A Racist Finds Cover For His Racism Post Trump Election

[fskimospy]

Very simply that when I go into areas which are filled with Trump voters I've noticed they are very nice people. Even when I try to look for a hint of racism I don't see it. At the very least they are more civil than the average city dweller.

The only thing I see is inter racial families all the time. I mean to the extent that it surprised me.

I just see this country converging on a nice cafe au lait complexion. At least in the rural areas.

If anything it's the city folk who cry for Hillary and Bernie, those people despite their outward cries would never jeopardize their social status by marrying outside their race. Not all but most. They like to march and protest but when push comes shove they won't put their money where their mouthes are. Such are the ways of the privileged city folk who have the luxury of blowing off classes to get counseling because they saw some spray paint that didn't ostensibly agree with them.

City folk think they are so progressive but it's all show and talk. It's the "deplorables" among whom I see white couples adopting black babies or marrying outside their race. It seems almost every 3rd child is mixed race. If I kept myself in the city all the time I would have thought much like you. But I went out into their territory and saw completely otherwise.

Let me just call complete and utter bullshit that you have any understanding of the marriage and adoption practices of people in urban areas.

According to research on the topic two of the largest factors for how likely people are to intermarry between races are proximity to that other race (duh) and educational attainment. The more educated you are the more likely you are to intermarry. Considering that education level was one of the primary cleavages between Clinton and Trump voters it would seem that the reverse of what you said is more likely to be true for any given area.

Most people (the vast majority) voted for Trump for economic and religious reasons. I don't necessarily agree with those religious reasons but I do see why they felt they needed a voice. Most of them know that Trump doesn't care about abortion. At least they feel for once they can live their lives without having an agenda shoved down their throats and all the false accusations that keep getting made against them. I'm for freedom and includes points of view I don't agree with. It's not freedom if only one group can safely voice their opinion.

I believe a baker has the right to not get involved in a gay couple's ceremony just as much as the gay couple has a right to get married. I think it's bad business but it's their right. That's what having a free country entails. You are free to practice your religion no matter how unpopular be it Islam or Christianity.

So you're against public accommodation laws. You realize why those exist, right?

I'm not in the least worried about these fringe groups of white nationalism. Sure they have more sympathetizers now. But they will just fizzle out like they always do.

I think people are bad judges of actual risk. The odds of dying crossing the street are far higher than a bunch of white dudes attacking me. The sort of fear talk I hear is rooted in fantasy. Some risks are too low to even talk about.

Of course people aren't likely to be murdered by white nationalists. Then again they are also exceptionally unlikely to be murdered by Muslims and yet Trump supporters are enthusiastic supporters of banning them from immigrating here.

 

[sxr7171]

Poverty too causes interbreeding. I see it all the time. All the time. That side of affairs is never discussed. To the point I was shocked to see how prevalent it is. To assume only the cities have proximity to other races is silly. The same applies in many rural areas too. You can discuss it all you want but have you actually gone and seen these towns? I was just as mistaken as you are until I saw it with my own eyes.

The government has no business telling private businesses how they should run. A big corporation would be stupid to exclude any group. Shareholders would have a fit. Let market forces decide. People should be allowed to run their businesses into the ground with their stupid preferences.

Oh yeah without a doubt. The odds of getting killed or hurt in a terrorist attack are not worth talking about. Especially in the areas many of these folk live. Their fear is unwarranted also. I'm against unwarranted fear in all cases.


Edit: However I agree with accommodation laws in one business area and that's travel and hospitality. I wouldn't want someone stuck somewhere because some ass wouldn't sell them gas or allow them to stay at an inn or hotel. But wedding cake? Give me a break. So many other bakers around.

 

[fskimospy]

Poverty too causes interbreeding. I see it all the time. All the time. That side of affairs is never discussed. To the point I was shocked to see how prevalent it is.

I bet that relates back to proximity as racial minorities tend to be poorer. It wouldn't surprise me if once you controlled for that the association went away.

The government has no business telling private businesses how they should run. A big corporation would be stupid to exclude any group. Shareholders would have a fit. Let market forces decide.

Of course they have business telling a private business how it should run. This was considered so important that it is one of the enumerated powers granted congress in the Constitution.

A polluting company for example probably GAINS market power by polluting. If I'm selling my goods to people across the country why do they care if I'm poisoning the local river? Not polluting costs money, savings I can pass on, increasing market share and making the shareholders very happy. I'm sure I don't have to explain why it's a very good thing that the government can tell my private business how to operate.

