Well, for one, he's stopped posting about it aside from a half-assed apology to people that he deems too dumb to understand what he said.

I'm also not a mod so I can't read the posts he deleted.

I'm not going to chase every one of your posts across multiple threads, but the gist of it seems to be that he's been misunderstood because SMP deals with facts and data that are somehow open to misinterpretation. Saying "I had some people in my neighborhood one time" and then applying it to a large population doesn't even come close to the standards SMP sets for anything else.

Incidentally, I haven't seen any of your posts that say what you think he was getting at or how it was thoughtful. Just a blanket defense of the general tenor of SMP. I'll freely admit I could have missed it which is why I asked originally what the point was.

Lol. So what, exactly, is you goal in this thread? What he said stands on its on as a ****ty thing to do. If you're not defending that, why do you really care what its called.

Yeah, you must be really busy since you're already posting a crap-ton in this thread...

There's nothing to ask. Do you need the quote again?

The context or your insightful discussion is irrelevant here. This isn't a hypothetical. He's literally talking about what he does. And what he does is ****ty.

Holy s***, how was this Bruce guy not snap-banned?!

Are you f***ing kidding me with that last block quote?

let me help you out with that dib:

start from here and i'm sure you can figure out the rest

Can't recall SM2 ever posting something that far over the line.

Shame on anyone attempting to shield that s*** with appeals to context, or like the dude's sparkling and not-racist posting history or whatever. Just a terrible look.

Racism can be quite benign with this definition. Seems that defining this word is a matter of much debate given the wiki discussion and in my mind I think of "race based prejudice, dislike, violence, or oppression" mentioned as a possible standard. It is becoming clearer to me why the use of the term and the reaction to being labeled as such or so varied given the various definitions in the mind of the posters.

Damn Giz you could have saved me a ton of money in divorce proceedings If I had read this post earlier. I would not have gone with "Sorry you perceived my sticking my cock in that other woman as a sign that I don't value our relationship."

What was racist about his comment again?

He accused race-baiters of fanning the flames on already-high racial tensions, and that that incensed people to riot.

What about that is racist?

tell us how you really feel Bruce.

Subtle racial biases in an individual may not mean much, but if those biases span large populations, they can have tremendously negative consequences on large chunks of people.

That there is no such thing as race-baiters. The reasons why these people are protesting nonviolently is justified. Characterizing their response as a riot is unfair, even if some people did loot.

I mean I agree with you and not Bruce here, I went up there and stood with my hands up one night and watched much of the following nights online. There was real anger that manifested itself in mostly shouting but sometimes vandalism, and finally to a much lesser extent looting by opportunists. I hate the way that got portrayed as some sort of organized looting when it was really more an organic demonstration of frustration and anger.

That said, for people to be of the opinion this shooting wasn't motivated by racism and that there are those who help rile up tensions where it shouldn't be doesn't seem anything like racism to me, but a point of view to be argued. I think they're wrong in this case (about the demonstrations, they could be right about the shooting, hopefully we'll have more facts.) Anyway it's something to be argued not assumed right or wrong on any side. The whole, a racist would say that therefore it must be racist is some godawful fallacy I'm sure. And I don't know how you can categorically say there is no such thing as race-baiters, seems like this forum is full of them.

Let me clarify: I'm not offering a definition here, I'm offering an explanation of where racism comes from.

I don't tend to call people racists. I'm pretty soft. But, I do wish some of these folks dropping denial of service word bombs would give me a hint that they've actually thought about the issues in depth.

---

Unchained has exposed me to a full spectrum of attitudes about race and allowed me to connect some dots.

Previously I had only the haters and polite company. So I made sharp distinctions, gave the benefit of the doubt. But with a platform for the silverman's of the world to explain themselves, I can see the patterns and think about the causes.

Everybody claims they are not racist. But some people obviously are. Are they lying? I think not. How to resolve this?

The answer for racists is they think they are using facts & logic & truth. They contrast themselves with those politically correct people who want to deny facts and silence (shame) speakers of hard truth.

I take a dim view of human rational thought. I believe we all engage in rationalizing thought. So the {facts, logic, truth} that racists use, I think that is really just old stereotypes and confirmation bias.

I don't think questions like: Are black people dumber / more violent / sexually reckless are reasonable empirical questions.

