To all the "Good Liberals": A Rant for our Times.

[JohnG]

I think another aspect to this is that inequality is costly.

Ethical arguments aside, people making less money because of race or gender costs money in more ways than one. There is no benefit to marginalizing anyone, only detriment even from purely a financial perspective.

There's lots of solid data re: pay inequity.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Neither was Mao. One wanted a master race to rule over all. The other wanted to level the playing field, destroy the elites and keep more from rising up. Both were horrible dictators who did horrible things.



Depends on what you mean by levelling the playing field. Equality of opportunity or equality of outcome? At a group or individual level? Fair treatment to all, or equal numbers for everything? Also depends on what wars. Not fighting wars is also how Hitlers win them.

(Emphasis added)

I think this is the heart of the issue. So many on the left use outcome as a measure of justice, when the proper yardstick is opportunity. They assume any difference in outcome is due to a difference in opportunity--which is only true if you count their own family/cultural situation as part of opportunity.

Bullshit. Inequality of outcome is a possible indicator of an inequality of opportunity.

Your side repeatedly takes it as proof of inequality of opportunity. In reality, all it means is one should look for why. It's merely a screening test, not a result.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Jebus! Talk about Moore-Coulter!

When you want to read a book and you've got a dark side of a room and a side of a room with a faltering flickering light, its not wrong to worry about that light going out, and its not good to unscrew the bulb.

You call a strawman a flickering light.

Noam Chomsky is in his eighties going strong fighting the good fight.

If Chomsky said it and it's not about language, it's probably wrong.

 

[laughing dog]

Your side repeatedly takes it as proof of inequality of opportunity.

Prove it. Certainly someone who consistently takes the position that "Inequality of outcome is a possible indicator of an inequality of opportunity." does not take it as automatic proof.

[
In reality, all it means is one should look for why. It's merely a screening test, not a result.

I see. You need smaller words to understand what I wrote.

The big difference is that people like you automatically refuse to deny there is a "why".

 

[AthenaAwakened]

bad post

 

[AthenaAwakened]

You forgot to quote this part

People who will fight the fight until they feel a slight then watch out.

Incidents of hatred are on the rise and frankly, I don't have time to constantly make "good liberals" feel warm and safe and praised for their goodness.

You clearly want to attack X, but you realize that doing so causes a slight to some "good liberals". You don't want to say not all X and you don't want to have to go out of your way to make them feel warm and safe. Warm and safe from what? From your prejudice.

Where have I misread this?

These "good liberals" you speak of get so sensitive and fragile because they want to be on the side of right and good, on your side, but you evidently make them feel like they are lumped in with your targets. Why do you suppose that could be, and do you think it has nothing to do with how you are speaking about the group you identify them with?

This is not an attack. Not wanting to be responsible of making privileged people feel warm and fuzzy is not an attack. And since you have no idea about the real life events that made me write the rant in the first place, you might want to back up instead of getting your back up every time I say something that pricks your oh so sensitive feelings.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Not wanting to be responsible of making privileged people feel warm and fuzzy is not an attack.

Yes, it is an attack, and they see it as an attack on them since you refuse to distinguish them, which is why they snap back on you. Lumping them in with Y just because they happen to be X is what we call prejudice. You claim to know something about that prejudice thing, right? Well its not exclusive to people who are not you. You do it too. This OP is a demonstration.

And since you have no idea about the real life events that made me write the rant in the first place, you might want to back up instead of getting your back up every time I say something that pricks your oh so sensitive feelings.

You have not pricked my oh so sensitive feelings. I would wager heavily that I don't belong to the identity group you had in mind when you made your OP. Even if I do, it doesn't matter. Whatever sparked your rant is as irrelevant as whatever sparks Richard Spencer's rants. You are using the same bad reasoning and generalization that he is. I bet he gets annoyed too when people who identify with groups he attacks fire back at him too, because they are not that thing he says that whole group is. Sound familiar yet?

When somebody talks about single motherhood, deadbeat dads, glorification of violence in music, and the crime and poverty rate of "blacks". How does that make you feel? If one were to presume you are a poor uneducated single mother prone to using drugs and prone to voilence because of the colour of your skin... would that make you snap at them? Would it help if they told you they don't want to have to make you feel warm and safe and say "not all blacks" all the time? What if they didn't say you specifically, but were sitting with you and just said "that's how black people are" as you were helping them with prejudices and unfair treatment towards them. Methinks you would lose your shit, and rightly so.

 

[laughing dog]

This is your first mention of "privileged people". Before you were talking about "good liberals" who turn on you when you identify them with X and say X are Y, when they are not Y, and you don't want to have to excuse them from being Y as you make your statement. Yes, it is an attack, and they see it as an attack on them since you refuse to distinguish them, which is why they snap back on you.

