F Champ Receives Lifetime Ban, Racism in the FGC/USA, and Other Prevalent Social Discussions

[CrimsonShadow]

I have done both in this thread. I take issue with your definition of racism because you seem to imply that any inequity in the system is the result of racism and discrimination. In other words, unless blacks, or any other minority group, are represented proportionately in all aspects of life, the system is racist and discriminatory.

I don't think I've ever said this -- I'm not looking for proof from the present day going backward. I've made the point several times that what we have is the result of our nation's history going forward. We are barely one lifetime away from the time days you could not vote and do many other things unless you were white. That has lingering consequences that are not erased overnight.

I've never spoken to 'any inequity in the system' -- I have, however, spoken to very specific inequities, that stem from specific historical policies, attitudes, and actions. And I've posted direct links to the line the connects from the recent decades of our history to these lingering forms of injustice in the present day.

It goes without saying that there are all forms of discrimination and injustice to consider -- income-based, gender-based, background-based, gaps in education, etc. Not every form of injustice is racism or racially-motivated. But the reason that nearly every form of injustice falls harder on African-Americans in this country is that decades of disenfranchising and discrimination have left African-Americans statistically living in worse areas, with less expendable income, lower-quality education, and less access to important resources.

This IS the history of social development in our country. We each have our own job to do, but the playing field is not equal for everyone. If you can't accept both, you are being willfully blind in a way that's convenient for you.

 

[Onryoki]

I don't think I've ever said this -- I'm not looking for proof from the present day going backward. I've made the point several times that what we have is the result of our nation's history going forward. We are barely one lifetime away from the time days you could not vote and do many other things unless you were white. That has lingering consequences that are not erased overnight.

I've never spoken to 'any inequity in the system' -- I have, however, spoken to very specific inequities, that stem from specific historical policies, attitudes, and actions. And I've posted direct links to the line the connects from the recent decades of our history to these lingering forms of injustice in the present day.

It goes without saying that there are all forms of discrimination and injustice to consider -- income-based, gender-based, background-based, gaps in education, etc. Not every form of injustice is racism or racially-motivated. But the reason that nearly every form of injustice falls harder on African-Americans in this country is that decades of disenfranchising and discrimination have left African-Americans statistically living in worse areas, with less expendable income, lower-quality education, and less access to important resources.

This IS the history of social development in our country. We each have our own job to do, but the playing field is not equal for everyone. If you can't accept both, you are being willfully blind in a way that's convenient for you.

Life isn’t fair, we all have something that can be used against us. I’m a gay man of colour, meaning that I not only get hated for my skin colour but also for my sexuality. Even in the more “tolerant” countries I am constantly in danger simply for being gay. Despite that, I don’t try to play the victim and try to fight the issues head on.

It is true that African Americans statistically live in the worst areas but we can’t only blame “the system” for that. In the end we are all individuals that make our decisions and some of these decisions have a negative impact on our lives. Most people that live in these bad areas often don’t try to get out or get held back by others to stay in those areas.

It is awful how it’s little over a lifetime ago that black people couldn’t do the same as white people back then. I understand that there are lingering feelings that don’t change overnight. However, we should learn from history and learn from the mistakes made in the past to build a better future. But what I’m seeing now is a lot of the younger generation of black people using the history of the older generation to make white people of this generation feel guilty for something they didn’t do. I also sense entitlement from them, by the way they are dismissing white people’s opinions simply for being white. It’s a shame that the younger generation doesn’t try to learn from mistakes, but try to reverse the roles around.

 

[Marlow]

Now I wonder why "classical liberals" see the negative in rights, while "social liberals" see them in a positive way.

