Planet Rugby Forum

Kiwias wrote:

fatcat wrote:

Kiwias wrote:

fatcat wrote:

Kiwias wrote:What a fascinating insight into the mindset and thought processes of Trump's base. Thanks.

How was it racist?

As I said, thanks.

So now you agree it wasn't. You're welcome; happy to have helped.

Not even close to what I said but carry on defending him anyway.

I haven't defended him. I asked a simple question - how was it racist? Which you choose not to answer. No problem.

Mick Mannock wrote:
And you might care to explain why it was racist.

If he could, he would.

Some new members of the choir have arrived. Have fun, kiddies.

Santa wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:

It's astonishing really. Rather than things that are not said being irrelevant they become the entire topic.

Yeah, and what becomes relevant is that white politicians are not allowed to criticise the performance of 'lawmakers of color'. And everyone sees that is now in the open. Finally.

It's a very clever tactic actually.

He uses a broadly or even specifically factual claim, or at least a defensible one. Overstated it. Deploys it against a target about whom certain projections can be made and when the inevitable criticism comes based on that projection it reveals a different unspoken truth that relies on the projection. That is 4D.

You have described a racist dog whistle, basically

Seneca of the Night wrote: Not a very good one if the only people who can hear the whistle are Democrats, and not racists..

You're deluded if you think that's true.

Seneca of the Night wrote:
So what you are saying is no black areas are crime riddled shit holes.

Well that's an interesting rhetorical tactic.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote: Not a very good one if the only people who can hear the whistle are Democrats, and not racists..

You're deluded if you think that's true.

Racists don't think it's racist. It doesn't help that those that think it's racist won't tell us exactly why it's racist, but that's where we are I guess.

I've pretty clearly stated it. The fact that a guy repeatedly incorrectly assumes that areas where black people are crime and vermin infested ghettos and/or keeps deliberately repeating the lie is racist.

Now, you can once again repeat the 'There's no definition of racism' line.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:
So what you are saying is no black areas are crime riddled shit holes.

Well that's an interesting rhetorical tactic.

It's very difficult to work out what your angle is on this thread.

Ok.

“I’m not racist but....”

Racist don’t think they are racist, I agre with you there Sen

Seneca of the Night wrote:Incidentally, if there is a 'line of racism' that is being laid down in fairly concrete terms, this review in Nature magazine just last week shows where it kind of is:

Evans zooms in on two focal points of racial stereotypes: sport and intelligence. His section on the success of Kenyan marathon runners in global contests is brilliant: it demolishes the idea of genetic explanations for any region’s sporting achievements. Some have speculated that Kenyans might have, on average, longer, thinner legs than other people, or differences in heart and muscle function. Evans notes, however, that we don’t make such generalizations about white British athletes when they do disproportionately well in global athletics. Such claims for athletic prowess are lazy biological essentialism, heavily doped with racism.

How many posters on here can claim to be within that scientific line? If you think that high-country tribesmen from Kenya might have genetic / biological advantages in distance running events you are a racist. That is the stance of one of the leading scientific journals.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02244-w

It's a very odd box they're trying to paint everyone into.

Youre not allowed to emphasise difference because that suggests differential capability, and therefore hierarchy, which is racist.

You're not allowed to emphasise sameness because that elides difference (which you're not allowed to acknowledge) and is predicated on a universalised white man baseline, which is racist.

You're not allowed to comment on poc unless you are a poc because to do so is to reiterate historical power relations, which is racist.

You're not allowed to not comment on poc because that marginalises marginalised communities, which is racist.

Given all that there is nowhere to go. People note this and say fudge it all, I don't care anymore.

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

Mick Mannock wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

Mick Mannock wrote:
One knows that people have gone full-on loopy loo when a tweet about Elijah Cummings is described as racist.

The one where he described a fairly middle class area as rat infested, dangerous and filthy? I wonder why anyone would see that as racist.

Quite. Hell of a reach to describe that as racist.

He has a recurring habit of assuming that black areas are impoverished ghettos. He made similar statements about how John Lewis' district was crime infested etc when it's actually one of the nicer areas of Atlanta. It's his go to attack when a Black Dem criticises him, claim their district/city/state is a hellhole and they need to take care of their own backyard.

You can argue the statements in isolation aren't racist, but the assumptions behind them are pretty transparent.

It covers most of the city of Atlanta.

Seneca of the Night wrote:https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ ... ar-AAEWOe0

She’s confused. Mueller has been pushed by Clinton centrists and Russia hawks (including quite a few NeverTrump republicans). Progressives mostly want him impeached for other reasons.