Saying someone does not have time to deal with the hypersensitive feelings is not an attack. And why do you assume that these people "snap" at AA? Is it because that is what you do? Hmmm.

As your prior hissyfit and this hissyfit reveals, it is clear AA more than pricked your "liberal" feelings so that you erupted into 2 unwarranted personal attacks.

[

 

[LordKiran]

Meh scrap.

 

[zorq]

I interpreted AA's OP similarly to the way that JP did.

AA seemed to be saying that she doesn't want to take the time to recognize the emotions of others who claim to want to help her. But my question is,why the heck not?

"Please" and "Thank you" don't disappear or lose their power just because you are "fighting for your life." If anything, circumstances this dire would indicate that you could use all the help you can get by any means necessary! But AA thinks that taking her allies' feelings into consideration is just too high a price to pay. Give me a break. Woman up and take the time to treat your friends with respect or they won't be your friends for long. This isn't rocket science.

 

[Axulus]

It seems like AA is preaching at "good liberals" about her usual canards: white privilege, male privilege, while fragility, black lives matter and the brutality of police, and then gets annoyed when they push back against her over-generalizations and mischaracterizations based on someone's skin color, sex or law enforcement occupation.

On top of it, she interprets any criticism of her views as originating not from perceived legitimate problems/weaknesses in her preachings but rather a "bruised ego", which to me is a symptom of the belief that one's own views are infallible and/or morally superior.

The net result is to be divisive against people who are otherwise your allies on the vast majority of issues, tending to drive away their support for failure to pass some sort of ideological purity test.

 

[Politesse]

If anything, circumstances this dire would indicate that you could use all the help you can get by any means necessary!

"Any means necessary?" Really?

So she should be happy for anything that comes along, even if it's not actually at all helpful? Forget that! You want to be someone's friend, be their friend whether or not they "thank" you for it. No one owes you gratitude, especially if they didn't ask for the thing you think you're gifting them with. You want respect, give it. Don't try to take it.

 

[Axulus]

If anything, circumstances this dire would indicate that you could use all the help you can get by any means necessary!

"Any means necessary?" Really?

So she should be happy for anything that comes along, even if it's not actually at all helpful? Forget that! You want to be someone's friend, be their friend whether or not they "thank" you for it. No one owes you gratitude, especially if they didn't ask for the thing you think you're gifting them with. You want respect, give it. Don't try to take it.

Accusing a friend of having a "bruised ego" when they criticize your arguments/position is not a very friendly thing to do. It has nothing to do with owing anyone gratitude. It is just common decency.

 

[Politesse]

Accusing a friend of having a "bruised ego" when they criticize your arguments/position is not a very friendly thing to do.

She's not the one claiming to be "friends" with people who she isn't actually on board with.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I interpreted AA's OP similarly to the way that JP did.

AA seemed to be saying that she doesn't want to take the time to recognize the emotions of others who claim to want to help her. But my question is,why the heck not?

"Please" and "Thank you" don't disappear or lose their power just because you are "fighting for your life." If anything, circumstances this dire would indicate that you could use all the help you can get by any means necessary! But AA thinks that taking her allies' feelings into consideration is just too high a price to pay. Give me a break. Woman up and take the time to treat your friends with respect or they won't be your friends for long. This isn't rocket science.

And no one has yet asked why I wrote the rant.

No where have I said anything about not saying please or thank you. No one has notice the scare quotes around "good liberals". I have not claimed these people are my allies. On specific legislation, that may be case, but my allies don't berate entire groups of people because they feel that group, en masse, stood up a candidate at his meet and greet. Yeah that is what this about.

A local candidate had a meet and greet. No African American supporters showed up. This upset not the candidate, but a woman who was there. She then got on social media and had a tirade about the Negro Community (yes she used the word negro because she thinks it's 1950) not wanting to meet the candidate halfway. It was explained to her that the previous week, a beloved young person had died suddenly and over 700 hundred people had gone to that funeral which was at the same time as the meet and greet and the many of the people who would have gone to that were at the funeral instead. This was a meeting of people who could deliver donations and votes. The black people who can do that were at the funeral. Instead of saying I didn't know and I'm sorry. this woman doubled down. and in the process attacked a member of the discussion who is an african american man running for sheriff in a neighboring county who had been putting out racial fires all week ranging from a group of white nationalists pulling up his lawn signs, to being called a nigger at a public gathering and having his life threatened for running for sheriff in the first place. And throughout all of this, the woman who started this felt she was the wronged party and black people were being ungrateful and unreasonable. and here's the kicker. The candidate she feels was slighted, did not ask her to do this, would not ask her to this, and has spent decades doing good work and building good will in the black community. I know this and that's why I'm working on his campaign. Good reputation which she is now in the process of erasing.