I think you're misunderstanding just a bit. There's nothing evaluative about Negative vs Positive. It's not seeing seeing rights in a positive or negative way. It's simply a way to make a distinction between the right being discussed. It's a purely philosophical distinction. Fundamentally a positive right requires others to provide you with a good or service. This would be something like the right to have clean air, or the right to have clean water, or the right to a fair trial and legal counsel, stuff like that. A Negative right is a right that requires others to abstain from interfering with your action. Like the right to drink raw milk, own a firearm, run a business free from any form of regulation. In theory, a negative right forbids others from acting against the right holder, while a positive right obligates others to act with respect to the right holder. Presumably, if a person has positive rights it implies that other people have positive duties (to take certain actions); whereas negative rights imply that others have negative duties (to avoid certain other actions)

Libertarians are generally big fans of breaking rights into Positive vs Negative, because they'll say that positive rights do not exist until they are created by contract, and that the state (aka government) shouldn't be in the business of granting or maintaining positive rights. The thought process is that by granting someone the positive right of something like free healthcare, it requires taking resources from some people to give to other people, thus hurting their negative rights.

Again, it's a pretty deep philosophical thing and mostly depends on semantics and with what language one decides to use to describe a right in the first place. I think it's mostly a way for people to try and feel smarter about themselves when talking about issues at a high level without actually engaging in the issues.

Or to put another way, it's a way for someone to feel smarter and fancier about why they think we need to cut taxes and cut benefit programs.

 

[Marlow]

@jokey77

Just to add on and give another example, think if we were going to debate healthcare. I might say something like how i think Healthcare should be considered a right, not a privilege. So I think the government should be tasked with making sure everyone has the resources to receive healthcare. You could simply disagree with me on a policy level and we could debate how good/bad a government healthcare program would work, feasability, practicality, stuff like that. Or we could turn it into a philosophical debate about the right to healthcare. If you wanted to argue from the libertarian or classical liberal side, you'd say that to be able to give everyone the resources to be able to afford healthcare it would mean taking resources away from other people. That would interfere with their negative right to do with those resources whatever they want in order to give other people the positive right of being able to receive healthcare.

Nothing wrong with having those philosophical discussions, and if you like that type of thing there's a lot out there on the internet to engage in. Just search around for some good philosophy blogs or philosophy books.

I tend to steer clear of philosophical discussions because again, I feel that it makes people come off sounding pretentious, and I don't always see the practicality in having them.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

Life isn’t fair, we all have something that can be used against us. I’m a gay man of colour, meaning that I not only get hated for my skin colour but also for my sexuality. Even in the more “tolerant” countries I am constantly in danger simply for being gay. Despite that, I don’t try to play the victim and try to fight the issues head on.

It is true that African Americans statistically live in the worst areas but we can’t only blame “the system” for that. In the end we are all individuals that make our decisions and some of these decisions have a negative impact on our lives. Most people that live in these bad areas often don’t try to get out or get held back by others to stay in those areas.

It is awful how it’s little over a lifetime ago that black people couldn’t do the same as white people back then. I understand that there are lingering feelings that don’t change overnight. However, we should learn from history and learn from the mistakes made in the past to build a better future. But what I’m seeing now is a lot of the younger generation of black people using the history of the older generation to make white people of this generation feel guilty for something they didn’t do. I also sense entitlement from them, by the way they are dismissing white people’s opinions simply for being white. It’s a shame that the younger generation doesn’t try to learn from mistakes, but try to reverse the roles around.

That's an unfortunate way to see it. It's amazing to me that after sharing one's experience for so long, and having people just tell you that "it doesn't exist", or that you're somehow lying, etc., that when you finally gather together a movement to end injustices people call you "entitled".

I'm definitely not entitled to anything. I probably work harder than the majority of people here, which is why I've never had time to compete in fighting games. Nor am I asking anyone to feel guilty -- I'm asking people to wake up and help out so that we can end this kind of nonsense and truly make our country the place of "liberty and justice for all" that it was promised to be.

 

[Onryoki]

That's an unfortunate way to see it. It's amazing to me that after sharing one's experience for so long, and having people just tell you that "it doesn't exist", or that you're somehow lying, etc., that when you finally gather together a movement to end injustices people call you "entitled".

I'm definitely not entitled to anything. I probably work harder than the majority of people here, which is why I've never had time to compete in fighting games. Nor am I asking anyone to feel guilty -- I'm asking people to wake up and help out so that we can end this kind of nonsense and truly make our country the place of "liberty and justice for all" that it was promised to be.

