Problematic Stuff

Locked
User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Tue Feb 13, 2018 4:31 pm

Compared to other cohorts, I believe so.
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Tue Feb 13, 2018 5:38 pm

Indeed, yes, there is a study that had 44% of Millennials say they preferred socialism over capitalism as an economic system. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... fascist-o/
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 5700
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Thu Feb 15, 2018 4:11 am

Forty Two, I'm not dismissing the subhead of the article. However, I do recognize that it's sensationalized and inaccurate.

Rodger was deeply involved in the 'incel' aspect of the MRA movement, and as I've previously pointed out, the MRA world is entwined with the alt-right to a great extent. The SPLC explains what they mean in regard to Rodger's killings being related to the alt-right, and it's not because he was influence by the alt-right as such. Yes, they consider him to be an alt-right killer, but none of the reasons for including him on their list are anything like 'he was influenced by the alt-right.' I've explained this clearly and the article is clear about it as well.

I wouldn't dispute that the SPLC slants things and not everything they put out is completely accurate, but the fact is that nobody is free of those failings. They make it their business to expose and discuss racists and far-right sleazebags, and like any organization they're not perfect. The article you've spent so much time criticizing is guilty of presenting an inaccurate summation in its subhead, and to that extent your criticism is well-founded.

However I think that what this is really about is that you view them as 'leftist scum' and that's why you're so determined to dismiss not only the article, but the SPLC as a whole. Your accusation that they peddle a narrative is ironic, since you spend most of your time here doing just that. For that matter I don't think that I'm immune to that accusation to some extent.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Thu Feb 15, 2018 12:05 pm

L'Emmerdeur wrote:Forty Two, I'm not dismissing the subhead of the article. However, I do recognize that it's sensationalized and inaccurate.
I agree, and its inaccuracy is what I'm pointing out, but it is corroborated by the inclusion of Rodger on the list of white killers, and the other quotes I mentioned within the artlce. It's the point the SPLC is trying to make, which is a dishonest one.

L'Emmerdeur wrote: Rodger was deeply involved in the 'incel' aspect of the MRA movement, and as I've previously pointed out, the MRA world is entwined with the alt-right to a great extent. The SPLC explains what they mean in regard to Rodger's killings being related to the alt-right, and it's not because he was influence by the alt-right as such.
They portrayed him as the genesys, the first of a long line, of "alt right" killers. They needed to boost the number of killers and the number of victims as much as possible, so they falsely attribute to the alt right that which is not really connected to any group of "alt right" persons. Just because this guy was a loner who hated women because they wouldn't go out with him, along with his pathological psychosis and other mental illnesses, doesn't make him alt right. You don't become an "alt right" person by frequenting Pick Up Artist websites (which is what the SPLC mentiones he was up to).
L'Emmerdeur wrote: Yes, they consider him to be an alt-right killer, but none of the reasons for including him on their list are anything like 'he was influenced by the alt-right.' I've explained this clearly and the article is clear about it as well.
You've tried to explain it clearly, but what you're doing, really, is rationalizing and obfuscating. If he was not at least influenced by the alt-right, then he's not an alt right killer. He would be, at most, a psychotic killer who didn't like women. That doesn't make him alt right or an alt right killer.
L'Emmerdeur wrote:
I wouldn't dispute that the SPLC slants things and not everything they put out is completely accurate, but the fact is that nobody is free of those failings.
Not just sometimes. The SPLC is not trustworthy.
L'Emmerdeur wrote: They make it their business to expose and discuss racists and far-right sleazebags, and like any organization they're not perfect. The article you've spent so much time criticizing is guilty of presenting an inaccurate summation in its subhead, and to that extent your criticism is well-founded.
It's not just the subhead. I've included several quotes from the body which say he is an alt-right killer, motivated by his alt-rightness, express and implied.
L'Emmerdeur wrote:
However I think that what this is really about is that you view them as 'leftist scum' and that's why you're so determined to dismiss not only the article, but the SPLC as a whole.
Non sequitur. Not even relevant to the discussion. What you're "really about" is defending a group's message because you sympathize with their goals. Sure, they missed it here, but rather say "yes, some of the folks on that list are not fairly characterized as alt right, so the high number of "alt right killings" portraying this as "the alt right is killing people" in an alarmist fashion is over-the-top" - you say well, the SPLC they're on the side of right here, and they're after the right wing loons, so good on them.
L'Emmerdeur wrote: Your accusation that they peddle a narrative is ironic, since you spend most of your time here doing just that. For that matter I don't think that I'm immune to that accusation to some extent.
And there you go again, non sequitur. What I do is irrelevant to what they do. I deny your accusation, but it doesn't change the SPLC. So what if someone else peddles a narrative? It doesn't change the fact that this article was cited here for a purpose - furthering the narrative that the SPLC's article supports. But, the SPLC's article is not accurate, not by a long shot.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 5700
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Fri Feb 16, 2018 1:44 am