BokJock wrote:“I’m not racist but....”

Racist don’t think they are racist, I agre with you there Sen

"3.6 roentgen, not great, not terrible"

Seneca of the Night wrote:Incidentally, if there is a 'line of racism' that is being laid down in fairly concrete terms, this review in Nature magazine just last week shows where it kind of is:

Evans zooms in on two focal points of racial stereotypes: sport and intelligence. His section on the success of Kenyan marathon runners in global contests is brilliant: it demolishes the idea of genetic explanations for any region’s sporting achievements. Some have speculated that Kenyans might have, on average, longer, thinner legs than other people, or differences in heart and muscle function. Evans notes, however, that we don’t make such generalizations about white British athletes when they do disproportionately well in global athletics. Such claims for athletic prowess are lazy biological essentialism, heavily doped with racism.

How many posters on here can claim to be within that scientific line? If you think that high-country tribesmen from Kenya might have genetic / biological advantages in distance running events you are a racist. That is the stance of one of the leading scientific journals.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02244-w

Er...no it is not. That's some lazy thinking from you..

Was it racist when Bernie Sanders likened Elijah Cummings district to a third world country?

zt1903 wrote:Was it racist when Bernie Sanders likened Elijah Cummings district to a third world country?

Not sure, what did the tweet say?

Seneca of the Night wrote:All the necessary leaps from that to racism are in your head. And he knows it.

Yeah, you're giving him a lot more credit than he's earned on that. I don't think it's some meta strategy for him, I think it's "Old man yells at cloud" behavior and his tendencies to view 'the blacks' as an amorphous entity who live in rat infested squalor is genuinely how he thinks.

zt1903 wrote:Was it racist when Bernie Sanders likened Elijah Cummings district to a third world country?

No because the implication was different. Bernie was suggesting a call to arms to end poverty across the whole of the US, while Trump was saying that POC aren't welcome in his US. Something like that I think.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:All the necessary leaps from that to racism are in your head. And he knows it.

Yeah, you're giving him a lot more credit than he's earned on that. I don't think it's some meta strategy for him, I think it's "Old man yells at cloud" behavior and his tendencies to view 'the blacks' as an amorphous entity who live in rat infested squalor is genuinely how he thinks.

Well we are going to have to agree to disagree on that as its your take on his mind and that's not something we can argue about. I think it's a completely ridiculous view, but there you go.

Just a random coincidence that Fox happened to screen a bit on Cummings that showed the poorer parts of his district immediately before Trump's tweet? So what's more likely?

1 - The Fox News article was co-ordinated with Trump as part of a strategy; or
2 - Trump saw the article and blurted out his tweet.

Every single one of these Trump is a racist posts begs the question. So when asked to demonstrate the claim there is either a resounding silence or some circular stupidity.

I'm starting to think there's something to this leftism is a mental illness thing. This kind of epistemological slippage appears time and again from the usual tosspots. In allegations of racism. In allegations of sexual assault. In ignoring the presumption if innocence. In the collusion delusion.

Bowens is best lefty on here by quite a margin. The rest if you are a collective disgrace to your education. And the sad thing is most of your are unable to step back and ask yourselves why you keep being wrong. It doesn't even occur to you to do that. So you just plod on and on.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

puku wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:Incidentally, if there is a 'line of racism' that is being laid down in fairly concrete terms, this review in Nature magazine just last week shows where it kind of is:

Evans zooms in on two focal points of racial stereotypes: sport and intelligence. His section on the success of Kenyan marathon runners in global contests is brilliant: it demolishes the idea of genetic explanations for any region’s sporting achievements. Some have speculated that Kenyans might have, on average, longer, thinner legs than other people, or differences in heart and muscle function. Evans notes, however, that we don’t make such generalizations about white British athletes when they do disproportionately well in global athletics. Such claims for athletic prowess are lazy biological essentialism, heavily doped with racism.

How many posters on here can claim to be within that scientific line? If you think that high-country tribesmen from Kenya might have genetic / biological advantages in distance running events you are a racist. That is the stance of one of the leading scientific journals.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02244-w

Er...no it is not. That's some lazy thinking from you..

OK. Fair point. I shall rephrase. That is the stance of the reviewer of a book in the leading science journal Nature. A reviewer whose own book on the subject received overwhelmingly positive reviews in the same journal just a few months ago. That this reviewer has had her own book on the subject reviewed and been invited back to review another book on the subject does not tell us anything about the policy of the editorial board of the journal.

From the review piece...

