Why this black man attends KKK rallies - demonstrates how the left should rethink its engagement with the Alt-Right

[Axulus]

Very interesting story about how a black man attended KKK rallies and sat down with the Grand Wizard and eventually became friends with him:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORp3q1Oaezw[/youtube]

Daryl said he was willing to sit down, listen, and discuss. He agreed with certain things, and disagreed with others strongly. The grand wizard eventually left the KKK, in part because of Daryl's influence and willingness to discuss these topics calmly and listen.

Reminds me of another story on Derek Black, the son of the founder of Stormfront:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.958e374ee78c

The people at his college didn't shun him and try to shout him down. They attempted to engage with him. He too eventually left the white supremacist movement.

This is in contrast to the far left's tactic of shouting down speakers that come to campus, interrupting their talks, and trying their hardest to get them banned.

As Daryl says in the Ted Talk above, when both sides are talking, neither side is being violent. When you stop talking, that's when violence has an opportunity to enter. No one changes their mind with violence. Hate derives from fear, and fear derives from ignorance. Violence only increases fear.

Perhaps the left should rethink their tactics on dealing with white supremacists and those holding controversial opinions in general.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

How dare he not simply punch them! That must mean he supports them![/sarcasm]

 

[Emily Lake]

Perhaps the left should rethink their tactics on dealing with white supremacists and those holding controversial opinions in general.

In general, I agree. I would make the very minor alteration of saying that the right should also rethink their tactics when dealing with hot-button topics that the left holds dear, like equal rights, immigration, and welfare.

Honestly, it's just something that humans as a whole should try to work on. As long as we keep letting tribalism govern our interactions, we're mostly going to get polarization and violence as a result.

 

[TSwizzle]

Wow, talk about stepping into the lion's den ! Despite Daryl's remarkable achievement of getting the chief wizard hanging up his robe, I'm not convinced his approach would have a large scale impact on the average knuckle dragging racist/bigot to change their irrational ways.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

How dare he not simply punch them! That must mean he supports them![/sarcasm]

So the Libertarian Party shouldn't kick out Nazis, shunning them, but instead allow them to be in the Party and those who disagree can disagree rationally and those who can agree can agree.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So the Libertarian Party shouldn't kick out Nazis, shunning them, but instead allow them to be in the Party and those who disagree can disagree rationally and those who can agree can agree.

Does anyone on the forum know what you are talking about?

 

[Alcoholic Actuary]

Very interesting story about how a black man attended KKK rallies and sat down with the Grand Wizard and eventually became friends with him:

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORp3q1Oaezw[/youtube]

Daryl said he was willing to sit down, listen, and discuss. He agreed with certain things, and disagreed with others strongly. The grand wizard eventually left the KKK, in part because of Daryl's influence and willingness to discuss these topics calmly and listen.

Reminds me of another story on Derek Black, the son of the founder of Stormfront:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.958e374ee78c

The people at his college didn't shun him and try to shout him down. They attempted to engage with him. He too eventually left the white supremacist movement.

This is in contrast to the far left's tactic of shouting down speakers that come to campus, interrupting their talks, and trying their hardest to get them banned.

As Daryl says in the Ted Talk above, when both sides are talking, neither side is being violent. When you stop talking, that's when violence has an opportunity to enter. No one changes their mind with violence. Hate derives from fear, and fear derives from ignorance. Violence only increases fear.

Perhaps the left should rethink their tactics on dealing with white supremacists and those holding controversial opinions in general.

Really? Is it that binary? Can I do both? Converse with those willing to listen - but also shout down those who show up to protest (and shout and not listen)? Do I have to tolerate intolerance?

aa

 

[laughing dog]

So the Libertarian Party shouldn't kick out Nazis, shunning them, but instead allow them to be in the Party and those who disagree can disagree rationally and those who can agree can agree.

Does anyone on the forum know what you are talking about?

Perhaps you should look up the words you don't understand or ask specific questions about the parts you don't understand, because it should be pretty clear what it means to anyone who graduated from junior high school even if one disagrees with it.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

So the Libertarian Party shouldn't kick out Nazis, shunning them, but instead allow them to be in the Party and those who disagree can disagree rationally and those who can agree can agree.

Does anyone on the forum know what you are talking about?

The op is about SHUNNING Nazis/KKKers etc and having rational debate with them and how SHUNNING is bad/ineffectual. Although you leaped to talk about hitting, in another thread you stated that a Nazi pedophile was kicked out of the Libertarian Party. That is exactly shunning them. You seem to actually partly disagree with the op, but are hiding behind smug sarcasm so as to not address more complicated things in life. It's so much easier to engage in tribalism by making fun of people who want to slap a Nazi, isn't? But then isn't that also making such people out to be pariahs? So, yeah, I think you need to address this.

 

[prideandfall]

Perhaps the left should rethink their tactics on dealing with white supremacists and those holding controversial opinions in general.

perhaps the right should stop trying to frame the conversation as if it's the left's duty/problem/responsibility to make the right stop being raging cockbags.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So the Libertarian Party shouldn't kick out Nazis, shunning them, but instead allow them to be in the Party and those who disagree can disagree rationally and those who can agree can agree.

Does anyone on the forum know what you are talking about?

The op is about SHUNNING Nazis/KKKers etc and having rational debate with them and how SHUNNING is bad/ineffectual. Although you leaped to talk about hitting, in another thread you stated that a Nazi pedophile was kicked out of the Libertarian Party. That is exactly shunning them. You seem to actually partly disagree with the op, but are hiding behind smug sarcasm so as to not address more complicated things in life. It's so much easier to engage in tribalism by making fun of people who want to slap a Nazi, isn't? But then isn't that also making such people out to be pariahs? So, yeah, I think you need to address this.

