The wicked nature of pseudo-woke mob

[Samson]

This part is wrong. You are actually making the exact same mistake made by the social darwinists, that is, prioritizing/packing the social and poltitical onto the biological.

I would argue that racism is also not the same as racial categorizations. Race is complex and captures multiple components, including genetic ones. We have to acknowledge that genetic differences between racial groups do exist and can have clinical significance. So even though social factors play the largest role in racial health disparities, we also need to address other factors, including genetics. As a geneticist, I consider myself a health disparities researcher.


Agreed

It really comes down to what we mean by race. It is defiantly an issue that we do much more medical research on white people than other ethnicities, which mean we are better at treating white people. Here is an example of GWAS studies, there are many other similar graphs I could have chosen. However is this race? Does it fully capture what race means in a modern socialogical context? That is the question, and I would say no.

 

[Senethro]

This part is wrong. You are actually making the exact same mistake made by the social darwinists, that is, prioritizing/packing the social and poltitical onto the biological.

I would argue that racism is also not the same as racial categorizations. Race is complex and captures multiple components, including genetic ones. We have to acknowledge that genetic differences between racial groups do exist and can have clinical significance. So even though social factors play the largest role in racial health disparities, we also need to address other factors, including genetics. As a geneticist, I consider myself a health disparities researcher.

You should look carefully and see if the health workers are using race meaning self-described identification of the patient, or if they are determining race from a genetic sample.

 

[JPetroski]

They may be a poor ally against an arsonist.

See, I think one of the bigger issues with the type of people who normally enjoy "The View," yet who would now try and "cancel" Whoopi in this sort of situation is that they don't have the foggiest idea what an "ally" really is. It doesn't seem to matter to them if she backs them completely most of the time, she screwed up once, and now she needs to get tossed out.

I find it odd, but then I also find it odd that I'm sitting here defending Whoopi when some of you (not necessarily "you", Senethro) are trying to eat your own, so I guess have at it.

 

[Kyriakos]

I think that a part (itself an effect of more serious issues) of the current problem is that various media personalities (of which Whoopi hardly is the worst; at least she did good work as an actress) get presented as spokespeople or (equally bad) supposedly useful commentators of political parties and their policies.
It's all a dangerous game, because it has little to do with democracy and much to liken it to sentient smokescreens.

 

[Hygro]

Read it in as a royal "you" all.

But what part of it being a social construct is hard to understand? The Nazis clearly killed people of the same race. White doesn't exist. Jew doesn't exist. Black doesn't exist. Well, they exist but not in any particular form, they're whatever we're hallucinating up at the moment. The Holocaust wasn't about race. It was about what could be taken. The same institutions did an even bigger number(impressive, I know, good lord) on their eastern front simultaneously. They had a lot of vanity projects going on about who they could kill and what they could take. Rapists and murderers always have justifications, and the justifications literally are entirely beside the point. Evil is like that.

Well I couldn't help but take it personally, because I was offended you called me a capitalist, because it's true.

I agree up through what you are saying at "they're whatever we're hallucinating up at the moment". From there I diverge. Yes, the starting psychology of the Fuhrer is his obsession with cleanliness embedded into his desire to hurt, to take away good. Also everything that motivated him. But he did it in part, in great part, in founding principles great part, through a racism. And spreading those memes inspired others to act, to build further justifications to act, upon that structure.

Rapists and murderers and racists always have justifications. Do you see? What makes a murderer evil? Or rather, why isn't murder besides the point, why isn't abstract evil the point?

Obviously because abstract evil is a description of actual powerful harms, the physical hurt and the psychic extra hurt, and the ruination of beauty, and so on. We can name it evil to spur action, and call it racism to spur inaction. Or, we name it racism to spur action, and name it evil, to spur inaction. These depend on the recipient. In our society, we are fortunately returning to calling evil, evil. But calling racism racism moves us to action, and gives the tool of evil a target we can oppose.

If the wicked swings his sword, obviously his sword is a problem, and if we sword fight, we can defeat the wicked. If we say "the sword doesn't matter, only that he is wicked" and he swings his sword, we're too late, unless we can sword fight and are equipped. But why would we know to need to sword fight, and why did we equip ourselves? Because we had better known to, and that came from putting our attention on the granular, downstream issue of sword wielding, as we have already failed to stop the wickedness in advance.

 

[Senethro]

See, I think one of the bigger issues with the type of people who normally enjoy "The View," yet who would now try and "cancel" Whoopi in this sort of situation is that they don't have the foggiest idea what an "ally" really is. It doesn't seem to matter to them if she backs them completely most of the time, she screwed up once, and now she needs to get tossed out.

