Seriously, what do you do to help?

[midnightpulp]

All due respect, but this is alarmist nonsense from Taibbi, where a few select decisions made based on social pressure and consenting parties are compared to the right's history of codified censorship. His first historical example is a city school board inserting religious theory into science textbooks. This is a legislative decision that would uncons utionally promote a religious view of creation on children in public schools.

This is a bit of whataboutism here. "Yeah, some people are getting canceled and decisions are being made on social pressure, but look at the right's insidious past of 'cancel culture.' They did much worse!"

It hardly compares to the supposed evil of an orchestra choosing on its own to respond to social pressures by revising its hiring practices to what basically amounts to affirmative action. (And really, why shouldn't the NY Philharmonic try to portray a more racially diverse group on their stage? Do you believe the musicianship will be negatively impacted as a result? Like with Affirmative Action, generally the choice is between people of similar skill levels. We're not talking about a white virtuoso being passed over for a black amateur here.)

No, I don't agree at all that an orchestra should be pressured into presenting a more racially diverse group on stage if those choices aren't based on pure merit. Again, would you argue the NBA should do the same? NBA rosters don't come close to resembling America's racial diversity. Even if the musicianship are "close" in skill levels, someone will still be considered more skilled, and in an objective evaluation based purely on merit (which a blind audition promotes), the more skilled person should win out. It's not fair to award bonus points or to dock points for things you don't have control over. To me, it's condescending. "You weren't good enough, but we want you anyway because your last name is Hernandez and you're a first generation immigrant." The better solution here is to close the wealth disparity gap so that minorities will start on relatively equal playing field from the beginning.

I'm in the "arts," and would not want my work chosen because I have a collection of genetic material I had no control over (I'm not pure white). "Oh, you're 25 percent native American. Wow, your ancestors (who I don't know) were really oppressed. Here's a cookie."

He compares the right's history of legislating the bedroom to the left's Twitter outrage over a "Cancel Culture" letter. How are those two things remotely the same? This is a sign of someone who spends too much time on social media. (And speaking of that, it's not the leadership on the Left that has threatened to legislate how social media companies can enforce their community standards.)

I don't disagree that is a false equivalency. I just think he fears that cancel culture is kind of a form of "vigilante legislation" where people fear challenging academic leftist orthodoxy (which places race at the center of all social dynamics) due to "cancel culture" looming over their heads. If I were a public figure, I have little doubt I would be "cancelled" for not agreeing with the NY Philharmonic's decision to abandon blind auditions.

The idea that the Left and Right have "swapped" when it comes to outrage is really hilarious given that the chosen leader of the Right has already gone back to the classic base-baiting rants about athletes "disrespecting the flag."

Don't disagree with that. The right are still the bigger "snowflakes," but I think Taibbi is perhaps firing a warning shot to try and reign in cancel culture before we really do become as sensitive as the right.

As long as there is still a significant racial imbalance, there are going to people who over-swing. I have no love for cancel culture or purity tests, and I've said many times that I think the left's protest approach of provocation is counter productive. But suggesting we're anywhere close to a "shift" in the balance of power, when we're still very far from balance at all, strikes me as slippery slope paranoia.

I don't believe there is an "actual shift" in power, just that there's these instances where activists or cancel culture is attempting to shift power while shaming white people with click baity articles like, "White people, we need to talk about..." It's paternalizing and self-righteous. But yeah, that's all I'm really saying and I think what Taibbi is saying, that their approach is counter-productive. Do I feel personally wronged by cancel culture? No. Have I been passed over for something due to affirmative action? No. Do I fear it? No. My fear is it will create more white nationalists and white grievance which is exactly the kind of that leads to populists like Trump rising to power. I HATE giving the right any kind of moral highground, and these instances where a black girl is telling white people to leave the room is the kind of they use as chum for the base or radicalization.

