To me, racism is an objective social condition to overcome. Race has a quality that is very personal to people so it can’t be overlooked. I take it very seriously but I dont want to reduce all society’s problems to race. You seem aware that doing so creates its own problems, I agree with the sentiment but does not warrant complete dismissal of race and racism as objective social conditions. It is an over correction.
Because of this over correction, you see racism and anti-racism as qualities of the other, in this case, i am an other with an anti-racist quality.
Rather than fighting a system of racism, that exists as part of a larger system of oppression, you seem to have adopted a posture that any mention of race or racism is a personal failing, an idea that can be defeated with individual logic, rather than an objective condition to be fought with solidarity and practice. Because racism is everywhere, you see anti-racism everywhere, but since it is, to you, only an individual opinion in other people, your only course of action is to respond to them one-on-one. In order to avoid appearing explicitly racist, and to effectively .debate your own alienated opinions against others, you have to steel man and think about this stuff all the time.
I don’t have to do that. I just listen to people, read books, and report on my own limited understanding. I don’t have to work half as hard because my perspective doesn’t disappear other people’s experiences, it naturally includes them. I don’t have to search frantically for details to question, or ways to feel superior. I can just listen and discuss. If done correctly I don’t frustrate myself or other people nearly as much, I can just be dumb and live my life and speak my mind, and if there’s something new I need to learn, I can just do that instead of frantically rejecting objective truth in order to maintain attachment to a system that hates and oppresses us.
I can have strong principles and take care of my friends and family, unlike the millions of families who lost a loved one to racist conspiracy theories like qanon. People who thought they had the world figured out while losing what really matters while selling themselves and their communities out for a glimpse of a false feeling of community.
In other words I’ve known a lot of different kinds of people, and the ones who are most distracted, haunted, and sad, are the ones who buy into the lies presented to us by the oligarchy and their proxies.
I just hate to see someone work so hard to remain attached to dastardly, corrosive lies. But of course I am clearly an over thinker so maybe I lie to myself a little as well, to justify my own individualistic indulgence.
Ive given a lot to this discussion and you’ve offered very little. I’m pretty sure you’re just messing with me. Please engage with something worthwhile or disengage.
You’re not offering me anything. I dont over write in order to dominate, I am just very inefficient writer and tend to edit out 3 pages for every 5 that I write, on average. You put preachiness on me like you perceive I put things on you.
I’ve offered personal details and my own philosophy though, where you’ve typically mostly given one line snarky responses or questions. So to me you seem unserious and uncommitted to mutual understanding. Maybe that’s wrong but its all I have to work with.
If this isnt worth either of our time then what is the point?
It’s very simple: I was calling out the person I replied to for having a kneejerk reaction to seeing an article where a black person was arrested.
At best it’s vapid virtue-signaling, at worst it diminishes the real examples of systemic racial injustice that happen all too often.
You then chose to jump in, assume my views, and then chastise your own assumptions about me.
Of course I’m going to defensively insist that you point out examples of what you’re accusing me of. Why should I bother engaging with all your strawmen?
So that is interesting. What is wrong with signalling virtue? In your previous comment, you said that volume =/= value. To me it seems you don’t like when people try to be social and expressive, at least around certain topics.
You haven’t elaborated on what racial injustice looks like to you, you’re just gate keeping other people’s definitions. Those other definitions of racial injustice are vapid, but your own secret measure is beyond reproach. You ensure it is beyond reproach by never describing it or allowing it to be challenged. This implies a fear that you might be criticized.
Skepticism isn’t analysis. To me, it seems like you’re all too willing to diminish real examples of systematic racism. Again, by going after “virtue signallers” you imply that your own position is the real virtuous one. And since you won’t elaborate anything about it, then it is vapid, at least to me. As you can see I have no problem explaining my reasoning, and you won’t even really challenge it. So what’s the point?
You can’t or won’t prove your own ideas so they don’t exist outside your idealistic little thought cave. The most generous interpretation I can make based on our conversation is that you just dont really care about other people. That’s sort of normal, unfortunately, but it doesnt make you correct or even relevant.
I was playing games online a while back and a group of young people were in chat, and called one of the kids a “try hard”. The kid’s response: “I’ve never tried hard at anything in my life.” That is how your virtue signalling comment appears to me. I want people to signal virtue, and you clearly believe in virtue/value. Signalling it helps virtuous people to find one another, and together we might accomplish something. For some reason, youve internalized it as a bad thing and I really don’t understand why.
Please elaborate on who the victims are of that comment you originally responded to. Or is that another idealistic little hypothetical covering for your own lack of critical thought, as it appears?