I find it odd, but then I also find it odd that I'm sitting here defending Whoopi when some of you (not necessarily "you", Senethro) are trying to eat your own, so I guess have at it.

The term I've heard to describe this situation is Circular Firing Squad.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, Hygro, his second highest body count was Germans*. Yes. Old lies are necessary to know. But they shift. Can you still hear the 30s echo in the fashion now? Those were grandma and grandpa as a young family. Rapid change. Radios on farms. Mechanical horsepower. Almost unbelievable, and very tangible. I love the photos of the family visits with their elders, dressed straight out the Civil War.

*just general, all types.

 

[Lexicus]

See, I think one of the bigger issues with the type of people who normally enjoy "The View," yet who would now try and "cancel" Whoopi in this sort of situation is that they don't have the foggiest idea what an "ally" really is. It doesn't seem to matter to them if she backs them completely most of the time, she screwed up once, and now she needs to get tossed out.

Of course, if Whoopi "backs them completely most of the time," then she is, according to the premise of this thread, "woke" and therefore has a "wicked nature" so why should we care if she got fired?

I would argue that racism is also not the same as racial categorizations. Race is complex and captures multiple components, including genetic ones. We have to acknowledge that genetic differences between racial groups do exist and can have clinical significance. So even though social factors play the largest role in racial health disparities, we also need to address other factors, including genetics. As a geneticist, I consider myself a health disparities researcher.

There are genetic differences between individuals and populations. Framing this as "genetic differences between racial groups" is stupid, racist, and factually wrong.

But this is an illustration of exactly what I'm talking about. The false folk perception of race is deep-seated enough that even medical doctors who should know better are stuck in it.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

but it is a little bit "All Lives Matter" though.

All lives mattering is a better ideal than most.

we shouldn't miss the point that there are particular characteristics historically associated with doing the eating.

Only if you have a very short memory of history. Unless by "characteristic" you meant the "we have the political/military power right now" characteristic.

If race was some objective thing that could be determined by genetics then one could make this argument, in that you could not distingish between those who were taken in the Holocaust from those who were left with a SNP chip.

At the genetic level, people are pretty unique. You can make arbitrary classifications. The US in particular is hung up on skin color, and would routinely classify someone with more European ancestry as "black" based on skin color, while classifying someone with less (by %) "white" if their skin is light enough. We then see joke claims that the former is oppressed by the latter, before even considering their individual conduct. It's complete nonsense.

Yes she does

Ugh. You didn't have to punish US though.

That is certainly something you can say about the wider criminal justice system, but the "cancel culture" thing is really about changing behaviour.

It is about using threats to change behavior/force conformity. I'm disappointed that so many organizations bend over to it.

she should have just stayed away from that topic. As Narz pointed out, everything that peoples say these days can result in ****storms.

If we keep coming to that conclusion, we allow mobs to constrain speech. Anybody who dissents, can't live a normal life. To hell with that. She should take them to court over defamation, and force operating legal definitions of "race" that are non-arbitrary. After all, they are taking action against her for being "wrong and hurtful". Those are factual claims. Make NBC prove them.

- It hurts the victims of Nazi racism when you tell them that was not really racism

Hurts, in what sense? Makes them angry/upset? Lots of things people say to each other do that. And it might be useful to define our terms wrt "racism". Because it seems to mean different things depending on what is convenient.

The ultimate minority is the individual, and "woke" garbage cancel culture intentionally threatens individual freedom...while often using shifting standards. They should not be respected, apologized to, or handed power by capitulating to them.

 

[Senethro]

Wow, a bunch of single sentences quoted out of context with replies that are more about making your own points on your own pet issues.

You're flying the flag, not engaging.
Moderator Action: Warned for trolling. The_J

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Wow, a bunch of single sentences quoted out of context with replies that are more about making your own points on your own pet issues.

You're flying the flag, not engaging.

Wow, can't make arguments so more of this.

Wow, so engaging.

Wow.

The irony is that one of us is on topic in the previous two posts. And it isn't you.

 

[Lexicus]

"woke" garbage cancel culture intentionally threatens individual freedom...while often using shifting standards.

Saying this threatens the freedom of the "woke" individual to respond as they see fit to things that they think are terrible

 

[Fippy]

What did she gain thou TmiT?
Didn't Whoopi apologize anyways, which could be seen as giving in.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

What did she gain thou TmiT?
Didn't Whoopi apologize anyways, which could be seen as giving in.