* To ask them is to already have internalized the stereotype.
* The questioner never finds good data
* The information would be worthless even if true
* Real people suffer because widespread stereotypes get acted on

people like to pretend they're not the "other" or the "out group"

the same thing happens with the whole rich vs upper middle class thing. rich people desperately want to be seen as just like you, so any label that might change that perception is not welcome

while racists do this thing quite often for people of the perceived races or genders or sexual orientations they hate (Oh, well I didn't mean you, just other people who look exactly like you), it's funny that the same sort of labeling of racist or not racist is what gets their goat

I don't have any questions about what he meant, though. This isn't a matter of differing interpretation.

Like you keep going back to this weird well about how SMP is a place where problems get solved and **** through SHEER LOGIC and FACTS and whatever. A stupid and racist old man complaining about how Mexicans ruined his neighborhood ain't exactly trigonometry!

I know approximately zero rich people that want to be like the help. St. Louis is a social status conscious town and the oft asked question "Where did you go to high school?" is the short hand way of determining your socio economic background.(The correct answer is Country Day btw.) but I would be surprised if that if there is a group of rich people just trying to fit in.
I think you are onto something with the in and out group dynamic. It is important to a lot of people to clearly identify the cool kids with acceptable philosophies and to isolate the lesser folks. Hard to see why racism is going strong! I don't think I am expressing butthurt over being a Republican I know I am an outsider here in that regard. I was thinking of the over the top reactions of some when Suzzer strays from the party line or the need to pile on a winning argument. I am going to comfort myself with the thought that you nerds have lingering resentment over the lack of tail mathletes pulled leading to this behavior.

Thanks this is helpful. We all stereotype, it is a way of making decisions quickly and can lead to racist thinking. I grew up in Saint Louis which you can see by the news is a horribly segregated city in terms of race and income. Every white kid (and likely the few middle class black kids I am not sure) is taught to avoid certain areas of town that were black, poor, and dangerous. It is easy to take a decent lesson from your parents (how to stay safe) and make incorrect racist conclusions (black people are more dangerous/violent) and should be avoided.

I likely understand gay male stereotypes better than any other living in a gay community in Seattle with predominately gay friends. Gay men are sluts. Straight guys might be if chicks were a little cooler about blowing you a McDonald's bathroom because they liked your shirt. Don't argue with me about this I have data.

On a more serious note I will try to not interpret "that's racist" posts as *******s being *******s. Maybe some good comes out of it.

It's funny how FoldnDark just skips over our posts pointing out that no context is required to understand how Bruce is racist when he plainly explains how he views and interacts with Mexicans in his neighbourhood.

These intellectual debates they're so proud of seem pretty disingenuous to me.

If I rarely respond to you, Fly, it's because I find your insincere, dishonest and intolerant rants deplorable. Your style of argument, and I use that term very loosely, does more harm to this forum than any racist point of view. Of course you don't have any question about what he meant, as usual you know more about what's our minds than we do. And there's never any nuance involved in discussions of cultural stereotypes/race relations. This is kindergarten stuff.

What does that have to do with anything he said? Your response is as dumb as my saying you have complete myopia about the scores of black men that have never been lynched by the KKK.

You might want to re-think this post.

Wookie is suggesting that many people maintain "non liberal" positions and don't get accused of racism, probably because they don't actually engage in racism. In the vast majority of occasions, people that get accused of racism have actually like, written racist stuff.

And you are saying exactly what? Black people that have been lynched by the KKK deserve it as evidenced by all the black men who haven't been lynched?

Obviously not since they did. I was using a literary technique that probably has a name but I don't know what it is.

However it is obviously true that if the decision is close they would vote in the black guy. Especially at that time and place. Even now I think you would agree that in a presidential race, if one candidate was black, liberal, and completely competent and he still lost more than half the black vote to his white opponent, that opponent would have to be pretty astounding. Which was really the only point of my post.

so is this when the racist poster who mods 3 forums here is demodded and banned, or just demodded?

DrawNone - you don't get it. Although, you're probably just not smart enough to get the context.

When he says he only yells at Mexicans for making noise, he's not talking about how he acts like a racist - he's making a nuanced comment that the ignorant masses just can't understand. Must be all that circus music rotting the brains.