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

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

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?

It doesn't upset me but nice try changing the subject. Once again, the op is saying not to shun these people but you advocated for it. Instead of addressing your disagreement with the op you chose to engage in sarcasm. Just admit it. Stop evading.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

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?

It doesn't upset me but nice try changing the subject. Once again, the op is saying not to shun these people but you advocated for it. Instead of addressing your disagreement with the op you chose to engage in sarcasm. Just admit it. Stop evading.

I wrote that shunning is a valid tactic but not always the best one. Saying that means I disagree with the OP is an unsubstantiated conclusion.

Why are you upset that the LP voted to kick out a fascist pedophile?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

It doesn't upset me but nice try changing the subject. Once again, the op is saying not to shun these people but you advocated for it. Instead of addressing your disagreement with the op you chose to engage in sarcasm. Just admit it. Stop evading.

I wrote that shunning is a valid tactic but not always the best one. Saying that means I disagree with the OP is an unsubstantiated conclusion.

No, you substantiated it. Now let's see if you can take it up with the op author or keep trying to argue based on tribalism or partisanship, whatever the heck it is.

Why are you upset that the LP voted to kick out a fascist pedophile?

I'm not. Don't really care. Nice try evading it though. Keep it up and don't tell the op author you disagree.

 

[Axulus]

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?

It doesn't upset me but nice try changing the subject. Once again, the op is saying not to shun these people but you advocated for it. Instead of addressing your disagreement with the op you chose to engage in sarcasm. Just admit it. Stop evading.

Shunning doesn't mean kicking someone out of a political party whose politics don't fit the party. It means rejecting them from any and all social gatherings and relationships.

Nice try though.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

No, you substantiated it.

What an interesting leap of illogic.

Now let's see if you can take it up with the op author or keep trying to argue based on tribalism or partisanship, whatever the heck it is.

Since I'm not in disagreement with the op author, then I have nothing to take up with him.

Why are you upset that the LP voted to kick out a fascist pedophile?

I'm not.

Obviously you are, the only question is why. Do you feel sympathy for the plight of that fascist pedophile?

 

[lpetrich]

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.

I agree. There is something very suspicious about that.

Stephen Miller: Trump’s Right-Hand Troll - The Atlantic on that staffer's history of right-wing trollishness. Something like Milo Yiannopoulos and Dinesh D'Souza.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

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.

Alright, so the plan now is to put fixing the far-right on the left-wing... and they'll do it by helping to normalize the far-right agenda by letting them us public institutions to spread their hate?

 

[Emily Lake]

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.

Well... when they do interact in an open and kind manner, they get called racists or racist supporters or racist evangelists or similar... so... I dunno where that leaves your argument, to be honest.

 

[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.

Well... when they do interact in an open and kind manner, they get called racists or racist supporters or racist evangelists or similar... so... I dunno where that leaves your argument, to be honest.

it leaves it untouched, since your response is an unsubstantiated assertion.

 

[Underseer]

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.

You poor thing. Do the mean liberals call you racist just because you say racist things?

That's so unfair!

I mean, sure, African-Americans are being murdered left and right, and their murderers almost always go free, but you get criticized when you say racist things. Why aren't more people more concerned about your feelings? Can't they see what a special snowflake you are and that you shouldn't be criticized?

Those awful libtards are so mean to you!

Here, let me try and soothe your hurt feelings.

You are a special snowflake and you are superior because you are white.

You are a special snowflake and you are superior because you are white.

You are a special snowflake and you are superior because you are white.

You are a special snowflake and you are superior because you are white.

You are a special snowflake and you are superior because you are white.

You are a special snowflake and you are superior because you are white.

I apologize for every time I failed to adequately consider your feelings. I hope you feel better now!

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Someone's upset about his "social club" losing members.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

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.

I agree strongly with both of you. Thumbs up!

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

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.

Maybe what they don't like even more is being told what they like and dont like, how they think, and who they are. Or maybe not, since that's also saying what they dont like.

Maybe they themselves can speak for themselves, and sit and and listen and explain their frustrations and reveal their misconceptions, and learn that others not like them are more like them than they thought. Maybe they can do that without us presuming every negative motivation and stereotype. Maybe that would work like the OP suggests.

 

[Underseer]

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

According to white supremacists, if you do not tolerate intolerance, you are the "real bigot."

If you criticize racists in any way, you are a mean person who is hurting their feewings and attacking their free speech because free speech means freedom from criticism (but only for opinions that promote white supremacism).

 

[Underseer]

For the record[ent]mdash[/ent]since unfortunately I have to come out and say this explicitly[ent]mdash[/ent]tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance, and love of hate is not love.

tolerance([ent]not[/ent]tolerance) = [ent]not[/ent]tolerance
love([ent]not[/ent]love) = [ent]not[/ent]love

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

What this guy is doing doesn't count as tolerance or intolerance. He's engaging in persuasion. I can see why that would upset you.

 

[braces_for_impact]

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.

Maybe what they don't like even more is being told what they like and dont like, how they think, and who they are. Or maybe not, since that's also saying what they dont like.

Maybe they themselves can speak for themselves, and sit and and listen and explain their frustrations and reveal their misconceptions, and learn that others not like them are more like them than they thought. Maybe they can do that without us presuming every negative motivation and stereotype. Maybe that would work like the OP suggests.

Let me grab my violin, this needs a song.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

The man who gave the talk in the OP is truly remarkable and we can all learn from his house example. It is not just specifically about how the left can engage the right, but how we can all engage with those we disagree with.

 

[Random Person]

For the record[ent]mdash[/ent]since unfortunately I have to come out and say this explicitly[ent]mdash[/ent]tolerance of intolerance is not tolerance, and love of hate is not love.

tolerance([ent]not[/ent]tolerance) = [ent]not[/ent]tolerance
love([ent]not[/ent]love) = [ent]not[/ent]love

Tolerance of what we already agree with isn't tolerance.

 

[braces_for_impact]

The man who gave the talk in the OP is truly remarkable and we can all learn from his house example. It is not just specifically about how the left can engage the right, but how we can all engage with those we disagree with.

No, it's not. He's standing on a stage at a TED conference precisely because he's a special case, a deviation from the norm. Why has he been so successful? Hard to say. Maybe he's uncommonly patient, courageous and persuasive. Maybe it's also some combination of luck. There's no way in hell I would ever advise most black people to do what this man has done. Put simply, it's not safe. It also wouldn't and isn't safe for trans people, or gays, hell, even some atheists could get into trouble doing something like this. The fact that there are people putting pressure on the left to change the dangerous, bigoted and dangerous attitudes of the right is in a word, ridiculous. What happened to personal responsibility? What about self improvement? A couple hundred years ago, is your contention that if only the slaves had befriended their masters we could have ended slavery without a civil war?

Get off your asses, pull your big boy pants up, and stop blaming everyone else for your bigoted, close minded views. Tired of people making you feel ashamed for the attitudes you display and the thoughts you verbalize? Try this. Find someone that makes you uncomfortable, whether it be race, sexual orientation, and so on, take some personal responsibility and approach that person, get to know them. It is your responsibility to cause change within yourself; it is not the victim's responsibility to dangerously approach others to change their attitude.

Grow the fuck up.