Don’t twist my words. I never said that the movement only exists out of entitled people. But people like Gazi Kodman definitely aren’t part of the movement to end issues but for their own personal gain:

Also the movement that fights for black people doesn’t exist only out of black people but also out of people of all races. Sometimes I see the people that aren’t black get criticised and told they should mind their own business because they’re not black. And to me those people are just trying to feel entitled rather than solve the issue. Also your statement of working harder than other people is subjective. You think that, that doesn’t mean that you actually do since it’s not a measurable fact.

 

[jokey77]

@jokey77

Just to add on and give another example, think if we were going to debate healthcare. I might say something like how i think Healthcare should be considered a right, not a privilege. So I think the government should be tasked with making sure everyone has the resources to receive healthcare. You could simply disagree with me on a policy level and we could debate how good/bad a government healthcare program would work, feasability, practicality, stuff like that. Or we could turn it into a philosophical debate about the right to healthcare. If you wanted to argue from the libertarian or classical liberal side, you'd say that to be able to give everyone the resources to be able to afford healthcare it would mean taking resources away from other people. That would interfere with their negative right to do with those resources whatever they want in order to give other people the positive right of being able to receive healthcare.

Nothing wrong with having those philosophical discussions, and if you like that type of thing there's a lot out there on the internet to engage in. Just search around for some good philosophy blogs or philosophy books.

I tend to steer clear of philosophical discussions because again, I feel that it makes people come off sounding pretentious, and I don't always see the practicality in having them.

Well, a few pages ago I mentioned that I am pro universal healthcare, so we propably agree in this regard. - But I get your point...

The thing is: It is easy to call for "more rights for everyone" or "more money for everyone". But I think that such demands are only legitimate if you tell where the necessary resources come from. - This is the problem that I have with many leftists (also in this thread). Usually their only answer is: Take it from the others.

Or as Margaret Thatcher said: "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money."

Besides my actual question was not philosophical, but very profane: What do those who demand "equal rights" think they must give up on themselves once there actually are "equal rights"?

 

[CrimsonShadow]

Don’t twist my words. I never said that the movement only exists out of entitled people. But people like Gazi Kodman definitely aren’t part of the movement to end issues but for their own personal gain:

Also the movement that fights for black people doesn’t exist only out of black people but also out of people of all races. Sometimes I see the people that aren’t black get criticised and told they should mind their own business because they’re not black. And to me those people are just trying to feel entitled rather than solve the issue. Also your statement of working harder than other people is subjective. You think that, that doesn’t mean that you actually do since it’s not a measurable fact.

Wonderful. So you have more sympathy for people who are distrusted because they're not the group being targetted, than for the African-Americans who have been the target of forced relocation, near-genocidal levels of careless murder and lynching, legal disenfranchisement, etc.

It sounds like you've created a victim complex out of your own guilt for something that history is not debating. And then furthermore that you'd like to cherrypick some extreme examples and try to use them to represent an entire race of people -- which is actually exactly what you're complaining about the person doing in that video you linked.

And on top of that, you've added that I'm not actually working harder, but just imagining that I do.

It's sad, but if this is how you think about things then I can't help you. More power to you.

 

[Marlow]

Besides my actual question was not philosophical, but very profane: What do those who demand "equal rights" think they must give up on themselves once there actually are "equal rights"?

I'm not sure I agree with your premise. Equal rights for all doesn't mean I need to give up any right or resource or whatever. "Equal rights for others does not mean less rights for you. This isn't pie" as they say. This would be like asking what right or resource people in the American South gave up when slavery became illegal. Or what right/resource men gave up when women gained the right to vote.

 

[jokey77]

Well, I'd say that it actually is a pie. - You have to make decisions about power and resource distribution.
Of course the end of slavery or the women's right to vote meant a shift of power. - It is just that it was a good one!

Another example would be Affirmative Action. There are only a limited number of study places at a university. So if POC get the "right" to easier access to university, then other young people have to give something up.

