Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Donald Trump, the road that might not lead to the White House!

Status
Not open for further replies.
What do you think their response should be? To see the irony and laugh it off?

Well, assuming that the CIA/FBI/NSA have it right and aren't lying, perhaps urge people in prominent positions like John Podesta not to set 'password' as their password? Suggest to the DNC that they avoid rigging primaries so that there is nothing to leak in the first place?
 
Perhaps enhance their cyber-security, imprison those in senior positions that install their own servers to circumvent FOI legislation and most of all, stop rampaging around the globe rigging every other cunt's elections.

Might be a start.
Perhaps they might do some or all of those but they seem to be a response to "taking the cream puff" (whatever that is actually meant to mean) which you seem surprised that they might do.
 
Well, assuming that the CIA/FBI/NSA have it right and aren't lying, perhaps urge people in prominent positions like John Podesta not to set 'password' as their password? Suggest to the DNC that they avoid rigging primaries so that there is nothing to leak in the first place?

Not writing down what they were doing and thinking is also something that might need to be learned.
 
I like how 'describing intersections of race, gender, class and other forms of oppression and privilege' seems to literally mean posting misleading memes and posting links to articles on racist libertarian websites.

Personally, I find it both ignorant and offensive. ;)
 
You'll like this one:

"
Because we have experienced racism from well-behaved and well-educated liberals as often as from the rednecks they despise; because we have never benefitted from the condescending and patronizing attitudes of white multiculturalists; because we recognize in the affluent liberal hatred of the white poor the same depraved social Darwinism that in less public moments is directed against us."

White Purity
 
I don't know what posts you are referring to specifically, but if you are talking about any of my contributions, which I suspect you are, then you have completely missed the point. It's not the hate crimes that are being questioned, it's the extent of their relationship to Brexit that is. As I recall, the only person who actually minimised any racism was you in regards to this story.



If you are going to be an anti-racist it helps not to be a massive, hypocritical racist yourself.
You seem to think structural racism based on class is a thing, am I right?

But, it's clear from the above and other posts, you believe "reverse racism" exists, Black people can be just as racist as whites. It follows you don't agree with the concept of institutional/structural racism, let alone white supremacy. People being mean to one another because of their race or nationality is the same, regardless.

You seem to be spoiling for a fight. I'm not interested in that and I doubt any further discussion with you would be of any benefit. So, time to mute. Again, I encourage you to do the same if my posts are so upsetting for you that you have to trawl through months of them for "evidence" that I have said something that's upset you. Bye then.
 
Well yes, but the election was between Clinton (who called for the no fly zone) and Trump (who didn't). Also the Republicans of the McCain / Graham class (who were the ones calling for no-fly zones and also have been blaming the Russians) remain Trumps' enemies.
To be fair, although Trump didn't call for a no fly zone, his response was hardly even coherent. He was going to leave it up to his generals :/

Donald Trump has avoided the issue. “I don’t think so,” he said a year ago, when ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked if he would, as president, order a no-fly zone. “I think what I want to do is, I want to sit back and I want to see what happens” in Syria, Trump said.

Since then he has been even less specific. In the only major speech Trump has given on national security since he secured the GOP presidential nomination, he dismissed the entire Syrian war and ISIS by promising upon his inauguration to ask “my generals” to come up with a strategy within 30 days.


Trump isn't really a Republican in the sense that McCain and GOP legislators are, or the people identifying as Republican who gave more hawkish responses to what the US should do in Syria than those who said they were Democrat.

In the normal scheme of things, where you have a President and a majority on either or both houses of congress of the same party, but with somewhat differing ideologies, or even who plain don't like each other, they will still try to appear, at least publicly, on the same page. With Trump, who knows who the hell he'll pick a fight with in his next tweet? It's nowhere near the "normal scheme of things" at the moment. :(
 
It says a lot about the entrenched racism of the USA that as anodyne a slogan as "black lives matter" can become a deeply, genuinely political slogan.