You are babbling, there's no substance to address.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Evasion.

 

[braces_for_impact]

OR maybe the right should stop being racist pricks and blaming the left for them being racist pricks.

What this man did was nothing short of amazing. His talk is inspiring. But honestly, how does this translate to the real world? Shall we find a bunch of African Americans that have lots of time on their hands to go befriend every Stormfront member, Klansman, and Conservative they can find so they can make friends?

The bottom line of all of these recent "anti-politically correct" movements is simple. These assholes are tired of being made to be ashamed to be racists. They don't like the people of color that don't "know their place" and tell them so. They don't like the coastal elites that lecture them when they act like Philistines, they don't like the looks and comments they get from the public when they have a bigoted meltdown in Starbucks. They don't like the pile on they get from message boards and websites.

Along comes Trump and tells them they should be proud bigots, that they should not be ashamed. He comes out and opens his mouth and regurgitates all these all bigoted tropes without shame. It makes people that believe in equal rights angry when they see their fellow citizens treated that way. It makes those minorities realize that they DO NOT want to go back to the days when it was perfectly publicly acceptable to be a bigoted jerk. Instead of realizing that shame is there for a reason, these people get an erection at other's outrage and have learned that reveling in it gives them power and status relative to each other. It's "virtue signaling" of the lowest order.

Anymore, two very iconic American institutions are no longer what they once were. One is conservatism, which is no longer about the principles it used to stand for. There were always racist roots to the party, but at least there were other principles and the party as a whole recognized that racism makes our country worse and that things have improved since the civil rights era of the 60's. The other is religion. Again, it always had racist roots, but religion at least used to pay lip service to quite a different Jesus that most evangelicals uphold as an example today. These two institutions had overlap but were separate entities. For 30 years now, they have been one in the same. The result is a massive loss of membership, leaving mostly the hardcore fundamentalists in charge. The result is no less than what used to be two proud institutions are now merely empty shells that have become a refuge for bigotry. That is all. They have no ideas. No innovation. No forward momentum. They are reactionary in one major way: they are attempting to counter the loss of power they have lost in the public square, and in governance.

It's doomed to fail. Hating someone else for their race only gets you so far. As we are currently seeing with the GOP, they cannot govern. They have no new ideas, no real strategy, no policy arm to speak of anymore. Intelligencia is frowned upon, suspect and distorted at every turn because the reality is unfortunately for them, skewed in the opposite direction. It's gotten so bad for them that they now have taken on overtly Orwellian strategies to try and hold on to public opinion and power.

When your country is being slammed by increasing weather events because of climate change, and your rivers are full of junk because of loosened pollution restrictions and the very water is unsafe to drink; when a citizen is turned against citizen, and our allies move on in a world that is leaving the US behind, when the gap between rich and poor is ever increasing at an alarming rate, when even healthcare and food are being denied to these citizens so that the already fabulously wealthy among us can simply stash away more cash, you are talking about a series of events that are simply unsustainable. Things cannot go on this way, and they will find themselves increasingly unable to govern. Instead of spending the necessary funds to improve these things, they'll spend the money on corruption and litigation to fight for an ever increasingly larger piece of the pie.

They're tired of being ashamed, but God damn have they earned it.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Evasion.

Are you actually upset that the LP kicked out a fascist pedophile?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

So are you for shunning or against it? Just more evasion.

 

[Mumbles]

Yeah, known about him for years, I don't know why the people who supposedly champion "freedom" haven't.

I also wonder why they leave out that he often fails - and is sometimes beaten up or threatened. If he wishes to treat white supremacists and neo-nazis in that sort of manner, then that's fine. I don't have the time or the patience, and I'm not sure why it should be on me to be overwhelmingly kind directly in the face of violent and irrational hatred.

I have no issue with what Davis does, but I see no reason to think he should *have* to - it's the threat he puts himself under that makes him remarkably kind.

I'm nowhere near as kind as he is. I've stated openly that there are people I'd gladly kill, that I have no problem with, say, Jerry Sandusky living out the rest of his life in solitary confinement (yes, that is torture). I have no problem if some bigot's family wants to talk them out of it, or throw them out. It's up to them.

Now, some people insist that he's a role model for confronting white supremacists (which, in the end, is mostly a problem for white people to fix in the US), but also insist that, magically, only black people can do anything to assist people that live in inner cities. Seems like a serious contradiction to me.

 

[laughing dog]

I think the OP would be stronger if it also asked the same of people on the "right". Where are all of these so-called compassionate or moral conservatives interacting in an open and kind manner with these type of people? Hmmm.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Evasion.

Are you actually upset that the LP kicked out a fascist pedophile?

So are you for shunning or against it? Just more evasion.

I think shunning is better than violence. Apparently you are upset that a fascist was shunned instead of welcomed with open arms.

Shunning is nothing more than an application of the right of free association, the right to disassociate. There is nothing wrong with it, unless you are a fascist upset that you got shunned. Sometimes it isn't the best tactic, but it is always a valid one. Why does this upset you so much?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

So are you for shunning or against it? Just more evasion.

I think shunning is better than violence. Apparently you are upset that a fascist was shunned instead of welcomed with open arms.

Shunning is nothing more than an application of the right of free association, the right to disassociate. .... ..... ...

So you disagree with the op.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

So are you for shunning or against it? Just more evasion.

I think shunning is better than violence. Apparently you are upset that a fascist was shunned instead of welcomed with open arms.

Shunning is nothing more than an application of the right of free association, the right to disassociate. There is nothing wrong with it, unless you are a fascist upset that you got shunned. Sometimes it isn't the best tactic, but it is always a valid one. Why does this upset you so much?

So you disagree with the op.

Unsubstantiated conclusion.

Now why does it upset you that the LP voted to have nothing to do with a fascist pedophile?