The point that the SPLC is making is that the alt-right serves to encourage acts of murderous violence by vulnerable young men. That's not dishonest, it's the simple truth.

So you don't agree with the reasons that the SPLC presented for including Rodger in their list--that's an opinion. The fact that at least some in the alt-right (including one who later went on to commit murder) choose to count him as one of their own is reason enough to include him on the list, in my opinion.

Who besides Rodger do you assert doesn't belong on that list? Perhaps Dylan Roof? He committed his massacre before the alt-right gained much prominence, but in fact he frequented sites like Stormfront, and espoused ideas that are echoed by the alt-right.

So, maybe Christopher Harper-Miller? The Government Accounting Office describes him as a white supremacist, and there is some indication that using a Pepe avatar on 4chan he posted a warning to not 'go to school tomorrow' the day before he went and murdered nine people at his college.

How about the rest of the list?

Alexandre Bissonnette check

James Harris Jackson check

Sean Urbanski check

Jeremy Joseph Christian check

Lane Maurice Davis check

James Alex Fields Jr. check

William Edward Atchison check

Nicholas Giampa check

Matthew Riehl check

Samuel Woodward check

I think that even if you're more concerned about zealous anti-racists engaging in no-platforming and going overboard in intimidating college professors that they think aren't with their program, the alt-right's history of producing murderers is problematic. The SPLC is correct to point that out, whether you consider them 'trustworthy' or not.

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Seabass » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:39 am

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Seabass » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:00 am

"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Seabass » Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:01 pm

Wayne State student suspended after brandishing knife while wearing Trump-Pence shirt and making threatening remarks about immigrants.
A Wayne State student has been suspended amid allegations that he pulled out a knife on campus and made threatening remarks about immigrants.
Kate Stenvig, a BAMN organizer who is not a student at the school, recorded a video of the incident. The video has been circulating on social media.
"He came up, he had his (President Donald) Trump shirt on, and opened his jacket to show his shirt, and pulled out his knife to show us, and he was saying, 'I think all immigrants should be deported or killed," Stenvig said.
Stenvig said the same student walked past the table last week and shouted "Make America great again!" and "Kill all illegals!"
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Sean Hayden
Microagressor
Posts: 17879
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:55 pm
About me: recovering humanist
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Sean Hayden » Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:07 pm

swell guy

User avatar
pErvinalia
On the good stuff
Posts: 59295
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:08 pm
About me: Spelling 'were' 'where'
Location: dystopia
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by pErvinalia » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:06 am

Seabass wrote:Wayne State student suspended after brandishing knife while wearing Trump-Pence shirt and making threatening remarks about immigrants.
A Wayne State student has been suspended amid allegations that he pulled out a knife on campus and made threatening remarks about immigrants.
Kate Stenvig, a BAMN organizer who is not a student at the school, recorded a video of the incident. The video has been circulating on social media.
"He came up, he had his (President Donald) Trump shirt on, and opened his jacket to show his shirt, and pulled out his knife to show us, and he was saying, 'I think all immigrants should be deported or killed," Stenvig said.
Stenvig said the same student walked past the table last week and shouted "Make America great again!" and "Kill all illegals!"
Only suspended?!! WTF? What do you have to do to get expelled there - kill someone?
Sent from my penis using wankertalk.
"The Western world is fucking awesome because of mostly white men" - DaveDodo007.
"Socialized medicine is just exactly as morally defensible as gassing and cooking Jews" - Seth. Yes, he really did say that..
"Seth you are a boon to this community" - Cunt.
"I am seriously thinking of going on a spree killing" - Svartalf.

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Seabass » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:38 am

That's exactly what I thought... :?

Maybe they just suspended him while they review the video and question witnesses before they decide what else to do him? I dunno. I imagine they probably have to be careful when expelling students so they don't get sued or something.
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Seabass
Posts: 7339
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2011 7:32 pm
About me: Pluviophile
Location: Covidiocracy
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Seabass » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:55 am

More non-problematic stuff that is totally not as problematic as SJWs shouting at college staff.

SLPC: The Year in Hate: Trump buoyed white supremacists in 2017, sparking backlash among black nationalist groups
President Trump’s first year in office proved to be just as racially divisive as his campaign — but even more consequential.
“President Trump in 2017 reflected what white supremacist groups want to see: a country where racism is sanctioned by the highest office, immigrants are given the boot and Muslims banned,” said Heidi Beirich, director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project. “When you consider that only days into 2018, Trump called African countries ‘shitholes,’ it’s clear he’s not changing his tune. And that’s music to the ears of white supremacists.”

It was a year that saw the “alt-right,” the latest incarnation of white supremacy, break through the firewall that for decades kept overt racists largely out of the political and media mainstream.
Also, for the first time, the SPLC added two male supremacy groups to the hate group list: A Voice for Men, based in Houston, and Return of Kings, based in Washington, D.C. The vilification of women by these groups makes them no different than other groups that demean entire populations, such as the LGBT community, Muslims or Jews, based on their inherent characteristics.
https://www.splcenter.org/news/2018/02/ ... ationalist
"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities." —Voltaire
"They want to take away your hamburgers. This is what Stalin dreamt about but never achieved." —Sebastian Gorka

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Thu Feb 22, 2018 4:04 pm

“President Trump in 2017 reflected what white supremacist groups want to see: a country where racism is sanctioned by the highest office,
Racism is not approved by the highest office. The SPLC provides not a single example of the highest office approving or sanctioning racism.
immigrants are given the boot
Immigrants are not "given the boot" - illegal immigrants are, and always have been. It is, also, not racist to limit immigration, or to remove those who break the law and enter contrary to law.
and Muslims banned,”
Muslims are not banned. The issue in that regard was a temporary stay on immigration from 7 countries (without regard for religion) which were overwhelmingly Muslim, but not exclusively Muslim, in population. The vast majority of the world's 1.2 billion or so Muslims were unaffected.
said Heidi Beirich, director of the SPLC’s Intelligence Project. “When you consider that only days into 2018, Trump called African countries ‘shitholes,’
He denied it. It's been alleged, but it's been denied. And, even if it's true, it's not racist. Some countries are shitholes. It's just uncouth and undiplomatic to say so.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

User avatar
L'Emmerdeur
Posts: 5700
Joined: Wed Apr 06, 2011 11:04 pm
About me: Yuh wust nightmaya!
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by L'Emmerdeur » Thu Feb 22, 2018 5:47 pm

An alternate take on the narrative that has dominated this thread.

"The Real Threat To Campuses Isn’t ‘PC Culture.’ It’s Racism."
I’ll never forget the first time I received a panicked call from a fellow academic who was being harassed online by a “white identity” group. That was about six years ago, and it has happened many times since, becoming more coordinated and more frightening as the years go by. Now, not a month goes by that I do not receive such a call.

...

