chezlaw you know that bit where he calls Jimmy Hill evil for calling a black player a lazy n-word, didn't that make you so angry? Because of how he didn't even consider the context?

He's stifling the conversation!

I guess it's possible your breathtaking inability to comprehend the written word extends to the spoken, but Stewart Lee would call BruceZ a big ole racist. You know that, right?

Oh my God now that you posted the Ang Lee bit I think you might not get that Stew is mocking you. You, personally, as a small minded and racist piece of ****. His entire act is at your expense, chez. You're one of those people who think political correctness has gone mad.

I don't know what you mean. You're an unbelievably stupid and dishonest piece of ****. That's not a "problem" that calls for a solution, it's just a fact. Shut the **** up.

Not at all. Why should it?

You are out of your mind.

I can't say for certain Jimmy whether or not is good calculus, can you? And so when he calls black people the n-word, that could be either not racist because of context, or maybe just intentionally inflammatory to spurn debate, right?

Ugh the issue with these SMPers is that they're so unbelievably stupid and incurious that they don't even understand when they walk into a trap. Like a bear on ketamine just lugging around a trap on its paw.

Seems less like not understanding they've walked into a trap and more like recognizing that the trap is beneath them.

On topic though, this Stewart Lee guy is amazing.

There's tons on youtube. His series on the BBC was outstanding.

There's a great bit somewhere where someone who's he think is going to say something racist looks at him angrily and he looks away because he didn't want to have to agree with something racist out of politeness. 'cos that's what he does when he goes home for christmas.

I don't know how well that translates into american but its one of my favourite lines.


Just to mention on this, Stewart Lee and I share very similar liberal values.

chezlaw I only remember you participating in two major 2p2 politard debates, one in which you argued that any employer protection laws are unjustifiable(in the context of allowing/condoning sexual harassment) and then this thing where you claimed Bruce's racist posts weren't racist for a reason.

So no, you don't. You're a pretty typical internet white dude, incoherently libertarianish and convinced against all evidence in your own ****ing intellectual superiority.

Try reading some more and with a bit more care if you're actually interested.

or even just ask. I'm not shy about my liberalism

Flyrony level over 9000!

chezlaw- I seriously do not care about your "liberalism", which AFAIK manifests itself in navel-gazing nonsense about how you wished things were better and could maybe hypothetically come up with a way to do that.

You appear so ill informed and stupid that there's tremendous incoherence running throughout your views on every subject. Like most of the other SMPers, you're also incapable of carrying even a basic conversation due to heroically awful reading and writing skills.

In other words, you're too stupid to accurately assess your own opinions, and from a brief refresher on your writings it appears that even defining your opinions is pretty heavy lift for the outsider observer. I'm not sure if you're intellectually capable of articulating your generalized emotional responses into the level of specificity that could be called "a political opinion."

Shut the **** up

then shutting up might be best.

I've been posting about liberal issues in a pro-liberal way for 10 years so don't come and have a go at me for not being liberal without even caring.

Like, the reason SMPers can have these little discussions is because they are all talking past one another.

Sure, they're writing nonsense, but none of them really bothers to read other people's posts, so that's a scratch. Because every party to the discussion is essentially making up the entire thing they manage to build these incredible feedback loops of self-delusion.

Chezlaw's completely in agreement with Stewart Lee.....except when his hero Brucie is the one under fire. Then it really is PC gone mad, can't these people see this guy is really smart so the racist **** he's saying isn't actually racist?

Bruce is not my hero and I never said anything like it was PC gone mad.

I assume like fly, you don't actually care. just mouthing off.

Man that Fly guy is so cool with his appeal to history characterizations.

Fool must think people are trapped to the past however he characterizes them. He is mean about it because it is easy to exploit with the obvious, and he would rather people not think about exactly what he is doing and rather the read the poop flinging he is doing like it is informative.

Look out his friends might show up and he may have spew back like it's something. But it is the functional equivalent of mostly nothing from the right perspective and that is your's and mine to choose.

Is chezlaw liberal like you guys keep calling pvn liberal? Because that **** is funny. Might want to figure out that pvn is one of Fly 's usual people to pick on before calling out politards for "teaming up" because they argue against each other all the time. Most of the time fly is calling pvn a racist and yet they are BOTH calling you guys out for racist b.s.. Time to take a hint.

And they are both bad and constantly argumentative, with little concern for people who are not constantly argumentative. I doubt some people understand much of pvns questions due to tone. His arguing about nothing is on the record somewhere in that post count.
Fly wants people to leave or at least acts that way.

Or I am just making a better appeal to history because it is informative and accurate, but not argumentative. I mean you can choose to argue back, but look yourself is all I am saying.

St fu spanky. I've never had an issue with fly because I don't say racist ****. Your explanation of pvn admonishing racism to finally "fit in" was ****ing funny tho dumb ass. Dude spent months ****ing with the racist douchebags at city data and funnily enough their response was similar to yours' "don't be mean to the racists".

Are you paying attention? No one is calling the police on people who use racial slurs. This stupid lady is calling the police because a comedy show made her feel bad.

Maybe you should be smarter.

The bigots are the dominant aggressive group and always have been. If they weren't constantly ****ing people over and yelling out of windows because people are the wrong color/religion/orientation then nobody would have a problem.

Honestly, racists and bigots could have no better ally than you--the concern troll who can't bear the thought of a racist getting his feelings hurt even though racist racists in this country ruin people's lives daily. And, just to be clear, not with their ****ing words.

What's the line on days until spank is found drunkenly wandering around with a gun hunting down dogs that didn't kill his cat?

I'd set it around 12 days.

Drunken Op-Ed

There's an awful lot of back and forth over racism and the deeply dreaded label of 'racist'. Here is what I have observed over how the word is used.

In casual conversation - the way normal people talk about normal things - 'racist' is not used to call out behavior that is blindingly racist. Nobody says "it's snowing" when standing in the middle of a snowstorm unless they're trying to be obnoxiously witty. Stating the obvious is dumb.

When confronted with an opinion that certain minorities are inferior, nobody says "that's racist". Of course it's racist. That doesn't need to be pointed out. A much more typical response would be something along the lines of, "STFU you ignorant white supremacist mother****er".

When used in typical conversation by actual people who haven't been kicked in the head by a mule, the whole point of calling a person, action or statement 'racist' is to draw attention to the underlying subtext that may not be readily apparent to a superficial reading. That is the entire purpose of labeling things racist - to point out the inherent prejudice that might otherwise be overlooked.

If you disagree with this, please consider your personal reaction to the statement, "Black people should be treated differently than white people, because skin color indicates important differences in a person's fundamental nature." I bet you don't just call that statement racist. I imagine your reaction is much stronger, and would be expressed with much more dramatic language.

So if you find yourself whining about who or what the label 'racist' gets applied to, you are probably betrayed by your own language in how you describe things that are blatantly racist vs. those that are casually or implicitly racist. You're trying to shift the definition away from how you yourself actually use the word. And that almost certainly makes you a racist.