To me, racism is an objective social condition to overcome. Race has a quality that is very personal to people so it can’t be overlooked. I take it very seriously but I dont want to reduce all society’s problems to race. You seem aware that doing so creates its own problems, I agree with the sentiment but does not warrant complete dismissal of race and racism as objective social conditions. It is an over correction.
Because of this over correction, you see racism and anti-racism as qualities of the other, in this case, i am an other with an anti-racist quality.
Rather than fighting a system of racism, that exists as part of a larger system of oppression, you seem to have adopted a posture that any mention of race or racism is a personal failing, an idea that can be defeated with individual logic, rather than an objective condition to be fought with solidarity and practice. Because racism is everywhere, you see anti-racism everywhere, but since it is, to you, only an individual opinion in other people, your only course of action is to respond to them one-on-one. In order to avoid appearing explicitly racist, and to effectively .debate your own alienated opinions against others, you have to steel man and think about this stuff all the time.
I don’t have to do that. I just listen to people, read books, and report on my own limited understanding. I don’t have to work half as hard because my perspective doesn’t disappear other people’s experiences, it naturally includes them. I don’t have to search frantically for details to question, or ways to feel superior. I can just listen and discuss. If done correctly I don’t frustrate myself or other people nearly as much, I can just be dumb and live my life and speak my mind, and if there’s something new I need to learn, I can just do that instead of frantically rejecting objective truth in order to maintain attachment to a system that hates and oppresses us.
I can have strong principles and take care of my friends and family, unlike the millions of families who lost a loved one to racist conspiracy theories like qanon. People who thought they had the world figured out while losing what really matters while selling themselves and their communities out for a glimpse of a false feeling of community.
In other words I’ve known a lot of different kinds of people, and the ones who are most distracted, haunted, and sad, are the ones who buy into the lies presented to us by the oligarchy and their proxies.
I just hate to see someone work so hard to remain attached to dastardly, corrosive lies. But of course I am clearly an over thinker so maybe I lie to myself a little as well, to justify my own individualistic indulgence.
When did I advocate for that?
Actions speak louder than words
Which actions?
Ive given a lot to this discussion and you’ve offered very little. I’m pretty sure you’re just messing with me. Please engage with something worthwhile or disengage.
Volume =/= value.
It’s clear you have no clue what my actual take or position is here and just want to post endless walls of preachy text.
Please engage with me instead of whatever shadow-boxing you’re doing or disengage.
You’re not offering me anything. I dont over write in order to dominate, I am just very inefficient writer and tend to edit out 3 pages for every 5 that I write, on average. You put preachiness on me like you perceive I put things on you.
I’ve offered personal details and my own philosophy though, where you’ve typically mostly given one line snarky responses or questions. So to me you seem unserious and uncommitted to mutual understanding. Maybe that’s wrong but its all I have to work with.
If this isnt worth either of our time then what is the point?
It’s very simple: I was calling out the person I replied to for having a kneejerk reaction to seeing an article where a black person was arrested.
At best it’s vapid virtue-signaling, at worst it diminishes the real examples of systemic racial injustice that happen all too often.
You then chose to jump in, assume my views, and then chastise your own assumptions about me.
Of course I’m going to defensively insist that you point out examples of what you’re accusing me of. Why should I bother engaging with all your strawmen?
So that is interesting. What is wrong with signalling virtue? In your previous comment, you said that volume =/= value. To me it seems you don’t like when people try to be social and expressive, at least around certain topics.
You haven’t elaborated on what racial injustice looks like to you, you’re just gate keeping other people’s definitions. Those other definitions of racial injustice are vapid, but your own secret measure is beyond reproach. You ensure it is beyond reproach by never describing it or allowing it to be challenged. This implies a fear that you might be criticized.
Skepticism isn’t analysis. To me, it seems like you’re all too willing to diminish real examples of systematic racism. Again, by going after “virtue signallers” you imply that your own position is the real virtuous one. And since you won’t elaborate anything about it, then it is vapid, at least to me. As you can see I have no problem explaining my reasoning, and you won’t even really challenge it. So what’s the point?
You can’t or won’t prove your own ideas so they don’t exist outside your idealistic little thought cave. The most generous interpretation I can make based on our conversation is that you just dont really care about other people. That’s sort of normal, unfortunately, but it doesnt make you correct or even relevant.
I was playing games online a while back and a group of young people were in chat, and called one of the kids a “try hard”. The kid’s response: “I’ve never tried hard at anything in my life.” That is how your virtue signalling comment appears to me. I want people to signal virtue, and you clearly believe in virtue/value. Signalling it helps virtuous people to find one another, and together we might accomplish something. For some reason, youve internalized it as a bad thing and I really don’t understand why.
Please elaborate on who the victims are of that comment you originally responded to. Or is that another idealistic little hypothetical covering for your own lack of critical thought, as it appears?