You have to see both sides. Just to demand "more rights", that is too easy.

 

[Pangolin-man]

This thread has been about racism in the FGC and the USA. I am not really a member of the FGC. I watch some tournaments when I can and some here to watch tip videos when I have the time to play. However, I have never been to a tournament and probably never will. I am too busy with life to ever make that happen. Most of my free time goes to animal rescue and conservation. So, I can't really speak to what happens in the FGC. What FChamp did was gross and he should have been banned. While I initially think people should get a second chance, apparently FChamp has a history of doing things like this so he should been banned for repeated actions.

Now back to the USA. The reason I feel the need to be so hard on the USA is because the United States and its people constantly and routinely talk about how the US is a land of freedom and supporter of human rights throughout the world. Yet, we all know the truth is far from it. With this in mind, I don't have time for whataboutism from some posters here. "I succeeded in America." "So many immigrants come here from all over the world." This can all be true.

However, we should be talking about how the US does not live up to its ideals and never has. We can easily list the crimes of other cultures and nations such as Russia, China, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Japan, etc. We can look up the rampant racism of non-European countries like China and Japan that goes on to this very day. We can look up the colonial crimes of the UK and France. In many ways, the US is superior to these countries. But, nobody believes for a second that Russia or China are actually bastions for human rights. And even the UK and France don't go on and on about being the cradle of liberty. But this thread is about the US, not these others countries.

The United States should get extra criticism because it constantly makes the claims of being a champion of human rights and liberty and never living up to it. First off, it was founded on a lie. "All men are created equal." Yet, it was founded on the genocide of the First Nation peoples and the slavery of African peoples. These are the two original sins of the US and it has never EVER dealt with them with the scrutiny and moral clarity it deserves.

If you can seriously watch the videos of George Floyd and Jacob Blake, and not acknowledge that there are still deep-seated racial issues in this country, we really are at a loss. Kyle Rittenhouse can walk up to the police with an AR-15 slung over his shoulder and they ask him where the shooting happened instead of telling him to get his ass on the ground. Amadou Diallo pulls out his wallet, gets shot 41 times, and all of the officers are acquitted. Dylann Roof murders 9 African Americans while they were praying, runs across state lines, and gets arrested without incident. Do you really think a black guy would simply get arrested if he killed 9 white people in a church and then fled across state lines? Eric Garner gets choked to death on camera for selling loose cigarettes. All of the officers get acquitted. This has been going on for 400 years.

And of course, we don't even mention the mistreatment of First Nation peoples in this country. Look up the Standing Rock protests. The Dakota access pipeline was being put straight through 380 archaeological sites that are considering sacred to native peoples. Not only were they purposefully and systematically murdered in the past, but now even their cultural and grave sites are being desecrated. Many different indigenous nations peacefully protested citing treaties with the US government. They were treated with drones, police in military gear, water hoses in sub-degree temperatures, attack dogs, and removed by force. The protestors were strip-searched, had numbers marked on their arms, and were held in dog kennels.

Meanwhile, a bunch of armed militia members and white supremacists led by Ammon Bundy seize the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in Oregon in order to protest the convictions of local reactionaries who committed arson on public lands. This went on for 6 weeks. The police actually let them come and go for the first few weeks. What happens? Most get to surrender peacefully and serve little to no jail time. Several of them even lead the police on a high speed chase. The cops still use rubber bullets and only shoot LaVoy Finicum after he tries to run a road block, is caught on tape taunting the officers to shoot him, ignores their orders several times, and finally gets shot after he reaches for a gun that he actually had. Do you really think if a group of black or latino men did the same thing it would have ended the same?

All of these instances demonstrate, over and over and over again, the double standards and racism that still go on in the United States. If you are black, you get choked to death for selling loose cigarettes. If you are white, you can lead an armed standoff with the FBI for six weeks and get probation. If that is not white privilege, I don't know what else it could possibly be.