So forgive me if I don't feel obligated to make this woman and people like her feel all warm and fuzzy and oh so greatly appreciated.

 

[Axulus]

I interpreted AA's OP similarly to the way that JP did.

AA seemed to be saying that she doesn't want to take the time to recognize the emotions of others who claim to want to help her. But my question is,why the heck not?

"Please" and "Thank you" don't disappear or lose their power just because you are "fighting for your life." If anything, circumstances this dire would indicate that you could use all the help you can get by any means necessary! But AA thinks that taking her allies' feelings into consideration is just too high a price to pay. Give me a break. Woman up and take the time to treat your friends with respect or they won't be your friends for long. This isn't rocket science.

And no one has yet asked why I wrote the rant.

No where have I said anything about not saying please or thank you. No one has notice the scare quotes around "good liberals". I have not claimed these people are my allies. On specific legislation, that may be case, but my allies don't berate entire groups of people because they feel that group, en masse, stood up a candidate at his meet and greet. Yeah that is what this about.

A local candidate had a meet and greet. No African American supporters showed up. This upset not the candidate, but a woman who was there. She then got on social media and had a tirade about the Negro Community (yes she used the word negro because she thinks it's 1950) not wanting to meet the candidate halfway. It was explained to her that the previous week, a beloved young person had died suddenly and over 700 hundred people had gone to that funeral which was at the same time as the meet and greet and the many of the people who would have gone to that were at the funeral instead. This was a meeting of people who could deliver donations and votes. The black people who can do that were at the funeral. Instead of saying I didn't know and I'm sorry. this woman doubled down. and in the process attacked a member of the discussion who is an african american man running for sheriff in a neighboring county who had been putting out racial fires all week ranging from a group of white nationalists pulling up his lawn signs, to being called a nigger at a public gathering and having his life threatened for running for sheriff in the first place. And throughout all of this, the woman who started this felt she was the wronged party and black people were being ungrateful and unreasonable. and here's the kicker. The candidate she feels was slighted, did not ask her to do this, would not ask her to this, and has spent decades doing good work and building good will in the black community. I know this and that's why I'm working on his campaign. Good reputation which she is now in the process of erasing.

So forgive me if I don't feel obligated to make this woman and people like her feel all warm and fuzzy and oh so greatly appreciated.

Thank you for providing the context, but where is the part about the "but not all ______ people" in response to "your truth"? If it doesn't relate directly to this incident, can you please provide some examples you have in mind?

This woman sounds like a bit of a loon and should probably be ignored. At the very least she lacks compassion and empathy, not the type of person you want advocating for societal issues that often already suffer from a lack compassion and empathy.

 

[zorq]

If anything, circumstances this dire would indicate that you could use all the help you can get by any means necessary!

"Any means necessary?" Really?

So she should be happy for anything that comes along, even if it's not actually at all helpful?

You are contradicting yourself. If help isn't helpful then it was never help to beginwith. And AA doesn't seem to be complaining about non-helpful help anyway. We don't know what she is complaining about at all because she won't say except that she doesn't think some people who are trying to help her are worthy of her considetation.

Forget that! You want to be someone's friend, be their friend whether or not they "thank" you for it. No one owes you gratitude, especially if they didn't ask for the thing you think you're gifting them with. You want respect, give it. Don't try to take it.

You want respect, give it. Don't try to take it.

Sounds like perfect advice for AA. It is nearly impossible to achieve political goals in a democracy without broad respect. She should be working to earn as much respect as she can by giving it ESPECIALLY to her allies.

 

[zorq]

I see AA's context went up while I was writing, and now I see this a big misunderstanding. The old lady reacted poorly because she didn't understand the context of the meet and greet because she was ignorant of the funeral, and some people here reacted poorly to AA's OP because they were ignorant of the context for AA's rant (because she didn't feel like sharing it until now.)

Ignorance breeds mistakes. Communication is key.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So forgive me if I don't feel obligated to make this woman and people like her feel all warm and fuzzy and oh so greatly appreciated.

And somehow we were supposed to know this from what you wrote....

You really expected us to guess the above rather than taking you at what you actually wrote?

I stand by my response to your OP as it was written. I'm glad you didn't mean it, if you didn't, but the points in response to it (if not you) stand.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I see AA's context went up while I was writing, and now I see this a big misunderstanding. The old lady reacted poorly because she didn't understand the context of the meet and greet because she was ignorant of the funeral, and some people here reacted poorly to AA's OP because they were ignorant of the context for AA's rant (because she didn't feel like sharing it until now.)

Ignorance breeds mistakes. Communication is key.

Not ignorance, but wishful thinking among a few in here.