It also says a lot that people think it's an adequate slogan, and that the typical racist cop will be likely to say "gee whillikers, I never thought of it like that before - note to self, stop murdering black people for no reason".
I think it started as a hashtag and wasn't intended to be a campaign. When I first heard of it, I also thought it was a bit mild, but understood since it had captured the imagination, why folks were still rolling with it. But, I shouldn't underestimate the capacity of many white people to be affronted by people of colour just pointing out that genuinely, not all lives matter. #AllLives Matter is the close cousin of #NotAllMen and the ever popular #WelfareScroungers :(
 
I haven't turned anything around. Class is not an identity, it's a condition, and one that sits beside all the other facets of our lives. I guess you could put the sixth bullet's 'identities' into the correct order for her. That's the trouble with your 'politics' of identity. It's so easy to be hoisted with your own petard.

I keep well away from the 'left.' It's not of or for the working class any more. It's filled with people who may well get badly burned in the future. From what I have seen of intersectionalism in practice it's well-off and very middle class.

Even in your above post you don't seem to offer anything. I should feel bad, guilty or something. That's it.

*sigh*

I didn't know you were expecting me to "offer you something," and to be honest, I don't know what you are expecting. I've tried to describe why I don't believe only a class analysis of oppression is sufficient. Although so many keep labeling me as a proponent of "identity politics" (which the way it's being used, is starting to sound like a slur, like when it used to be popular to dismiss people for being "politically correct.")

You say "class is not an identity, it's a condition." Does that mean you think say, being African American is only an identity (something you can pick and choose) and not a condition? How about disability? Gender? Is the idea that being a working class person is pretty much the same whether you are white or Black, just if you're the latter there's the extra layer of racism?

You also said, "From what I have seen of intersectionalism in practice, it's well-off and very middle-class."

No. It's origins are in the African American feminist/womanist movement and it's working class women of colour worldwide who remain the strongest proponents of it. I first came across the term when I read "Mapping the Margins" from Kimberle Williams Crenshaw over 20 years ago. Her description was an eye opener for me. It was some time after that, I was put on to writings from bell hooks. If you're genuinely interested in understanding the concept, I'd recommend "Feminist Theory - From Margins to Centre," where she describes the interplay between race, class and gender in America. There's plenty of stuff out there on the net. I'm aware that there are campaigns and movements around the world, particularly of young people, based on an understanding of intersectionality.

Going back probably 15 years ago, I used to be active in some online discussion groups that also valued this approach. Funnily enough, despite the wide range of folks involved (although it leaned towards North America just because at that time perhaps fewer people in the US had home internet) and different opinions, the dialogue was constructive, thought provoking, civil. My mistake in thinking something like that might be possible here, but hey ho.
 
Perhaps they might do some or all of those but they seem to be a response to "taking the cream puff" (whatever that is actually meant to mean) which you seem surprised that they might do.
Can someone explain what "taking the cream puff" means? Thanks.
 
Although in the cited instance more if someone's being a bit rich in their criticism of others.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

But you knew that right
 
Although in the cited instance more if someone's being a bit rich in their criticism of others.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

But you knew that right
Honestly, I wasn't sure. I read it a couple times and didn't get it.

So in other words, Americans are getting their just desserts because of American interference in politics, elections, etc. in other countries in the past.
 
I wonder which bit of Crenshaw's intersectionality theory talks about why it is good to post articles from far-right websites that state that white members of the working-class deserve their lot because they are addicted to drugs, get divorced, are on welfare and refuse to move from place to place like robotic nomads. I wonder whether Crenshaw might be able to identify those exact same tropes being deployed against another group.

CRI linking to this article while suggesting that it might be an aid in understanding 'intersections of race, class, gender and other factors in the US context, particularly related to the elections' is basically the same as linking to a racist website like Breitbart in reference to black people, LGBT people, Hispanics or other minorities.
 
Thanks. Never heard of having a bubble, either. Well hey, you learn something every day, dontcha?

Couldn't you have worked out the meaning from the context?

This happened before - with the 'trump apologising' comment which saw you go off on one.

If you can't deduce - or even make a stab* - at someone's meaning by the context then it's no surprise you're having so much difficulty here.

*means make an attempt
 

I wonder if any Trump supporters have hit on the irony of building a wall to prevent cheap Mexican workers from slipping into the US, while using cheap prison labor to replace well-paid, non-prison labor. I'm only surprised they aren't going to use cheap Mexican labor to prevent cheap Mexican labor from getting in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
So in other words, Americans are getting their just desserts because of American interference in politics, elections, etc. in other countries in the past.
I don't think anyone would wish Trump on the American people but that doesn't mean we can't appreciate the irony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CRI
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom