White people get beat up too; where is the outrage, Jesse?!

[chairkicker]

and now i'm just backpedaling cause i'm an idiot and sounding like a stormfront "rationalist." i wish i could say anything that hit on this differently, but i can't. carry on.

[Self Destructive Zone]

no one is bending over backward for that reason. i wish i could make up for all the stupid things i said in that post, as i agree that no one is "bringing up race." the national outcry is more than healthy. anything to raise awareness under the circumstances is a good thing. i responded to the OP in the same way. i just wish that here, especially, the anger spawned from the whole thing was less a deciding factor in the discussion. you've willfully deflected salient points because of the banner that hangs over you if you don't and that shouldn't be the case. racism and stand your ground are not the only concerns

we will deal with the gated community menace in due time.

[mcphee2000]

I'm glad you clarified that, because that's exactly what I thought you were saying, but I think other people in this thread assumed you were trying to make a more reasonable argument and now they can see that you weren't.

If you don't see how that plays into my larger argument, which many people have understood, but you haven't, I don't know what to say. You are obviously a smart guy, but I don't think you are capable, or willing, to process thoughts you don't already agree with. Or maybe you are just taking this all too personally, because you can't seem to address any of my points with anything other than indignation or sarcasm.

There are subconscious reasons people are focusing on race (from both perspectives) to the exclusion of larger issue. Because if we move outside of the racial argument, which is limiting and reductive, we must look at the fact that the SYG law is a symptom of our government's increasing disregard for the well-being of the majority of its populous (and I don't mean racially), and then the systemic issue at hand becomes more about class than race. And by "taking sides" we are helping to reinforce the idea of two americas, and actually fostering an environment where things become more and more divided, which only serves to help prolong this disregard. This sort of division takes the pressure off the bigger problem, which is that a law was enacted almost exclusively to please a major lobby (and perhaps a group of Americans with a fucked idea of personal liberty as a lucky bonus), a law which has a very good chance of putting innocent people - of all races - in mortal danger. Which seems to go against any rational argument for the purpose of laws. By categorizing this as a "race issue" (of which there are plenty, more clear-cut examples), we distance ourselves from discussing these larger implications. At least subconsciously, it is an attempt to define who is affected - racists and the victims of racism. But this isn't Rodney King. It's a much greyer situation, and attempts to define it with a single social issue seem to do more harm than good, from my perspective. But I can understand why, subconsciously, people would do this. It's easier than admitting to ourselves that "we're all fucked."

And I'm too lazy to go quote the other response (not by you), but saying "everyone is directly affected by racism" is some kindergarten level ideology, and pretty fucking insulting to people who actually are. "Actually are directly affected by racism," that is, not "actually are kindergartners." Though maybe them, too.

[chairkicker]

that the topic is this delicate that no one can suggest race isn't the singular heart of the issue without being shut down is a problem. on this board it's a symptom of deeply ingrained guilt, since we carry the air of the informed, thoughtful and tolerant (except for the overweight - they brought it on themselves). we need to carry that guilt, that weight, but not for appearances. it isn't to say that i think anyone misunderstands me. it's just frustrating hitting a brick wall

[Paul Simon]

Stop race-baiting guys

[captain]

keep going guys, you almost made it to 100 pages

[iambic]

at the risk of prolonging this discussion, I think it's important for me to clarify that I think focusing on race in this situation is a cognitive defense for many people, because most people are neither overtly racist nor directly affected by racism. So they can look at this issue and be upset by it, while subconsciously distancing themselves from its implications.

Guys, I mean... this is just... this is just ridiculous. It's just laughable.

fwiw it's worth, I think the focus on race is neither a "cognitive defense" nor at all inappropriate. I just think the coverage of it by the media is predictable, illuminates or elucidates nothing, and is ultimately unhelpful in preventing future 'justifiable' (both legally justifiable, and for some culturally justifiable) shootings of a similar kind.

[universe]

If you don't see how that plays into my larger argument, which many people have understood, but you haven't, I don't know what to say. You are obviously a smart guy, but I don't think you are capable, or willing, to process thoughts you don't already agree with. Or maybe you are just taking this all too personally, because you can't seem to address any of my points with anything other than indignation or sarcasm.

I'm not sure why you think I'm taking this personally. I've repeatedly said what my problem with your "argument" is. I think it's absurd to claim (which you are doing repeatedly) that people are only focusing on race because it serves some self-righteous self-interest. I think people are focusing on race because it's an actual element of this crime, and I don't think addressing that issue is detrimental to the other aspects of the case, like stand your ground.

[universe]

that the topic is this delicate that no one can suggest race isn't the singular heart of the issue without being shut down is a problem.

