Do we have enough race threads? Drexel University Controversy

[agent00f]

Learn to post to the correct thread, dumb ass.

No, it's very much the correct one:

Ahh, P&N apologist is here. Did you see that black chick in that bus video hang on the rail and tried to kick that guy in the face/head not one or twice but several times? Look like a chimp to me.

 

[desura]

I had to dig through so many articles to even find the context of the tweet. And after reading it, this whole outrage is some of the dumbest shit I've ever had the displeasure of reading. Anyone calling for his firing over this or any other twitter post without addressing the context is an idiot and should be flayed for it.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-controversy/?utm_term=.90b15fbdd650#comments

I think he should be fired or censured.

I understand the context completely. This really is more a symptom of a frame of reference I wouldn't want in the university at all. You have to understand, these people make kids think that nazis are lurking behind every corner, and they gradually make university students despise the white working class of america as irredeemable and deplorable.

 

[Svnla]

No, it's very much the correct one:

The quote you posted was from this thread https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/u-md-gone-the-way-of-mizzou.2495832/

Not from this one thread. Dumb ass is dumb. No wonder other members that were here much longer than you called you out as a racist bastard. LOL.

Now go take that race bait and shut it to you know what. Pathetic.

 

[realibrad]

I had to dig through so many articles to even find the context of the tweet. And after reading it, this whole outrage is some of the dumbest shit I've ever had the displeasure of reading. Anyone calling for his firing over this or any other twitter post without addressing the context is an idiot and should be flayed for it.



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-controversy/?utm_term=.90b15fbdd650#comments

That Washington Post article is misleading. It tries to make it seem like he was just talking about mixing of the races as the context of white genocide. If That was his intended context, then why did he follow up his tweet with this

To clarify: when the whites were massacred during the Haitian revolution, that was a very good thing indeed.

That follow up comment is what changes the context. I think taunting racists with the fear that whites might mix with other races is funny and have no problem with it. the problem is that narrative goes right out the window when he says that whites being massacred is a good thing. In no way can his 2nd comment mean mixing of the races.

So, it looks like your article has mislead you. I know much of the articles are not talking about the 2nd comment, and are only trying to focus on the white genocide, but that is not the whole story.

 

[desura]

The WAPO is a crappy paper. The DC bubble is pretty bad. I prefer the NYT generally and really don't read the WAPO at all unless it has some unique article about the inner workings of DC. Even then, Politico has pretty much surpassed it.

 

[agent00f]

The quote you posted was from this thread https://forums.anandtech.com/threads/u-md-gone-the-way-of-mizzou.2495832/

Not from this one thread. Dumb ass is dumb. No wonder other members that were here much longer than you called you out as a racist bastard. LOL.

Now go take that race bait and shut it to you know what. Pathetic.

Good job demonstrating that trailer park "Call me a slut, you whore, you're the Real slut!" mentality, couldn't have proven the case better myself.

 

[agent00f]

I think he should be fired or censured.

I understand the context completely. This really is more a symptom of a frame of reference I wouldn't want in the university at all. You have to understand, these people make kids think that nazis are lurking behind every corner, and they gradually make university students despise the white working class of america as irredeemable and deplorable.

Wouldn't want them kids associating the "american is a white country" crowd with rather popular ethnofascists despite all empirical data on the matter.

 

[agent00f]

That Washington Post article is misleading. It tries to make it seem like he was just talking about mixing of the races as the context of white genocide. If That was his intended context, then why did he follow up his tweet with this



That follow up comment is what changes the context. I think taunting racists with the fear that whites might mix with other races is funny and have no problem with it. the problem is that narrative goes right out the window when he says that whites being massacred is a good thing. In no way can his 2nd comment mean mixing of the races.

So, it looks like your article has mislead you. I know much of the articles are not talking about the 2nd comment, and are only trying to focus on the white genocide, but that is not the whole story.

It's the aftermath of a slave revolt, dumbass, when they believed the white would try to re-introduce slavery.

 

[realibrad]

It's the aftermath of a slave revolt, dumbass, when they believed the white would try to re-introduce slavery.

So I clarify that the issue was not simply mixing of the races which is what the WP article was trying to do, and your response fits that how?

 

[agent00f]

So I clarify that the issue was not simply mixing of the races which is what the WP article was trying to do, and your response fits that how?

The WP addresses his first tweet, I addressed his second which you brought up. I'm sure this is still somehow confusing to you, though one would imagine you've become accustomed to that feeling by now.

 

[desura]

So I clarify that the issue was not simply mixing of the races which is what the WP article was trying to do, and your response fits that how?

Real problem is that extremes meet. This guy prefers dwelling in the extremes. He'd rather that the world be filled with his *good* people versus Nazis than with what it actually is.

 

[Moonbeam]

So I clarify that the issue was not simply mixing of the races which is what the WP article was trying to do, and your response fits that how?

Assuming that you are right, an assumption I personally do not feel sure enough about to make, who is at fault if some or many black people hate whites? I believe that all hate is self hate, and didn't white people teach black people to hate themselves well? Are each of us responsible to cure our own self hate, I would say yes. Are each of us guilty as a crime of hating ourselves, I would say no. In the world of reality that I see I can't justify hating haters, but I fully support ending their actions when those cross the line of thought and become actions that harm the rights of others. I believe you have the right to end injustice by whatever means ends it without becoming vengeful.

 

[momeNt]

It's the aftermath of a slave revolt, dumbass, when they believed the white would try to re-introduce slavery.

You know it really kind of wasn't. It would be the equivalent to executing everybody in the south after the civil war, or germans after WW2.

It was a systematic village to village slaughter well after the french soldiers left, or were executed.

He fear mongered the towns into purging their whites.

The revolt? Fantastic! The genocide afterwards? Not so much.

 

[realibrad]

The WP addresses his first tweet, I addressed his second which you brought up. I'm sure this is still somehow confusing to you, though one would imagine you've become accustomed to that feeling by now.

I must still be missing something, because the person I responded to seemed to think that the prof. was only talking about the mixing of the races. His 2nd comment clearly shows the prof. saying that it was a good thing whites were massacred and thus not fitting the narrative that the WP article presented. Still failing to see how your response fits into that.

But hey, I'm sure you will say something to the effect I'm too dumb for you to explain it to. Cheers.

 

[realibrad]

Assuming that you are right, an assumption I personally do not feel sure enough about to make, who is at fault if some or many black people hate whites? I believe that all hate is self hate, and didn't white people teach black people to hate themselves well? Are each of us responsible to cure our own self hate, I would say yes. Are each of us guilty as a crime of hating ourselves, I would say no. In the world of reality that I see I can't justify hating haters, but I fully support ending their actions when those cross the line of thought and become actions that harm the rights of others. I believe you have the right to end injustice by whatever means ends it without becoming vengeful.

No, assuming your premise to be true, whites did not invent self hate. If whites can develop self hate, then blacks can also develop self hate.

As for the means, I would ask what you mean by that. Ends do not justify all means that accomplish that goal. I would argue that killing is far to easy to solve issues, and it saddens me that human history is filled with death.

 

[agent00f]

I must still be missing something, because the person I responded to seemed to think that the prof. was only talking about the mixing of the races. His 2nd comment clearly shows the prof. saying that it was a good thing whites were massacred and thus not fitting the narrative that the WP article presented. Still failing to see how your response fits into that.

The article addresses the responses to the first tweet, dumbass.

But hey, I'm sure you will say something to the effect I'm too dumb for you to explain it to. Cheers.

You really are, and it's not just me but pretty much every educator or evidently anyone else here.

 

[agent00f]

Real problem is that extremes meet. This guy prefers dwelling in the extremes. He'd rather that the world be filled with his *good* people versus Nazis than with what it actually is.

I'm sure some of them are good people, too.

You know it really kind of wasn't. It would be the equivalent to executing everybody in the south after the civil war, or germans after WW2.

It was a systematic village to village slaughter well after the french soldiers left, or were executed.

He fear mongered the towns into purging their whites.

The revolt? Fantastic! The genocide afterwards? Not so much.

Given their previous experience the "it's either them or us" reaction isn't exactly shocking.

 

[realibrad]

The article addresses the responses to the first tweet, dumbass.



You really are, and it's not just me but pretty much every educator or evidently anyone else here.

I know the article addressed the first tweet, and only the first tweet. The context of the situation was more than the first tweet. So I will say again, if the person I responded to thinks the only issue comes from the first tweet, he is mistaken as the 2nd tweet gives a very different context to his views. Considering the 2nd tweet quickly followed the first tweet, and was well before the WP article was written, then I would argue that the article is misleading about the situation.

Your follow up comment thus makes little sense to me. Are you trying to say that murdering civilians and children in the streets is a good thing because it stopped slavery? If so that is pretty twisted.

But, as I suspected you will not explain yourself.

 

[agent00f]

I know the article addressed the first tweet, and only the first tweet. The context of the situation was more than the first tweet. So I will say again, if the person I responded to thinks the only issue comes from the first tweet, he is mistaken as the 2nd tweet gives a very different context to his views. Considering the 2nd tweet quickly followed the first tweet, and was well before the WP article was written, then I would argue that the article is misleading about the situation.

It's pretty obvious he was fucking around with the dumbshits as mentioned and you unexpectedly will never understand.

Your follow up comment thus makes little sense to me. Are you trying to say that murdering civilians and children in the streets is a good thing because it stopped slavery? If so that is pretty twisted.

But, as I suspected you will not explain yourself.

People who understand things can likewise see it as an understandable situation given the slaves might be under the impression the whites were only looking to put them back in the cage again.

 

[realibrad]

It's pretty obvious he was fucking around with the dumbshits as mentioned and you unexpectedly will never understand.



People who understand things can likewise see it as an understandable situation given the slaves might be under the impression the whites were only looking to put them back in the cage again.

So its just like holocaust jokes?

 

[agent00f]

So its just like holocaust jokes?

It's exactly the situation where I sometimes refer to minorities as darkies to mock the racially resentful crowd, and the morons in a desperate and comical attempt to lash back peg that as da Real racism when it's designed as a parody (ie reflection) of themselves. Of course they live up to their dunning kruger stereotype with all sorts of chest thumping in lieu of reflecting/pondering what can be learned from this, much like they do here. Now I suspect your particular type of intellectual shortcoming doesn't prevent some grasp of their situation, even if whatever tools useful in that endeavor can't be directed to figure anything about yourself.

 

[realibrad]

It's exactly the situation where I sometimes refer to minorities as darkies to mock the racially resentful crowd, and the morons in a desperate and comical attempt to lash back peg that as da Real racism when it's designed as a parody (ie reflection) of themselves. Of course they live up to their dunning kruger stereotype with all sorts of chest thumping in lieu of reflecting/pondering what can be learned from this, much like they do here. Now I suspect your particular type of intellectual shortcoming doesn't prevent some grasp of their situation, even if whatever tools useful in that endeavor can't be directed to figure anything about yourself.

So his joke is that he does not actually think massacring white people was good, but says that it was because pretending to believe it will be offensive to racists? So then if I was talking to a black person that was racist, I could say all the ni**ers should die because I dont actually believe that, but so long as I am attempting to offend a black racist its okay?

That is pretty sad.

 

[desura]

He was being an ironic hipster.

Which is his right as a private citizen. As an employee...he really does harm the brand of Drexel. Even if you understand the irony and context, etc, it still is inappropriate because of the tone and attitude taken.

 

[agent00f]

So his joke is that he does not actually think massacring white people was good, but says that it was because pretending to believe it will be offensive to racists? So then if I was talking to a black person that was racist, I could say all the ni**ers should die because I dont actually believe that, but so long as I am attempting to offend a black racist its okay?

That is pretty sad.

Pointed humor requires rather complete understanding of context (in this case the history of such remarks), not something anyone's ever accused you of.

He was being an ironic hipster.

Which is his right as a private citizen. As an employee...he really does harm the brand of Drexel. Even if you understand the irony and context, etc, it still is inappropriate because of the tone and attitude taken.

Makes sense this crowd will never understand tenure, for exactly this sort of situation, even if they manage enough smarts to be at least offended for the right reason. "This guy thinks we're ignorant, so let's show everybody just how ignorant are we".

 

[momeNt]

Pointed humor requires rather complete understanding of context (in this case the history of such remarks), not something anyone's ever accused you of.



Makes sense this crowd will never understand tenure, for exactly this sort of situation, even if they manage enough smarts to be at least offended for the right reason. "This guy thinks we're ignorant, so let's show everybody just how ignorant are we".

Why do you take the approach that people who disagree with you are less capable of understanding?