|
>With that Bullshit. > >1. First Off, Racism is the ultimate and original Identity >Politics. Any of those David Brooks type commentators who >spend all their energy deriding Identity Politics and >Political Correctness but can't muster up the energy to >investigate the underlying conditions that give rise to those >"so called" issues are self-serving Pricks. Think about it. >All the fucked up shit in the world going on and these white >guys spend column after column worried about the one issue >that makes them feel a little uncomfortable? Bullshit.
Yes. Milos says the same thing.
>2. If Milos is a racist, like you acknowledge, then you can't >say he "ignores racial context" or that he is "Post Race". >You can't be both racist and post-racial, that shit doesn't >even make sense.
It's the difference between his philosophy and what I THINK about his philosophy. I might have unfairly characterized him as being post-racial. In fact...Milos has said that black people are the most oppressed group in America and he pointed to prison statistics as evidence. The reason I characterized him as 'post-racial' is because Milos does not adhere to what he calls 'signifiers' to prove he's not racist. He will make equivalents without acknowledging context. So Milos is the type of person who says something like 'If Leslie Jones was white and making fun of black people like that....she would be banished from hollywood'. As you know (how many more disclaimers of this ridiculous notion of whitesplaining am I'm gonna have to include) liberals tend to acknowledge that there is a historical context that makes arguments appealing to equivalence invalid. For us (me and you I presume?)....It's NOT the same when Jones makes fun of white people and when Milos makes fun of black people because of historical context. Milos refutes that. That's what I meant by him being 'post-race'. He doesn't acknowledge historical context and the way it should guide our use of racial humor.
>3. Get the fuck out of her suggesting that either Leslie >Jones brought on herself the attacks she received or started >the beef with Milos. Absolutely did not happen that way. The >beef started when Milo's minions started attacking Lesli Jones >after Milo criticized Ghostbusters and Milo's retweeted those >racist and terrible tweets (including faked tweets framing >Lesli Jones for saying racist and homophobic shit). LJ asked >twitter to do something about it and they banned Milo which >just upped the attacks against LJ. LJ has in the past made >"racial jokes" (white people walk like this, etc.) and I am >fine with comedians making "racial jokes" Louis CK does it all >the time. But calling black people apes aren't racial jokes, >that's just plain racist.
Milos didn't call Jones an ape and he didn't retweet whoever did say that. The only comment I've found him making about it was that whoever compared her to an ape was despicable and offensive. He tweeted that she looked like a 'black dude'. So if you're cool with racial jokes I'd like to hear exactly what it is you are outraged about in regards to what Milos actually said about Jones. Not being snarky here...there might be more that I don't know.
>4. Your posting shows why Milo is so dangerous. Dude is super >smart and he has a seductive brand of racism and sexism that >seems sophisticated, intelligent and rebelliously cool by >mixing lies and half truths and letting his minions do his >dirty work so he can hide his hand after throwing stones and >say "Well I didn't say that". If you find yourself adored by >Racist and White Supremicist you are doing something wrong. >(BTW, if all this sounds familar it's because we have a >President who does the same thing).
Agreed. He does mix half truths and lies all the time. I don't like Milos either. But I think it's dangerous to not differentiate between him and someone like Richard Spencer. Fact is....Milos views on just about everything except for race are pretty prominent on this very board.
>For example his review of the New Ghostbusters was largely >accurate in many regards but he fashioned it in such a way to >fuel a war on feminism needlessly and excited the racist and >mysoginist to attack LJ. Or look at his article about how >there should be a cap of women in grad school which uses just >enough logic and stats to make a simple dude think it's a >well reasoned logical argument.
Agreed. Though Milos certainly does have legitimate arguments against modern day feminism and they are often less mysoginist than views espoused on this board on a daily basis.
>At least it's clear that Richard Spencer is a Neo-Nazi. Milo >got you up in here talking about he is racist but he is also >"post racist". SMH.
This is fucking BULLSHIT. This idea that Milos is more dangerous than Richard Spencer because it's 'racism undercover' which you seem to be alluding to. Absolutely ridiculous. In fact....you have not even provided an example of Milos saying a racist thing yet. It wouldn't be hard (imo)...but you haven't. I'd be interested (not being snarky here) in something he's said that you object to. If I hadn't made it clear before...the contraction you are pointing out about the 'post-race' thing is the difference between what Milos presents himself as and what my critique of him is.
>5. Finally, kill all the condescending whitesplaining ("It >might help to know what these people stand for", or this >notion that I don't understand the Alt-Right). I don't know >why you assume I don't know what I am talking about, but >don't.
I'm not hearing that whitesplaining shit. You said 'Isn't he the guy that called Leslie Jones an ape?'. Which firstly, is wrong. And secondly, people don't tend to word questions like that about someone they are intimately familiar with. You were clearly unaware of the idealogical differences between Milos and Spencer which is not a factor of race. Quite frankly, appealing to whitesplaining is cheap. Milos is white, Spencer is white, I am white and I have an opinion. We're not debating about an exclusively black issue that should be settled exclusively amongst black people here. This isnt' a 'black/Black' debate or something like that.
>You can try and perform all that parsing between Racist Troll >and White Supremicist Troll, I stand by original opinion of >would love clocking either if given the opportunity.
And I'm telling you, to my knowledge.....and I'm being VERY approximate here....but it's the difference between wanting to punch 10 to 20 thousand people and wanting to punch 100 million people. I have a hard time accepting that difference isn't relevant.
And through all of this...we still haven't even discussed what things Milos has said that are racist. And we should. But ignoring historical context as it pertains to the sensitivity of racial jokes is a FAR FUCKING CRY from advocating 'peaceful ethnic cleansing'. To suggest there's not degrees of racism...that there's no difference between something like the prejudices of our old grandparents and the views of someone like Hitler is ludicrous.
|