[ElNono]

Honestly, I think his concerns are warranted and "wokeness" is worth having a debate about. Sure, the lowercase white situation is something kind of silly that isn't worth paying attention to, but I think FrostKing's concern is that this points to a larger social issue where the woke crowd, or at least the more fringe element, don't seem to want blind equality but to shift the balance of power to their side as they shame and humiliate "white" people for just being, well, white. I don't think this will serve to improve race relations at all and just wind up creating more white nationalists. Here's an example of how one of the "wokes" is trying to shift power:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51506733

Don't have time to read Taibbi now, but I'll eventually catch up, appreciate it. I want to address your first paragraph.

If you feel humiliated because somebody wrote white in lowercase and Black in uppercase, and causes anything other than rolleyes, then perhaps you need to turn in your manhood card, you're a gigantic insecure person and you need to get your head checked.

I get the slippery slope argument, but you and I both know when you're being humiliated, and when somebody is simply virtue signaling. Neither you or I are getting humiliated without pushback.

This is really what it boils down to. And when it comes to FrostKing, his perception of the world is that from 1920. If you're a mulatto, you shouldn't be voting or procreating. So it's a completely different view of the world from the average, normal person.

He's certainly en led to his opinion, as wrong and backward it is in this century. But I'm not going to pretend this is some major slight where white privilege hangs in the balance...

[midnightpulp]

Don't have time to read Taibbi now, but I'll eventually catch up, appreciate it. I want to address your first paragraph.

If you feel humiliated because somebody wrote white in lowercase and Black in uppercase, and causes anything other than rolleyes, then perhaps you need to turn in your manhood card, you're a gigantic insecure person and you need to get your head checked.

I get the slippery slope argument, but you and I both know when you're being humiliated, and when somebody is simply virtue signaling. Neither you or I are getting humiliated without pushback.

This is really what it boils down to. And when it comes to FrostKing, his perception of the world is that from 1920. If you're a mulatto, you shouldn't be voting or procreating. So it's a completely different view of the world from the average, normal person.

He's certainly en led to his opinion, as wrong and backward it is in this century. But I'm not going to pretend this is some major slight where white privilege hangs in the balance...

I think FrostKing's white nationalism is a pose. When I have real conversations with him, I think he legitimate wants the post-racial society America set out to be. Maybe I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

My worry isn't that "wokes" have usurped power, just that these many instances where wokes are telling white people to the leave the room, staging events where white people wash black people's feet, where white people apologize for slavery, is the kind of that creates white grievance which creates more racism and which leads to populist heels like Trump getting elected. As I said to Spurm above, I hate giving the Right fodder.

[ElNono]

I think FrostKing's white nationalism is a pose. When I have real conversations with him, I think he legitimate wants the post-racial society America set out to be. Maybe I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

My worry isn't that "wokes" have usurped power, just that these many instances where wokes are telling white people to the leave the room, staging events where white people wash black people's feet, where white people apologize for slavery, is the kind of that creates white grievance which creates more racism and which leads to populist heels like Trump getting elected. As I said to Spurm above, I hate giving the Right fodder.

Part of being a critical thinker is not necessarily agreeing with everything you're fed. You take your time to digest, think about it and come to a conclusion.

I'm not 100% on board with cancel culture, but that doesn't mean, say, that systemic racism is a myth... and that's how some people would like to frame this: with us or against us, and that's superficial dogma to me, it's lazy and it's unappealing.

Same goes with BLM politics. I still don't know what they really are, because they have such a fragmented message, that I can't honestly say I support or not support it. I only heard excerpts depending who's talking that day, so it's difficult to even dissect it.

There's no doubt that Trump's rhetoric has gotten a minority of very loud voices out of the closet. And there's also no doubt they'll be back in the closet sooner rather than later. Mostly because, just like Dear Leader, it's empty bravado.

I'll check the Taibbi piece tomorrow.

[FrostKing]

I think FrostKing's white nationalism is a pose. When I have real conversations with him, I think he legitimate wants the post-racial society America set out to be. Maybe I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

My worry isn't that "wokes" have usurped power, just that these many instances where wokes are telling white people to the leave the room, staging events where white people wash black people's feet, where white people apologize for slavery, is the kind of that creates white grievance which creates more racism and which leads to populist heels like Trump getting elected. As I said to Spurm above, I hate giving the Right fodder.

My Polish friend from Cleveland called me a "fake racist" after he met my circle of friends. We check a number of demographic boxes but above all we always kept our humor after all these years. No matter how emotional the debate gets, the ability to poke fun and have a laugh is crucial. Because ultimately we are all healthy, educated and live steadily

Politics and social issues became somewhat of a hobby to me over the past 6 years. I think it coincided with becoming bored with team sports. As emotional or heated as a political/social event might get me "I'm gonna post this on Facebook!", the past 2 years I've been able to weather it after a few minutes. Maybe some of that is experience with online trolling and knowing acting unhinged is a weakness. Regardless it has served me well because 5 years ago I was alienating some family and especially acquaintances. Today politics/social issues are not the root of my happiness or anger. I credit this place for also allowing me to let off steam.

I am following your guys discussion here but it is a little over my head. I was unaware of that incident at UVA. I just checked their Reddit page and someone posted a message on poor race relations at the school 5 months ago. So must have been right after. If I attempt to trace back what really irks me or started me on this "red pilled" path, it was the use of guilt and accusations of racism (when Eastern Europe wouldn't accept refugees). I found those tactics out of bounds. And yet it was effective in many cases. That is my overwhelming frustration with how "fellow whites" are driving this movement I disagree with. As I stated before, it is totally understandable to me for a demographic to seek better/more for themselves. I have no issue admitting white people have it better/advantage in the West. I am aware of the persona I play but I do gravitate towards exotic and different, as I always felt like an outsider growing up trying to fit in by being the class clown when we constantly moved. Being around people that are unable to present racism in a humorous way makes me uncomfortable and talk of physical violence is downright trashy.

IMO if you were born in the 1980s (or later) and you set out to see the deck shuffled to become equal within your lifetime, then yah a heavy handed approach is necessary. I am weary of the slippery slope you guys are mentioning. I think it would help to have non-black/white voice heard. It is a bit shocking how the American scope is almost entirely thru these two races. Nearly every statistic pins these two against each other. Fortunately population growth forecast argues it will be Hispanics and Asians most influencing the near future. I wasn't born here and 50/50 on setting my roots here (applying for work overseas in the next 3 month's, great timing yikes), so my opinion on what America should do doesn't matter much. I think there are fundamental problems that warp skin color but hey America has always been a road blazer and experiment and will continue to be.

[ElNono]

IMO if you were born in the 1980s (or later) and you set out to see the deck shuffled to become equal within your lifetime, then yah a heavy handed approach is necessary. I am weary of the slippery slope you guys are mentioning. I think it would help to have non-black/white voice heard. It is a bit shocking how the American scope is almost entirely thru these two races. Nearly every statistic pins these two against each other. Fortunately population growth forecast argues it will be Hispanics and Asians most influencing the near future. I wasn't born here and 50/50 on setting my roots here (applying for work overseas in the next 3 month's, great timing yikes), so my opinion on what America should do doesn't matter much. I think there are fundamental problems that warp skin color but hey America has always been a road blazer and/or experiment and will continue to be.

I'm latino (despite looking like your white guy), so I don't deny I might have somewhat of a different perspective than you average American. However, it's not hard to pinpoint the white/black dichotomy. There's very pointed history between them, and while people can keep claiming slavery was a long time ago, it only has been 50-60 years since ins utional racism (in the form of vote suppression, for example) was outlawed. As a matter of fact, the sections that dealt with race-based voter discrimination in the Voting Rights Act was alive and well all the way to 2013 (and there's calls to bring it back).

So no matter how you slice it, it's recent. It takes more than 2-3 generations to get past this thing, and political rhetoric of going back don't help.

[Spurminator]

This is a bit of whataboutism here. "Yeah, some people are getting canceled and decisions are being made on social pressure, but look at the right's insidious past of 'cancel culture.' They did much worse!"

The basis of the article is that the Left has become the new Right. Taibbi brings up specific legislative measures in the right, I'm simply commenting on what he's already introduced.