 

[KingHippo]

Another issue is the loose usage of the word racism by social justice warriors, the most recent example being King Hippo, to whom I indicated that some liberal news media personalities have big donors too. I mentioned George Soros as a financier and he immediately implies that I am an anti-semite. LOL! King Hippo constantly trashes Ben Shapiro, who is also Jewish, but because I am no raging intersectionalist, I do not prescribe King Hippo's aversion to Ben Shapiro as antisemitism bit rather as political.

I trash Ben Shapiro on the honest merit of what comes out of his mouth, which, when not brutally racist, is also just shite and based in misinformation and an earnest hatred.

George Soros is often linked, as others have mentioned, as the head of a cabal trying to "destroy America", a conspiracy which first got legs in white nationalism forums who wore their anti semitism as a badge of honor. As white nationalism has ascended in American politics (notice almost every major right wing politician has changed their framing of the other as "destroying America"), so has this conspiracy theory, which had no meat then and even less so now.

One can not be a racist in their heart but still spread propaganda that is founded in hate because they don't know any better. You do this a lot, and knowing that Shapiro and basically Turning Point USA are some of your consumed media, that's not surprising. This is why I suggested a change in media consumption, it rots your brain.

 

[Marlow]

Of course the end of slavery or the women's right to vote meant a shift of power. - It is just that it was a good one!

It still doesn't make sense. Treating people fairly isn't a zero sum game. Treating some people fairly doesn't mean having to treat other people less fairly.

 

[Onryoki]

Wonderful. So you have more sympathy for people who are distrusted because they're not the group being targetted, than for the African-Americans who have been the target of forced relocation, near-genocidal levels of careless murder and lynching, legal disenfranchisement, etc.

It sounds like you've created a victim complex out of your own guilt for something that history is not debating. And then furthermore that you'd like to cherrypick some extreme examples and try to use them to represent an entire race of people -- which is actually exactly what you're complaining about the person doing in that video you linked.

And on top of that, you've added that I'm not actually working harder, but just imagining that I do.

It's sad, but if this is how you think about things then I can't help you. More power to you.

What? I don’t see how you can distrust people that are willing to fight with you against these issues. So yeah, when allies get told to mind their own business while they clearly just want to show support I do show sympathy towards them. Is that an issue with you?

I actually didn’t create a victim complex. I linked that video that not every black person has the right intentions and that some just want to feel entitled. I linked him because he’s an example of said people. Maybe a extreme example but still an example. And yes, you aren’t working harder that’s subjective. If something being subjective is an issue with you, then you have to deal with it.

 

[Dankster Morgan]

I trash Ben Shapiro on the honest merit of what comes out of his mouth, which, when not brutally racist, is also just shite and based in misinformation and an earnest hatred.

George Soros is often linked, as others have mentioned, as the head of a cabal trying to "destroy America", a conspiracy which first got legs in white nationalism forums who wore their anti semitism as a badge of honor. As white nationalism has ascended in American politics (notice almost every major right wing politician has changed their framing of the other as "destroying America"), so has this conspiracy theory, which had no meat then and even less so now.

One can not be a racist in their heart but still spread propaganda that is founded in hate because they don't know any better. You do this a lot, and knowing that Shapiro and basically Turning Point USA are some of your consumed media, that's not surprising. This is why I suggested a change in media consumption, it rots your brain.

I only watch Ben Shapiro when he's in a meme, genuine question no bait, what has he said that's brutally racist?

 

[CrimsonShadow]

I linked that video that not every black person has the right intentions

Name an ethnic group where every person has the right intentions.

That's the entire point -- it's to not reduce entire groups of people into a single amorphous entity. The problem is that we did do that here, for multiple centuries, and now we need to clean up the fallout. So people simply bringing up their experience/the history of it is just that -- experience, and history. If you feel guilty about those two things, that's your decision.

I don't understand what statements like this are even supposed to prove, or in what way they are helpful.

 

[Dankster Morgan]

Name an ethnic group where every person has the right intentions.

That's the entire point -- it's to not reduce entire groups of people into a single amorphous entity. The problem is that we did do that here, for multiple centuries, and now we need to clean up the fallout. So people simply bringing up their experience/the history of it is just that -- experience, and history. If you feel guilty about those two things, that's your decision.