In 2009, at the ‘Preserving Western Civilization’ conference in Baltimore, Maryland, Harpending stated, bizarrely: “I’ve never seen anyone with a hobby in Africa.”

and

A world in thrall to far-right politics and ethnic nationalism demands vigilance. We must guard science against abuse and reinforce the essential unity of the human species

.

The latter is something I can get behind 100% as I'm sure the editorial board at Nature do too.

Seneca of the Night wrote:
Are those the only two options?

No, but they're the most likely ones given the timing. Have you got an alternative theory?

Interestingly if you type 'Baltimore is a' into google it auto completes to 'Baltimore is a mess, a dump, a hell hole,

The algorithm is racist.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Jay Cee Gee wrote:

Seneca of the Night wrote:
Are those the only two options?

No, but they're the most likely ones given the timing. Have you got an alternative theory?

Are you saying that it's likely he was in cahoots with Fox on this story? I don't think thats likely at all tbh.

Are you being wilfully obtuse? I think it's pretty obvious I favour the alternative.

Seneca of the Night wrote: Yeah, so the other alternative you've given is fcking stupid. I suppose that's one way to get your theory over the line.

Again, I'm happy to hear alternatives as to why Trump's meta 4D chess own the libs master strategic tweet just happened to coincide with a Fox segment depicting Cummings' district.

Out of interest is anyone disputing that West Baltimore is, in fact, a shithole?

bet the weirdos are taking a hammering on this thread these days..

or maybe they're too stupid to realise (probably).

zt1903 wrote:Out of interest is anyone disputing that West Baltimore is, in fact, a shithole?

You couldn't make The Wire in Connecticut.

Seneca of the Night wrote:

Santa wrote:Every single one of these Trump is a racist posts begs the question. So when asked to demonstrate the claim there is either a resounding silence or some circular stupidity.

I'm starting to think there's something to this leftism is a mental illness thing. This kind of epistemological slippage appears time and again from the usual tosspots. In allegations of racism. In allegations of sexual assault. In ignoring the presumption if innocence. In the collusion delusion.

Bowens is best lefty on here by quite a margin. The rest if you are a collective disgrace to your education. And the sad thing is most of your are unable to step back and ask yourselves why you keep being wrong. It doesn't even occur to you to do that. So you just plod on and on.

Survival of mutant dna caused by collapse of infant mortality rates post industrial revolution. Result is pathological altruism. These are the best theories.

Golly

Seneca of the Night wrote:Rats: https://twitter.com/baltimoresun/status ... 7212550144

Geoblocked

Trump was basically found guilty of racism by a court of law..in the f**king 70’s. That is quite a feat.

Why is it so hard to believe he is still a bit racist. I think he is guilty of that old man casual type racism, rather than outright ‘ethnocentrism’

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvf5LD7mFuE

I haven’t followed the last few pages but have we reached the “you’re racist” part of the cycle, which usually gets pulled when there is nothing left to try, so we’ll use the race card because that’s so 2019 now?

saffer13 wrote:I haven’t followed the last few pages but have we reached the “you’re racist” part of the cycle, which usually gets pulled when there is nothing left to try, so we’ll use the race card because that’s so 2019 now?

that's the trouble with the weirdos, they're still using the cards they played last century.

and they wonder why they're getting their asses handed to them across the globe.

There seems to be no one left in the middle no more.... you're either for us.. or against us... you can't be both... but most of us are both...

Grandpa wrote:There seems to be no one left in the middle no more.... you're either for us.. or against us... you can't be both... but most of us are both...

seems that way..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSy-6VqIww

merry! wrote:

Grandpa wrote:There seems to be no one left in the middle no more.... you're either for us.. or against us... you can't be both... but most of us are both...

seems that way..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSy-6VqIww

Jesus, you have properly lost the plot

happyhooker wrote:

merry! wrote:

Grandpa wrote:There seems to be no one left in the middle no more.... you're either for us.. or against us... you can't be both... but most of us are both...

seems that way..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSy-6VqIww

Jesus, you have properly lost the plot

merry! wrote:

happyhooker wrote:

merry! wrote:

Grandpa wrote:There seems to be no one left in the middle no more.... you're either for us.. or against us... you can't be both... but most of us are both...

seems that way..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSy-6VqIww

Jesus, you have properly lost the plot

QED

happyhooker wrote:

merry! wrote:

happyhooker wrote:

merry! wrote:

Grandpa wrote:There seems to be no one left in the middle no more.... you're either for us.. or against us... you can't be both... but most of us are both...

seems that way..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhSy-6VqIww

Jesus, you have properly lost the plot

QED

get some new material if you want more than a smiley.