The argument being presented by her, and now supported by you, is that how we assess people as individuals is shaped by our racial group. That how we treat people is conditional on our race, that how I as a visibly white person treat another as an individual is contingent on their racial group. Conditional individualism.

The issue at hand isn't that there is plenty of truth contained within the book. There is, a painful amount of it. The contention that I and others raise, however, is that you cannot apply the same mentality and life experiences and views to every single person of a skin group even if there is a shared common backdrop (which is, in itself, contentious). And that ignoring those individual difference and plastering over them does nothing to move things in the right direction.

So, you've ended all forms of racism, systemic and otherwise?

Until that happens, what you're talking about is impractical idealism that is disconnected from the reality of society as it actually exists.

Of course not. But I at least have the wisdom not to presume that every individual of a particular skin tone shares a common mentality.

Why would you presume that?

Because you and he are possibly utilizing the same version/edition. People have a tendency to engage in projection.

Horseshit. I expect better of you than this.

Are you really going to insist that I dig up the quote where I asked you on this, why you snip particular quotes directed at you while keeping others? To be clear, I don't have any issue with it. It makes things more neat and tidy. Hell.. you did it just now.