I don't understand what statements like this are even supposed to prove, or in what way they are helpful.

Exactly. Goes further than that too, even. Not just race, but people from different nationalities, religions, and belief systems aren't all going to have the same quality of character... obviously.

 

[KingHippo]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/695622179874967552

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/116002989570920448

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/25712847277

"Here is the bottom line: If you believe that the Jewish state has a right to exist, then you must allow Israel to transfer the Palestinians and the Israeli-Arabs from Judea, Samaria, Gaza and Israel proper. It's an ugly solution, but it is the only solution" - Source: https://townhall.com/columnists/benshapiro/2003/08/27/transfer-is-not-a-dirty-word-n976781

"“The Obama administration is racist. … The next race war will come not from racist whites, but from racist blacks and Hispanics who feel empowered to act on their racism by an administration that excuses all minority misbehavior.” - Shapiro, Obama's Race War, 2010

Shapiro was full on racies in the 2000's and early 2010's, and recently switched to dogwhistling about kneeling in the NFL and "divisive racial theory" contributing to the victimization of white men in order to appear reasonable, but still acts as if Blacks and Palestinians are barely human

 

[Pangolin-man]

We can have academic discussions about Luhmann and Foucault. Hell, I enjoy that stuff a lot. However, this stuff matters very little in the real world and is irrelevant to the poor and oppressed. All too often, it is just mental masturbation. This is why I prefer people like Noam Chomsky, Cornel West, and Chris Hedges. First, they communicate in a clear and concise manner that everybody can understand. Second, they actually go out into the real world, protest, get arrested, make sacrifices, etc.

This relates to someone like Thomas Paine, who is the most important Founding Father and the only one who was not a hypocrite on some level. He wrote Common Sense in everyday language that people understood and gave all of the money to support the Continental Army. He was for abolition, women's suffrage, direct democracy, secularism, and a universal social safety net BACK THEN. History smiles favorably upon him. Not so much for Thomas Jefferson. Yet, there is still not a single national monument to Thomas Paine in the United States. There was piece of legislation that was signed by Bush I that secured funds for one, but nothing has been done since. Considering Paine went after people like Washington and Jefferson, was against the aristocracy of the time, believed in actual equality for all, was the only one to protest slavery, and vehemently went after organized religion, I think it is pretty obvious why there are no national monuments to him and he barely gets mentioned in basic American history classes in schools. By the way, he died alone in New York and only 6 people went to his funeral. 2 of those people were freed black men because of his stance on abolition.


With all of this in mind, and since several people here have decided to share personal anecdotes about their life experiences, I want to address the following from @jokey77

However I have great personal respect for those (few) leftists who understand by "equal rights" that they themselves would have to give up something. Thus I ask the left leaning people in this thread: What would you give up in order to fight systemic racism or other inequalities?

I have been working with animal rescues and conservation for 24 years, since I was 14. I have a degree in biology. I have worked at several major zoological institutions accredited by the American Zoo and Aquarium Association. Long story short, some of the places, not all, I worked at had severe animal care and welfare issues. One had a rabies outbreak. Another had five endangered mammal specimens die in one week.

I worked at a major aquarium that had severe animal welfare issues. Their idea of pest control was shooting birds with BB guns. Several of the exhibits were falling apart and one of the animals, a mammal, almost drowned through negligence. I blew the whistle on this place to the USDA. They were fined over a million dollars and had to fix all of their violations or get shut down permanently. I quit in protest after this. They know I am the one that blew the whistle. So, now as a result, I am blacklisted. I don't want to work in the field anymore due to several bad experiences. But, if I found another place that I liked and wanted to work, I won't get in because I am a whistleblower. I can't prove it, but I have had several discussions with people who basically confirmed it. So, in other words, I gave up the only job I ever wanted in my life to try to do the right thing. I still do trainings with places that let me and I keep several endangered rescued animals at my house, but no one is ever going to give me a full-time job again.

