Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
 

Then socially, I'm me.

Re: Taibbi
 

No. You've offered a theory on how the media works. And it's not withstood much scrutiny.

Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
 

If the question was worded in that manner, I wouldn't become too exercised about the results. (Though I know you are fixated on this issue at an almost OCD level.) The question should be phrased:

Election held tomorrow, Biden, Trump, or 3d Party Candidate?

Re: Taibbi
 

One of our (two) local papers is owned by a hedge fund. Yeah, just a little side vanity project for them. :rolleyes:

Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
 

Michigan was won by Trump by 10,000. My burg votes 70% lib- if 30% of my suburb is willing to consider the thing in the abstract- while spending each day complaining about the current president- then we have not learned.

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

Not necessarily. It is also a state of threateness, if that is a word. I'm not sure why, but Thurgreed viscerally reacted when I said that whites are reacting to the changing demographics of the US that threaten their traditional power. One may not like it, but it was understandable and foreseeable.

LessinHamburg in 24 hours

Re: Taibbi
 

Somebody still makes buggy whips. And somebody provides financing for that entity. If the financials work for some reason, or a paper happens to own undervalued assets, a fund will of course invest in it. But is investing in newspapers generally a good idea? No. This is reflected in the bargain basement price Bezos paid for WaPo, and the decrease in the NYTimes' value. The Journal is an outlier. Niche paper.

Re: Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same
 

Wash that with this: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donal...b07c9a4ce7bc8e

It's HuffPo, I know, but the poll cited is reputable.

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

You forget obliviousness. The overwhelming majority of everybody of every background in this country are simply getting up and going to work and doing what people do. The significant friction over and emphasis on identity and differences is, as this excellent NYTimes article places in stark relief (Twitter link because the paywall won't let me insert direct link), driven by a small number of people.

This doesn't mean these conversations aren't worth having. But it is worth noting, the Starbucks barista probably isn't thinking about #metoo, your GP isn't reading books about post-modern cultural studies, and that lawyer you just spoke to on the phone is never going to understand the friction between academics over gender identification theories. The arenas in which these items are discussed are in a corner of the pinnacle of Maslow's Hierarchy. Most folks have other priorities -- most of them acutely economic. They are oblivious. In some regards, this is good. In other regards, it is bad.

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

Of course you are.

TM

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

I'm going to ignore the rest of your bullshit because I want to focus on this huge turd.

People of color are not creating friction over identity. People of color want to be treated fairly. If we were, there would be no fucking friction. White people have put people in categories and deprived them of shit throughout this entire country's history. At every single stage there's been some moron (like you) who looks at people who are fighting for fair treatment and says, "Why are you so focused on your own identity/race/cause?" or some jackass like less who says, "Of course there's going to be a reaction."

It is astounding that we're still having these conversations. Blacks aren't making politics about identity. Our entire existence in this country is defined by the social, political, economic, institutional categories we are automatically thrust into merely by being born a non-white color. Once in these categories when we say, "Hey! Stop throwing us in jail at higher rates for the same fucking crimes!" or "We want to vote too!" and we are guilty of playing identity politics. It's absolute fucking nonsense.

And the person most guilty of identity politics is Trump. He is playing strictly to white people in absolutely every decision he makes, every speech he gives, and every moronic tweet he twats. The use of the term, "identity politics," is for assholes who cannot see that all of politics is identity politics. It's just completely ridiculous.

TM

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

Just so you know, when you're talking to normal people, this is a tell that you consume way too much right wing media. "Post-modern" is, for some reason, a right wing talking point that just isn't there in the rest of the world.

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

Guys like Sebastian don't see race. So it's confusing for them when you have to make EVERY conversation about how you're a black man and how that affects your life. You don't hear Sebastian constantly going on and on about his white experiences. If you could learn to transcend racial politics like he has, you wouldn't be so obsessed with micro-aggressions or safe spaces or whatever it is the identity politics crowd is all worked up about today. You could focus on more important things, like how the obsession with micro-aggressions and safe spaces and other identity politics bullshit is one of the biggest problems facing our nation today (although you wouldn't know it with the liberal press constantly echo chambering the shrill bleatings of the hair-on-fire anti-Trump "resistance" Nancies).

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

Maybe they want a wall just so we'll have a place to bash our heads.

Re: And do whiteys have to identify with Robert E. Lee
 

Agreed. The "corner of the pinnacle of the Maslow Hierarchy" I described is small, and it's occupied by people of all backgrounds with one thing in common: Scarcity.

I'm not asking why anyone is fixated on his or her race. I'm simply stating that it's not close to a majority of people. The majority of people are simply living their lives. I happen to believe the BLM is a significant thing that needs more attention. Our justice system is abhorrent, not only in regard to its treatment of minorities, but in its systemic inequities. (Jeff Epstein comes to mind in the immediate.) But I've found that this issue doesn't seem to resonate with many people of any color or background.

People are so focused on their own hectic lives they don't have time to discuss this stuff or think about it deeply. This place is an anomaly. People who have jobs like we do which allow them time to focus on this stuff are an anomaly. The progressive politics that is creating friction within the Democratic Party right now is a tail wagging the dog.

While we debate this stuff and the media feeds stories about division, it just might be that the rest of the country is ignoring the identity politics of Donald Trump and those against him.

No one said they were. There are endless groups engaging in identity politics right now. Pick a unique background and you'll find a group of people who take it as their identity and have policy requests based on it.

Being black is freighted. There's systemic racism throughout the country. No one is disputing that.

This is where the rubber meets the road. Both of those demands are eminently reasonable and should be accepted and addressed by society. It is not at all controversial to say "Black people have been fucked over, are treated unfairly still, and this needs to be recognized." Where I think people say, "Oh fuck... Here comes more identity politics" is when something like BLM is hijacked by the fringe. And it was. Do you hear about BLM anymore? No. Why? Progressives (of all colors) grabbed the movement and turned it into "Wokeness." Wokeness is so large and can mean so many things people don't know how to deal with it. One can offend a woke sensibility in any number of ways. Reasonable people are exhausted by the concept.

Messaging matters. Wokeness rings to many as amorphous grievances. BLM, with its elegant and blunt message - Stop shooting us - did exactly the opposite. That message stuck in white America's throat. They couldn't ignore that. Eventually, even Trump signed a bill (too weak, but a start) addressing justice reform. Voting can and should be the next step. But when the message becomes wokeness rather than "Stop precluding us from voting," it becomes weak. Wokeness sounds trendy. It gets mixed up with #metoo, and as these things roll along, there's a snowball effect where all sorts of complaints get attached to it. It becomes muddled, confused, and that's where people start using terms like "identity politics" against it.

Agreed 100%. Trump is the king of identity politics. He's wrapped up all sorts of grievances under one angry banner. It's confusing as all fuck and totally alienating to most Americans outside his base. The only reasonable voters he'll attract in 2020 are those who figure the economy is good, so why fuck with it?

I think if we play Trump's game, we lose. I think things should be dealt with on an issue by issue basis. We need to rollback a predatory justice system. We need to make election day a national holiday so everyone can vote. These are real concrete fixes following which many of the smaller concerns will disappear. The last thing we need is a Progressive Woke Identity Politics Machine, where a microaggression is as important as a police murder, fighting Trump's Identity Politics Machine, where every crazy concern of marginalized whites is gifted utterly unwarranted credibility.

That battle is just a fucking shitshow.

TM[/QUOTE]