The first clue a professor gets that her life is about to change arrives in the most bureaucratic and benign of ways: It is often an email. The email may say that a known right-wing publication is planning to run a story about your research or your teaching, and it offers you a chance to comment.

Next, the architecture of online news media takes over. A story, perhaps about your syllabus or a story you told in a lecture, is posted. A series of outraged tweets goes out. An army of social media accounts, some run by real humans and some by “bots,” is pressed into service. The targeted advertising that Facebook uses to sell you the shoes you thought about buying on Amazon last week also helps the troll armies push stories about a “liberal commie” into the social media feeds of those on the right who are likely to believe and share it.

Within 24 hours, your university email is swarmed with messages from people claiming to be concerned students, concerned parents and concerned donors. Somewhere in the hundreds of emails there may be official communications from students and co-workers, but you don’t have the resources to find them. You cannot do your actual job of teaching and researching because you are drowning in emails, phone calls and messages.

If you are one of the lucky ones, it stops there. Increasingly, it does not stop there. Angry consumers of this kind of culture war red meat do not live just on the internet. They live in your community. They may mail you packages, perhaps with dangerous contents in them. They may send you death threats. They may use the surveillance apparatus we built to sell internet ads and control poor people to find out where your children go to school or where your spouse works. They may threaten them, directly or indirectly.

The distance between these trolls and their targets is shrinking; Increasingly, the perpetrators of this harassment have a real-life presence on campus. They organize sophisticated armies of student “journalists” to surveil and trap professors and students into being “liberal.” They record and remix footage, circulating it on a vast web of social media, blogs, content farms and even in mainstream media. They capture the public’s imagination, feed conservative media’s obsession with the liberal academia, and they make it seem safe to hordes of on-the-ground soldiers fighting an imaginary race war to come to a campus near you to recruit.

...

Given higher education’s reputation as a bastion of liberalism and political correctness, it’s no wonder that it’s seen as a ripe target for angry white men. To many Americans, we are, as one angry internet troll recently told me, responsible for producing the “social justice warriors” and “feminazis” who are supposedly destroying the world. In reality, “the university” in 2018 is mostly a constellation of underfunded, overextended public institutions that still serve mostly working-class and middle-class whites and smaller numbers of minorities, including some undocumented young people known as Dreamers. Those institutions rarely have the resources to target conservative students or brainwash students.

You could be forgiven for not imagining that university when people talk about liberal colleges and coddled professors. We do not appear often in elite media, which tends to focus on the fringiest and most outrageous goings-on at elite universities. But even elite institutions are not nearly as radical as the alt-right believes. They are, if anything, the finishing schools for conservative economics, social science and social policy. A handful of gender studies courses could not begin to check the power of an economics department or a business school at any university in the U.S. The college down the street from most Americans is a conservative institution that is sensitive to the pluralist needs of the students they serve because its economic viability depends on it.

Of course, racism does not need logic. White racist organizations are flourishing in the space between perception and fact, and in that space, the university is the mecca for aggrieved white masculinity to reassert its dominance. When I get those emails from colleagues across the nation and the political spectrum, the focus is usually on survival rather than analysis. We talk about communication plans and safety contingencies for their families. I send notes to their administrators to explain how networked attacks work. Many of us help raise money to offset the real cost of protecting ourselves while merely trying to do our jobs.

If you’ve never experienced it, this kind of harassment may seem like a small thing. In fact, it’s a crippling symptom of a much larger illness. Most college campuses are struggling to serve student needs that have become more expensive to provide. People feel left out of the race for good jobs and blame those same colleges for that because in our cultural imagination all colleges are flush with endowments and tenured professors. White men are especially aggrieved because they perceive any loss of status as a deep betrayal, whereas other groups take it as par for the course.

User avatar
Forty Two
Posts: 14978
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:01 pm
About me: I am the grammar snob about whom your mother warned you.
Location: The Of Color Side of the Moon
Contact:

Re: Problematic Stuff

Post by Forty Two » Thu Feb 22, 2018 6:52 pm

Any harassment is unacceptable.

