Not all diversity is good diversity.
It’s like you heard someone say, ‘This smoothie is a mix of powdered glass and fruit’ and you felt the need to say, ‘Not all fruit is fresh fruit’.
Actually, that’s not what I meant.
What I meant was hiring somebody from Saudi Arabia, praising yourself on diversity, then finding out they hate women and LGBT people.
Not all diversity is good diversity — there are plenty of people who come from diverse backgrounds who are bigoted as all hell.
As contemporary events seem to make more apparent by the hour, I don’t think one needs to scour as remote a place as Riyadh to find examples of those things.
The pews of rural Iowa and suburban Houston often underwhelm in their diversity though remaining overblessed in their capacity for hatred of vulnerable groups.
If I say some ‘diversity is bad because it may contain religious bigots’, and to make that meaningful I use it as an excuse to oppose diversity, it’s more likely I’m upset with the diversity or foreignness of them than the bigotry they may share with domestic homogeneous folk. Continue reading ‘America: a dangerous blend of diversity and racism’
As memorials to slavers and other Confederate heroes have been removed from public and otherwise challenged in recent months, a common complaint is that, by doing this, we’re forgetting our history or erasing it.
In my home county, we still have the historical marker its namesake:
Created February 26, 1887 from Tom Green County organized January 15, 1891, named in honor of Matthew Duncan Ector 1822-1879. Member of the Texas legislature a confederate officer and outstanding jurist Odessa, The County Seat.
Indeed, Ector (his first name was actually spelled Mathew) was a Confederate brigadier general and later a Texas high court judge. As a jurist, he’s most notable for re-affirming racist marriage laws after Reconstruction.
In 1878’s Charles Frasher v. the State of Texas, presiding judge Ector wrote:
Continue reading Texas named its counties for a lot of horrible people. Mathew Ector is one of them
Someone—I don’t remember now who—described the major difference in American politics to be that the Left fetishizes being correct where the Right reserves that obsession for power.
For that reason, Republicans have been willing to abandon all previously stated principles so long as they can expect to have a warm body capable of signing regressive tax bills into law and who will nominate judges to protect conservative orthodoxies.
And it’s why a year and a half later, Democrats still get into fights about whether they supported Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders in the 2015-16 primary. It’s why many of us on the Left continue, inexorably, viewing contemporary events as a chance to re-litigate that contest and who was right.
So just to say, “Bernie Sanders: Guide to Political Revolution is for teenagers,” will invite cheap jokes along those lines, and merely by existing, it reinvigorates the conversation about who actually had the better fire extinguisher a year and a half ago, even as the grease fire continues to spread.
Continue reading Book Review: Bernie Sanders’ “Guide to Political Revolution” is more textbook than revolutionary
They [Jewish people] benefit from the same institutional racism as white people, hold the same position of privilege, and—actually—look down on all gentiles, yet every time you mention this you’re instantly painted as anti-Semitic.
Jewish people are considered white people, but Jewish people can also experience anti-Semitism. Just as a white, gay man can be called white, he can also be harassed for being gay. The issue is entirely contextual.
I don’t think there are many Jews who would claim they have it worse in America than black people.
Adding to this, in the United States, ‘whiteness’ is a concept that expands and contracts as needed, always at the exclusion and in opposition to people identified as ‘black’. Italians and Greeks and Slavs are white now when, 100 years ago, to be white was explicitly in opposition to those groups.
Those groups have been allowed to escape from targeted discrimination and, in fact, now benefit from it.
Continue reading ‘Why are white people hated but Jewish people aren’t?’
Just wondering why Robert E Lee can’t be an American hero for owning slaves despite literally everyone owning slaves at the time
While we all can safely circle jerk around Alexander the Great and Plato and Julius Caesar who all owned the fuck out of shit tons of slaves.
Better take down every statue of Augustus Caesar in Italy because he owned slaves.
The Confederates sought to found a nation whose explicit cornerstone was the moral equivalent of institutional prepubescent rape.
Continue reading ‘Why do we judge Confederates on the morality of slavery but not figures of the classical era?’
Just remain silent and understand you’re actually the empowered one.
I mean, maybe it’s actually this. To some extent, I understand that the underlying message is that “these people are angry” and that the use of “white male” as a scapegoat is just “the easiest tangible target for anger.”
However, when I feel specifically targeted, I can’t help but feel like it is in my personal self-interest to actively undermine movements that use this sort of rhetoric.
Assume for a moment reincarnation does exist and when you die, you’ll be reborn as a human again.
Without any guarantee of what your demographic characteristics would be, what sort of society would you want to live in?
Continue reading ‘As a white male, how can I be sympathetic to movements that demonize my being?’
1. Lack of education means a lot of people can’t actually determine what economic policies are good for them or bad for them.
2. People who can’t discern the effects policy decisions will have on them latch onto any explanation that sounds adequate by people they trust and believe.
3. Politicians who wish to manipulate the uneducated and ignorant tell these people what they want to hear rather than present sound policy decisions because these people do not understand policies.
4. Once people have heard a politician tell them what they want to hear they will associate the policy decisions these politicians advocate for as being good for them.
5. When no one understands the effects certain policy decisions will have you can pretty much argue any policy decision as being good for anybody as long as you sound convincing. For example: “We should lower taxes to create jobs. With lower taxes more companies will have more money to create jobs.” People want to hear how they will get more jobs. Lowering taxes does mean companies will have more money so they could hire more people this ought to work.” Then people assume the job tbey get will be a good job so they don’t worry about social programs since they won’t need them once they have a job which lower taxes will get them.
If you’re saying education, you’re missing a step.
Southerners could have improved their school systems long ago.
White Southerners, and rural people in general, are voting for their interests. They’re just voting for their interests relatively instead of absolutely.
To feel like you’re doing better, you need to be doing better than someone else. It’s more important to put a floor under you and have people in a status you can never descend to—a status they can never climb from—because then you have security.
Continue reading ‘Why are people in the south Republican when they should be fiscally liberal?’