Similarly, we have historical evidence of how market forces don't end segregation. Back in the days of segregation it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if a business would have seen a net downturn if they stopped segregating their lunch counters. We have public accommodation laws for that one obvious reason, that being: huge piles of demonstrated evidence of systemic economic discrimination against black people. All they basically say is if you open your doors to the public you must serve the public equally. Equal access to goods if you have the money to pay for them is a cornerstone of an efficient market and a positive moral good all on its own.

Oh yeah without a doubt. The odds of getting killed or hurt in a terrorist attack are not worth talking about. Especially in the areas many of these folk live. Their fear is unwarranted also. I'm against unwarranted fear in all cases.

Glad to hear it!

 

[sxr7171]

Oh yeah I agree about assigning externalities to those that create them. Even to the point that if someone is pro life then they should offer a percentage of their income to fund adoption. They need to put their money where their mouthes are. We are in an advanced society with crypto currencies etc. So we need to do a much better job of assigning costs to people. You want to eat three Big Macs and fries you better pay more. Things like Carbon credits have helped us move in that direction. Let's start with companies and place the burden there. I'm for soda taxes.

With regard to segregation I think we have come pretty far, far enough to leave it to market forces outside of housing and education. My point is that a bakery isn't one such essential service. For essential services I think we need accommodation laws.

 

[sxr7171]

Why do you think discrimination on class in a business is a desirable or even legal thing? You have a right to your religion and opinion but there is no right to own a business.

Not desirable but let them sink their own business. Maybe 40 years ago they could do it and stay in business just fine. Now any discriminatory business would not survive except in the most insular of communities.

In America you have the right to make stupid business decisions and sink your business.


The civil rights movement was a very necessary thing. It was to move the needle to the center. For many decades it was about that. Then they started to move it all the way to the left. If any chain business discriminates they would simply sink. With small businesses in most areas they would sink. If it's in an area where they wouldn't it's their right to live there and be ignorant and stupid. I wouldn't live there.

 

[fskimospy]

Not desirable but let them sink their own business. Maybe 40 years ago they could do it and stay in business just fine. Now any discriminatory business would not survive except in the most insular of communities.

In America you have the right to make stupid business decisions and sink your business.

This was basically the identical argument that SCOTUS used to strike down the voting rights act preclearance segments. 'Maybe 40 years ago this was necessary but things are better now'. Know what happened there? Almost instant racist voting restrictions. We shouldn't confuse the effectiveness of these laws in tamping down racism for the disappearance of racism.

The civil rights movement was a very necessary thing. It was to move the needle to the center. For many decades it was about that. Then they started to move it all the way to the left. If any chain business discriminates they would simply sink. With small businesses in most areas they would sink. If it's in an area where they wouldn't it's their right to live there and be ignorant and stupid. I wouldn't live there.

You really think that in plenty of areas of this country a business with a 'no Muslims allowed' sign would sink? I sure don't.

 

[jackstar7]

Not desirable but let them sink their own business. Maybe 40 years ago they could do it and stay in business just fine. Now any discriminatory business would not survive except in the most insular of communities.

In America you have the right to make stupid business decisions and sink your business.


The civil rights movement was a very necessary thing. It was to move the needle to the center. For many decades it was about that. Then they started to move it all the way to the left. If any chain business discriminates they would simply sink. With small businesses in most areas they would sink. If it's in an area where they wouldn't it's their right to live there and be ignorant and stupid. I wouldn't live there.

Chik-fil-A says you're not correct about discriminatory businesses not surviving.

 

[MrSquished]

Chik-fil-A says you're not correct about discriminatory businesses not surviving.

It's one thing to donate money to conservative causes it's another to totally refuse service to someone because of race, religion, creed or sexual orientation.

 

[sxr7171]

This was basically the identical argument that SCOTUS used to strike down the voting rights act preclearance segments. 'Maybe 40 years ago this was necessary but things are better now'. Know what happened there? Almost instant racist voting restrictions. We shouldn't confuse the effectiveness of these laws in tamping down racism for the disappearance of racism.



You really think that in plenty of areas of this country a business with a 'no Muslims allowed' sign would sink? I sure don't.

Yeah I'm afraid I can't argue with you in that's either. We do need to keep up the current protections.

In the cities the no muslim sign would not work at least in the white collar areas. But you're right in the blue collar areas I think it would fly.

Heck I remember going to Geno's philly steak in Philly and saw their "this is America order in English sign". I still ate there though. It wasn't good. Jim's is way better.

 

[Svnla]

Chik-fil-A says you're not correct about discriminatory businesses not surviving.

How CFA stores are discriminatory to customers, especially to minorities? I have been to CFA places a few times and they were clean, employees were nice (my pleasure as the reply instead of "uh huh" of typical fast food employees), the prices were reasonable..and on and on. No wonder why those places are packed at lunch and dinner time.

 

[sxr7171]

Yeah Chick Fil-A despite their bonehead level advertising is pretty good food. The employees are very nice and also very diverse. Except I guess for gay people. But really if one doesn't agree with a company owner's political views they can choose not to eat there. The same with Hobby Lobby.

No doubt all of us listen to music by some people with crazy habits like R Kelly etc.

You can't regulate away thought and ideas though. The pursuit of a fully thought controlled utopia is impossible.

 

[interchange]

You can see why it's easy to misinterpret "If that is your interest, it makes me wonder why you post here."

Yeah, definitely. At the time, though, I think I was imagining a totally neutral context to that statement. The internet and this forum and particular are interesting to me. There is no tone of speech, no affect, no body language, no physical appearance, etc. to draw inferences about the intended context of someone's statements. Sometimes I look back at things on a different day, especially things I wrote, and see them in a totally different way. I'm used to being ambiguous with my comments, but I can't communicate the rest of the context that neutralizes them here. Also I don't try to associate myself with a particular political or ideological group.

To clarify "If that is your interest, it makes me wonder why you post here" -- I'm genuinely curious about what people are getting out of being here. I haven't been able to satisfactorily answer that question for myself.

 

[agent00f]

Very simply that when I go into areas which are filled with Trump voters I've noticed they are very nice people. Even when I try to look for a hint of racism I don't see it. At the very least they are more civil than the average city dweller.

The only thing I see is inter racial families all the time. I mean to the extent that it surprised me.

I just see this country converging on a nice cafe au lait complexion. At least in the rural areas.

If anything it's the city folk who cry for Hillary and Bernie, those people despite their outward cries would never jeopardize their social status by marrying outside their race. Not all but most. They like to march and protest but when push comes shove they won't put their money where their mouthes are. Such are the ways of the privileged city folk who have the luxury of blowing off classes to get counseling because they saw some spray paint that didn't ostensibly agree with them.

City folk think they are so progressive but it's all show and talk. It's the "deplorables" among whom I see white couples adopting black babies or marrying outside their race. It seems almost every 3rd child is mixed race. If I kept myself in the city all the time I would have thought much like you. But I went out into their territory and saw completely otherwise.

Most people (the vast majority) voted for Trump for economic and religious reasons. I don't necessarily agree with those religious reasons but I do see why they felt they needed a voice. Most of them know that Trump doesn't care about abortion. At least they feel for once they can live their lives without having an agenda shoved down their throats and all the false accusations that keep getting made against them. I'm for freedom and includes points of view I don't agree with. It's not freedom if only one group can safely voice their opinion.

I believe a baker has the right to not get involved in a gay couple's ceremony just as much as the gay couple has a right to get married. I think it's bad business but it's their right. That's what having a free country entails. You are free to practice your religion no matter how unpopular be it Islam or Christianity.

The rust belt is hardly multi-cultural, which is rather why trump's msg played so well. The deep south is more integrated because of the way the social framework was set up via legal segregation, where its collapse left poor white & black people in closer proximity than de facto separation elsewhere.

Also to put things in perspective, it's not as if literally everyone in these areas, even the key demos, voted for trump; just enough to carry him over the top. There were certain a lot of white people (eg those -10% college whites, and I'm sure some non-college) who cross party lines against trump, but they weren't in the right places.

I'm not in the least worried about these fringe groups of white nationalism. Sure they have more sympathetizers now. But they will just fizzle out like they always do.

I think people are bad judges of actual risk. The odds of dying crossing the street are far higher than a bunch of white dudes attacking me. The sort of fear talk I hear is rooted in fantasy. Some risks are too low to even talk about.

Bannon has a vision to build a fascist ethnocentric america using these key areas as a base; he's not a flimsy flip-flop populist, but rather an idealist akin to the Project for New American Century folks.

 

[agent00f]

Yeah, definitely. At the time, though, I think I was imagining a totally neutral context to that statement. The internet and this forum and particular are interesting to me. There is no tone of speech, no affect, no body language, no physical appearance, etc. to draw inferences about the intended context of someone's statements. Sometimes I look back at things on a different day, especially things I wrote, and see them in a totally different way. I'm used to being ambiguous with my comments, but I can't communicate the rest of the context that neutralizes them here. Also I don't try to associate myself with a particular political or ideological group.

To clarify "If that is your interest, it makes me wonder why you post here" -- I'm genuinely curious about what people are getting out of being here. I haven't been able to satisfactorily answer that question for myself.

I imagine it's mostly a hobby. There's presumably some psychology behind why people feel the need to expressing their thoughts/feelings.