Whoopi was wrongly punished, so I'm not alleging that she gained anything. She should not have apologized. How often has bending over this way helped people against "woke" mobs. It would be different if she didn't mean what she said, or acted rashly in a moment to say something she wouldn't have otherwise said/believed.

If you meant to ask what could she gain from a lawsuit, the answer is reputation, clarity, and possibly damages (though I don't know how much she cares about the financial aspect). ABC is claiming she made "wrong and hurtful" comments. Both of those are questionable assertions. She should dig up examples of ABC using the typical US basis for race (skin color), I'm sure her lawyers can find some. In which case, how can they publicly claim she said something "wrong" and give a penalty? It would be a bad look if ABC accepts use of skin color to distinguish race, then rejects using skin color to distinguish race arbitrarily. I get that race itself is arbitrary, but if they can use it that way and most Americans seem to understand it that way...why is it suddenly "wrong" now?

Similarly, what distinguishes "hurtful" comments worthy of a suspension from generic comments that might be "hurtful" which do not merit a suspension? I think it would be interesting to hear ABC's response/standards for this, and then compare them to their own broad conduct.

 

[Senethro]

The irony is that one of us is on topic in the previous two posts. And it isn't you.

No, you really weren't. You've just got little summoning phrases that cause you to pop up and remind us that you exist and that you have such and such opinions, even many pages after the statement.

Could you please take it as understood that you don't like BLM, and that even an offhand reference to it through the phrase "All Lives Matter" isn't asking you to repeat your opinion.

Thank you.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

No, you really weren't. You've just got little summoning phrases that cause you to pop up and remind us that you exist and that you have such and such opinions, even many pages after the statement.

Whoops! Still off topic. When you start posts this way, you seek little more than disrespect. If that's what you want, carry on.

Could you please take it as understood that you don't like BLM, and that even an offhand reference to it through the phrase "All Lives Matter" isn't asking you to repeat your opinion.

It's true that I don't like communist virtue signaling organizations that disguise their donation money trail as it funnels to a few people rather than the communities they ostensibly virtue signal for. I also don't like organizations that back liars that make false police reports (even after conviction!), push false narratives about criminals to fuel anger, and don't exactly push back strongly when people to go off burning and looting in their name...frequently in black neighborhoods. You're right, I don't like or respect that, at all. They are closer to the KKK than they are to an organization that legitimately seeks to better lives of any skin color, including black lives.

But...well...you brought it up in this thread, not me. I don't think Whoopi was taking shots at the racist, communist junk organization while implicating that we're all human beings in the context of the Holocaust, and the context given for her comments later still doesn't lead to that conclusion.

isn't asking you to repeat your opinion.

Before pushing standards onto others, try them yourself.

 

[Senethro]

It's true that I don't like communist virtue signaling organizations that disguise their donation money trail as it funnels to a few people rather than the communities they ostensibly virtue signal for. I also don't like organizations that back liars that make false police reports (even after conviction!), push false narratives about criminals to fuel anger, and don't exactly push back strongly when people to go off burning and looting in their name...frequently in black neighborhoods. You're right, I don't like or respect that, at all. They are closer to the KKK than they are to an organization that legitimately seeks to better lives of any skin color, including black lives.

There, you've gotten to say what you wanted. Can we consider the matter put to bed now? In this thread and every other thread where it isn't directly relevant?

 

[Anysense]

Of course, if Whoopi "backs them completely most of the time," then she is, according to the premise of this thread, "woke" and therefore has a "wicked nature" so why should we care if she got fired?

But thats the key point: Whoopi does not seem to have done anything seriously wrong and yet she was suspended, received official condemnations and hate mail and had to apologize again and again. How true or pseudo woke she is I do not know, and it is completely beside the point, anyway.

Her slip about Holocaust not being about racism seems to be even less meaningful than it sppears at first glance, seeing how people diverge on what is race and racism even in this thread.

 

[lymond]

I'll tell yall what I'm quite tired of is the use of the word "woke". Half the folks who use it don't really understand its origin, but regardless, it's been appropriated by the far right or not so far right for primarily pejorative purposes. And usually regarding subjects that actually matter to a great deal of people. It's so very tiresome and appalling.

Whoopi made a incorrect statement that she acknowledged as such. I've always a lot of respect for her. She received a slap on the wrist basically to think on the matter. But if one questions the seriousness of the error, go ask a Holocaust survivor or their descendants....

edit: I never use the word at all myself, and this is the first time I've actually written the word at all relative to the context.

 

[warpus]

how does it make Whoopi's comments so wrong and hurtfull that it earns suspension and the spite she recieved?

She's an idiot who said something hateful and hurtful about the Holocaust and deserves everything that's coming her way as a result. What a moron