However, I read through the article and it's long on general allegation, and quite short on specifics. The harassment is described thusly:

1. A professor gets an email that a known right-wing publication is planning to run a story about your research or your teaching, and it offers you a chance to comment. [right wing publication? Fox News? The Wall Street Journal? Stormfront? What publication? If what we're talking about is a some conservative publication, even Breitbart, or another obviously, staunchly right wing publication, is doing this - this is not harassment. It's an email asking for comment. It's what journalists are supposed to do].

2. A story is published which then "goes viral" on social media. The article refers to it in scare quotes - the "little commie" -- is being criticized all over by an "army" of trolls. That's also known as "people on social media interested in a topic and commenting on it." And, the "little commie" sometimes is a commie, sometimes not. But, sometimes. And, as we have seen, a lot of professors have said a lot of fucking ridiculous shit, worthy of comment and scorn. And, so far, there is nothing wrong with what anyone is doing here. Both the left and the right have an outrage brigade, and they both have bunches of people who are interested in vigorous discussion of ideas. Just being an academic doesn't make you immune from social media commentary.

3. Within 24 hours, your university email is swarmed with messages from people claiming to be concerned students, concerned parents and concerned donors. Oh, they're "claiming" this? Maybe they are that. And, if you have a published university email to the public, then you're inviting such communications. She writes "Somewhere in the hundreds of emails there may be official communications from students and co-workers, but you don’t have the resources to find them. You cannot do your actual job of teaching and researching because you are drowning in emails, phone calls and messages." - So, here, we're missing any indication that any "racists" are after the "liberal commie" -- there are just upset parents and students and others who are writing to oppose something this professor wrote that probably sounds ludicrous to them.

4. Then there is this "Increasingly, it does not stop there. Angry consumers of this kind of culture war red meat do not live just on the internet. They live in your community. They may mail you packages, perhaps with dangerous contents in them. They may send you death threats. They may use the surveillance apparatus we built to sell internet ads and control poor people to find out where your children go to school or where your spouse works. They may threaten them, directly or indirectly." Dangerous packages with contents? Call the FBI folks, and the local police. That kind of shit - sending threatening packaging - especially with dangerous contents to university professors is not just ho-hum shit - that's terrorism, and would make every cable news channel if reported. And "death threats?" Again, are they death threats? And, have university professors had their kids and spouses threatened? When? Any examples at all? I don't buy it. This is a lot of "could happens." And, to suggest that the mob of internet asshats is something new is ridiculous. Nobody gives a fuck when mobs of people email prominent people on the internet -- Richard Dawkins was famous for his fireside readings of his hate mail, which included very vile and horrible suggestions, and nastiness. Of course that's out there. What do you think? If you publish some communist manifesto that nobody is going to call you an asshole for it? What do you think professors like Jordan Peterson, Gad Saad or Brett Weinstein get? Brett Weinstein is a great example - that guy was literally threatened with violence, and had leftist students hunting him on campus, and he was forced to hold his classes off campus for a time to avoid getting attacked.

The article then refers to "the perpetrators of THIS harassment," but conspicuously left out are any specific examples. All we know is that the writer says that hosts of left wing professors, starting 6 years ago or so, are routinely subjected to news outlets emailing them for comment on publications related the professors' work. Once those news outlets publish, then the public comments vigorously on social media about the "liberal commies." Then some actually write as concerned citizens and students to the professor to express their displeasure, using publicly available email addresses which are publicly available to the public so the public can email the professor.... there is then the strong implication that some numbers of these professors have received packages in the mail with dangerous substances and threats in them (none have made the news), and that some have had their families and even kids threatened (nothing like that has made the news).

Seems legit.
“When I was in college, I took a terrorism class. ... The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up, But you know, it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with the intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with the intensity,” she continued. “... But you say these names [Al Qaeda] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to be something.” - Ilhan Omar

Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests