Forums

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I realized reading Diangelo’s direct, lucid, and dryly logical argument that I didn’t really have an issue with her positions. How could I? Logic is logic. Her analyses were laid out like mathematical proofs. Even if I suspected her of bias, which I didn’t, her points would nevertheless be largely irrefutable.

I realized I was arguing most with people like Adder. He’s not really an ally. He’s biased, extremely, toward appearing exceptionally virtuous in matters regarding race, sex, LGBTQ, etc. But unlike Diangelo, who carefully and rigorously explains her definition of racism in the United States, Adder offers no thinking. He just reflexively labels anything he can some form of bigotry or prejudice.

He’s the embodiment of the hammer seeing only nails analogy.

This is not thoughtful, nor is it rigorous. To immediately cite bigotry as the cause of all criticisms one hears about foreign products is lazy, and its grandstanding. And he should not be considered a credible ally because it is largely that affirmation that he seeks. He wants to be the dutiful finder of bigotry everywhere, and so his move, anytime he sees even the thinnest pretext to do so is to, in a Javert fashion, accuse the speaker of bigotry.

He means well, but in this regard he’s the chatboard equivalent of an “unreliable narrator.” And to the extent the behavior of him and the many like him offends an independent like me, well, imagine its impact on Biden voters, and Trump voters with some buyer’s remorse. “Allies” like Adder, behaving as they do en masse, are what can and indeed may likely lose the Ds the middle, and consequently lose them the election.

And it won’t be because the middle is fragile. Indeed, the whites in the middle are fragile. But they can also spot grandstanding. And that really turns off people.

I honestly don’t think Adder realizes how transparent he is. But he has no business claiming Diangelo as support. She wrote an argument. He’s entirely Pavlovian. Dangle an opening for his favorite accusation (pick whatever form of bigotry he can shoehorn into the facts at issue) and he never fails to provide it.

Dude, take a breath. Adder is too quick to blame him/us (he is where I coined the post summary “white people bad, black people good”) but he ain’t stupid and the point in this bit is, you quoting several people saying anything made in China is shit. Then you admit that only some is. But that means you gotta look at the thing in question? I’ve a client whose name everyone here respects, they make stuff in China. It’s good I believe- their name is too important not to watch that. So to quote someone saying “China shit is bad” isn’t too far from Adder’s “white people bad.*” An overly simplified view that boils a more nuanced q to race?


*Adder, first version equates it to “all blacks bad” but I thought this works better to my audience? No offense.