I would be more than willing to give up more money in taxes to fund social programs or sacrifice something else in order to end systemic racism. I am white but I realize that I still do not have to deal with certain situations that minorities have to put up with on a daily basis.

In other words, talk is cheap. You have to be willing to do something about it. I have before and am willing to do it again.

 

[M2Dave]

I don't think I've ever said this -- I'm not looking for proof from the present day going backward. I've made the point several times that what we have is the result of our nation's history going forward. We are barely one lifetime away from the time days you could not vote and do many other things unless you were white. That has lingering consequences that are not erased overnight.

I've never spoken to 'any inequity in the system' -- I have, however, spoken to very specific inequities, that stem from specific historical policies, attitudes, and actions. And I've posted direct links to the line the connects from the recent decades of our history to these lingering forms of injustice in the present day.

It goes without saying that there are all forms of discrimination and injustice to consider -- income-based, gender-based, background-based, gaps in education, etc. Not every form of injustice is racism or racially-motivated. But the reason that nearly every form of injustice falls harder on African-Americans in this country is that decades of disenfranchising and discrimination have left African-Americans statistically living in worse areas, with less expendable income, lower-quality education, and less access to important resources.

This IS the history of social development in our country. We each have our own job to do, but the playing field is not equal for everyone. If you can't accept both, you are being willfully blind in a way that's convenient for you.

I am not disagreeing with your premise. My question, again, for the 1000th time, is what is your solution? Implying that if all white people acknowledged their "white privilege", black lives would be infinitely better is not a serious solution to any inequity.

In my opinion, Onryoki has the right frame of mind and attitude in this post. Unfortunately, life is not fair and never will be. First, it is the government's job to ensure that all citizens are equally protected under the law, but then it is up to individuals to do what they can in order to live a dignified life.

 

[Onryoki]

I am not disagreeing with your premise. My question, again, for the 1000th time, is what is your solution? Implying that if all white people acknowledged their "white privilege", black lives would be infinitely better is not a serious solution to any inequity.

In my opinion, Onryoki has the right frame of mind and attitude in this post. Unfortunately, life is not fair and never will be. First, it is the government's job to ensure that all citizens are equally protected under the law, but then it is up to individuals to do what they can in order to live a dignified life.

Very that. To me ranting about these issues online are pointless. Wether people like it or not, racism and homophobia etc will never end. Because there’s always gonna be people that are racist and homophobic. We should fight it by educating people.

The protests of the victims killed by police brutality are pointless. The injustice is awful and I really feel bad about the people that got killed by the police, but honestly them being another trending hashtag and hot topic for a few months is just awful. I always see people say “Justice for x person” but how many of these victims actually get justice? What is the justice people of the BLM movement seek? Even if the police officers get arrested and thrown in jail, what change does that make? These people are still casualties, there are still racist police officers that abuse their power.

The only way to truly solve this vicious cycle according to people is to have more POC in the police force. This to me is a crock of shit, because it’s like people forget that POC can also be racist towards their own and other races. We just have to educate people and have conversations with them instead of labelling them “racist” and be hateful because it doesn’t change anything. I actually went into a conversation with a homophobic person and was able to make him realise that there was nothing wrong with being gay. I wish people would be reasonable for once and listen to both sides of an argument.

 

[scarsunseen]

Rugged individualism is awesome when your born into a family who already has things. Duh.

 

[M2Dave]

As far as the United States failing to live up to standards in terms of freedom and equality, I disagree, but your point is taken. I think few people, even liberals, would deny that the United States has been trying hard to correct the sins of the past.

However, if social justice warriors intend to make genuine difference in the world, why not focus on parts of the world where black people are legally discriminated against, women are forced into marriages and polygamy, and gay men and women are executed?

Every single social justice warrior who prioritizes one over the other is a massive hypocrite and anti-American.

 

[scarsunseen]

Why is everyone a communist, Marxist, and anti-American if they don't agree with you? Joseph McCarthy, anyone?

 

[KingHippo]

black people are legally discriminated against, women are forced into marriages and polygamy

So...America?