Wait a second, that's not what's happening. What's happening is that people in this thread were discussing a variety of topics, including race and stand your ground and gun control, and then mcphee (and you) came in and said "everyone needs to stop talking about race, it's not a major issue here."

[manierisme]

I know it's the Washington Times, but jesus christ.

http://times247.com/articles/the-rise-of-the-black-klan

[Platypus]

zimmerman's motivations aside, it's hard to imagine that the police would have treated the incident similarly if the victim had been white

There are subconscious reasons people are focusing on race (from both perspectives) to the exclusion of larger issue. Because if we move outside of the racial argument, which is limiting and reductive, we must look at the fact that the SYG law is a symptom of our government's increasing disregard for the well-being of the majority of its populous (and I don't mean racially), and then the systemic issue at hand becomes more about class than race.

conversely there may be subconscious reasons why some would want to center the discussion on the validity of SYG, how it came to pass etc. as opposed to the 'too simplistic or 'reductive' focus on race when, actually, there's nothing reductive about racism - quite the opposite.

I also tend to focus on class rather than race as the crux of the injustice but this may be due to the fact that I think I can wrap my mind around class and wealth distribution etc and so I can at least fantasize about solutions. But racism confounds me. I don't really understand where all the threads lead and I don't even really know where I'm situated in relation to it other than what I tell myself and others. So instead of trying to unravel it, which seems impossible to me, I often pick one of the threads - class - and probably assign to it an inflated importance because it's something I can grasp

[addison]

universe always slays in ethical matters
dude's our rachel maddow

[darger]

kind of shitshow but that thread is on its way out:

Newt Gingrich, in his speech to the National Rifle Association, said he hopes the NRA won’t be offended, but the group has been “too timid.”

“A Gingrich presidency will submit to the United Nations a treaty that extends the right to bear arms as a human right for every person on the planet,” Gingrich said.

[badhat]

universe always slays in ethical matters
dude's our rachel maddow

oh my god

[can]

I know it's the Washington Times, but jesus christ.

http://times247.com/articles/the-rise-of-the-black-klan

my favorite part of the article:

The danger of black revanchism is that, if it remains unchecked, it may trigger a counterreaction among whites. For every Farrakhan there could be a David Duke.

"be careful black racists or you might just provoke white people to become racist in return"

[universe]

I was about to ask for that custom title but I see badhat is one step ahead

[badhat]

would you prefer caps or no caps?

[darger]

haha

[Feech La Manna]

o/

[waldojeffers1]

kind of shitshow but that thread is on its way out:

Newt Gingrich, in his speech to the National Rifle Association, said he hopes the NRA won’t be offended, but the group has been “too timid.”

“A Gingrich presidency will submit to the United Nations a treaty that extends the right to bear arms as a human right for every person on the planet,” Gingrich said.

jesus christ

[pablito]

very nice

[universe]

No caps I think

[WAC]

I know it's the Washington Times, but jesus christ.

http://times247.com/articles/the-rise-of-the-black-klan

kind of shitshow but that thread is on its way out:

Newt Gingrich, in his speech to the National Rifle Association, said he hopes the NRA won’t be offended, but the group has been “too timid.”

“A Gingrich presidency will submit to the United Nations a treaty that extends the right to bear arms as a human right for every person on the planet,” Gingrich said.

It's gonna be that kind of day, huh

[ssshhhooo]

i read today that the NRA is planning to spend $30 million to oppose Obama's re-election.

[chairkicker]

that the topic is this delicate that no one can suggest race isn't the singular heart of the issue without being shut down is a problem.

Wait a second, that's not what's happening. What's happening is that people in this thread were discussing a variety of topics, including race and stand your ground and gun control, and then mcphee (and you) came in and said "everyone needs to stop talking about race, it's not a major issue here."

what i said was a leading, unfair generalization, but what actually happened is that mcphee laid out his frustrations with the focus of the case and you responded, not as our rachel maddow, but as our own penn jillette (unfortunate politics withstanding). the back and forth from this has been the consistent pull of the thread since then, not the desire for anyone to tell the board to stop talking about race.

[ssshhhooo]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/13/national-rifle-association-annual-meeting-obama?newsfeed=true

[universe]

[Feech La Manna]

would love to be a fly on the wall there just to hear the SYG discussions

[worrywort]

what you need to keep in mind is that badhat doesn't like rachel maddow

[sideshow raheem]

kind of shitshow but that thread is on its way out:

Newt Gingrich, in his speech to the National Rifle Association, said he hopes the NRA won’t be offended, but the group has been “too timid.”

“A Gingrich presidency will submit to the United Nations a treaty that extends the right to bear arms as a human right for every person on the planet,” Gingrich said.

holy fuuuuuccccck this is amazing