No, I don't agree at all that an orchestra should be pressured into presenting a more racially diverse group on stage if those choices aren't based on pure merit. Again, would you argue the NBA should do the same? NBA rosters don't come close to resembling America's racial diversity. Even if the musicianship are "close" in skill levels, someone will still be considered more skilled, and in an objective evaluation based purely on merit (which a blind audition promotes), the more skilled person should win out. It's not fair to award bonus points or to dock points for things you don't have control over. To me, it's condescending. "You weren't good enough, but we want you anyway because your last name is Hernandez and you're a first generation immigrant." The better solution here is to close the wealth disparity gap so that minorities will start on relatively equal playing field from the beginning.

I'm in the "arts," and would not want my work chosen because I have a collection of genetic material I had no control over (I'm not pure white). "Oh, you're 25 percent native American. Wow, your ancestors (who I don't know) were really oppressed. Here's a cookie."

But this is where it's alarmist. Ultimately Taibbi's complaint is about a single NY Times column: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/16/a...tras-race.html Is that really a campaign? Have there been protests outside of the Lincoln Center? Even if you disagree with the column, it wouldn't be the first time the NY Times Opinion page gave space to an unpopular idea. It doesn't support the assertion that the entire left is somehow pushing for these kinds of measures. This is the same kind of confirmation bias that is FOX News' bread and butter... Find provocative column in "liberal" newspaper, claim that this reflects the views of everyone to the left of Joe Liebermann.

I don't think the NY Philharmonic should be compelled by law to improve its racial/gender diversity, but if they choose to do so on their own, that's their business. A white person on the fringe of being qualified to perform with the NY Philharmonic will have no problem finding other work and will likely perform at the NY Philharmonic some other time. I can see the argument that a public ins ution should try to reflect the public that supports them, even if it's merit based. That's different from the NBA, which is a compe ive business by nature. If the NY Philharmonic ignores the "campaign" to end blind auditions, I doubt there will be much discussion about it long term.

No I don't believe the NBA needs to work towards racial balance. Affirmative action, whether voluntary or mandatory, isn't about making sure every business or industry reflects the racial makeup of the country, it's about making sure minorities are not underrepresented. The NBA has done their part. I don't see anyone campaigning for the NHL to improve racial diversity, but someday they might choose to implement some kind of diversity initiatives, and that probably wouldn't be a terrible business decision.

I don't disagree that is a false equivalency. I just think he fears that cancel culture is kind of a form of "vigilante legislation" where people fear challenging academic leftist orthodoxy (which places race at the center of all social dynamics) due to "cancel culture" looming over their heads. If I were a public figure, I have little doubt I would be "cancelled" for not agreeing with the NY Philharmonic's decision to abandon blind auditions.

I don't think you would. As far as I can tell, none of the signors of the cancel culture letter have been cancelled. Matt Yglesias still has his job at a liberal outlet. JK Rowling hasn't been dropped by her publisher that I'm aware of. The outrage, by and large, has been focused in the sensitive fringes of Twitter and it hasn't lead to tangible consequences for anyone that I'm aware of.

Don't disagree with that. The right are still the bigger "snowflakes," but I think Taibbi is perhaps firing a warning shot to try and reign in cancel culture before we really do become as sensitive as the right.

That would be fair, but his column reads like it's already happened. Maybe that's better for clicks.

I don't believe there is an "actual shift" in power, just that there's these instances where activists or cancel culture is attempting to shift power while shaming white people with click baity articles like, "White people, we need to talk about..." It's paternalizing and self-righteous. But yeah, that's all I'm really saying and I think what Taibbi is saying, that their approach is counter-productive. Do I feel personally wronged by cancel culture? No. Have I been passed over for something due to affirmative action? No. Do I fear it? No. My fear is it will create more white nationalists and white grievance which is exactly the kind of that leads to populists like Trump rising to power. I HATE giving the right any kind of moral highground, and these instances where a black girl is telling white people to leave the room is the kind of they use as chum for the base or radicalization.

I agree with all of this. The patronizing self-righteousness is off-putting and it doesn't change minds. To some extent it's about empowering like-minded people but in an age where everything is recorded, it tends to backfire.