Ok everyone - you need to denounce white supremacists.

[NeedleinA]

True story:
I was invited to a KKK rally once when I lived in Montgomery Alabama. This was in my high school years. Something like 75% of the student body was going to ditch school to go to this rally since we were not that far away from it. I kindly excused myself from attending that event. I was one of only 6 non-black students at this high school. So in fact they weren't going to support the KKK they were going to argue/fight/harass the KKK. Despite all my friends being black, there was no way I was going there to some how be confused as a Klan supporter by someone who wasn't my friend.  

 

[mordorbund]

@NeuroTypical - Just curious, is this thread part of a larger conversation you're having elsewhere? I know you have a variety of friends across the political spectrum, and just the way the OP is worded (it might be more in my head than in the text) I'm reminded of radical Islamic terrorist attacks and the call for Muslims ("if they really are a peaceful religion") to denounce the acts strongly and publicly - or suffer the association as a consequence.

Now the right has various (ahem) deplorable associations made with their winning candidate, and here you're calling for a similar denouncement.

[NeuroTypical]

Heh - absolutely.  I was vaguely concerned that the only person in any of my online arguing circles willing to denounce the various white racist groups supporting Trump, was my far-far-far-uber-left anarchist buddy.  I already understood just about every conservative I know doesn't support that jargle, but nobody was saying it openly.  As Mirk said, denouncing a given isn't required.  But conservative's silence was being interpreted as agreement or support. Yeah, wrongly interpreted, but interpreted nonetheless.

So I gave the opportunity here, and on Facebook, and gathered a ton of folks who put the obvious truth into words.  I also gathered ignored news stories about how Trump himself has had a long and healthy track record of denouncing these people.  

Now, a week or two later, nobody in my little corner of the online world can say pro-Trump people are all supporters of white nationalists. 

[anatess2]

On 11/23/2016 at 1:55 PM, mordorbund said:

Yup, all the reports I see about a lack of diversity in software companies completely ignore Asians of all stripes, lumping them in with the white "majority". Welcome to the club

Well... I guess that's because we are too smart to fall for Democrat/Republican vote-buying tactics using our race.  We're too independent minded to be a "voting bloc" so we get lumped in with the Whites as... politically useless.  Hah hah. 

 

Edited November 28, 2016 by anatess2

[NightSG]

"Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs. The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement. Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits often without paying any taxes. Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world.” 

"Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally."

I guess we all need to denounce the guy who said those things.

[Just_A_Guy]

"Immigration and Naturalization Service"?  Ain't no such thing.  This must be a very old quote indeed.   

[anatess2]

16 minutes ago, NightSG said:

"Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, schools and social programs. The Immigration and Naturalization Service needs the ability to step up enforcement. Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care and other benefits often without paying any taxes. Safeguards like welfare and free medical care are in place to boost Americans in need of short-term assistance. These programs were not meant to entice freeloaders and scam artists from around the world.” 

"Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally."

I guess we all need to denounce the guy who said those things.

Well, I have no problem with people denouncing the guy... but not because he said those things.

[NeuroTypical]

27 minutes ago, NightSG said:

"Even worse, Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally."
I guess we all need to denounce the guy who said those things.

Harry Reid said those things.  Back in like 1993-94 or something, yes?  Wanna know what else he said?

Quote

However, Reid has openly acknowledged his changed position on at least two occasions. In a House floor speech on August 5, 2006, he admitted that the "low point" of his legislative career came when he introduced the "travesty that [he] called legislation" in 1993. The Las Vegas Review-Journal also reported on December 13, 1999, that Reid said that the legislation is "way up high" on his "list of mistakes" and that it was "short-sighted." He added, "I didn't understand the issue. I'm embarrassed that I made such a proposal."

Sounds like Harry already beat us to the denouncing...

[Traveler]

The very term “Radical Islamic” or radical anything is an interesting term to me.  My work has taken me to many places of this world and I have attempted to take my personal faith in Christ and openness to others everywhere I go.  I have even sat down and have a long and interesting conversation with a devout Satan worshiper.  Spending many hours discussing religion with devout Muslims, at least for me, was life changing.  From my experience I believe we LDS or Mormons have more in common with Muslims than we do with most of what we understand as traditional Christianity.  I would be surprised if our friend Prison Chaplin found Muslims even remotely difficult to work with in his chosen profession. 

Islam is far more open to opinions as a religion than any other faith I know.  For example, the term Islam denotes a believer in G-d.  By doctrine and declaration an Islamic Mosque is a sacred place that must be open to all believers in G-d.  Unlike Christianity that separate their various “Churches” to be only open and usable to those of their particular sect.   At an Islamic Mosque there is no prescribed preacher that gives sermons but rather anyone can come and present and anyone is free to listen or not to listen.  That is the ideal but the practice varies from place to place and culture to culture. 

I was once asked to come to Mosque on Friday (the Muslim Sabbath) and present.  It is not the same as a sermon because those present are encouraged to ask questions.  The subject matter I chose was to speak to the LDS doctrine that through ordinances (ordinations) and obedience to covenants man can become like G-d.  This subject generated a lot of questions and discussion because it is Islamic doctrine that the essence of G-d is unique in the universe and very much unlike man.  My chosen subject matter was the most radical discussion about G-d and religion that anyone (Muslim) in attendance have ever encountered.

There was not much of agreement that came from this discussion but there was one thing to which there was agreement and I found the agreement interesting.  We all agreed that when the time come that we stand before G-d and make account for our earth life – that if I should discover that my belief in the doctrine that we can become like G-d is completely wrong that I would repent of my belief and plead for mercy and my Islamic friends would petition G-d to accept my call for mercy.  I also promised I would do the same for them – I even went so far as to tell them that I would submit their names for temple work for them after they die.  When they heard I would do temple work for them after they died – they promised that they would complete the Hajj for me after my passing.

I do not think it is that important to denounce much of anything – in fact I think it is more important to find ways to agree about things than it is to denounce anything.  I have even suggested to many of my black friends that a desire to preserve black culture, have black representatives in government, foster black churches, think in terms of black needs and separate black issues has historical examples - that rigid separation of races for the singular purpose of race is the very foundation and purpose of Apartheid.

Knowledge and understanding is the better way (far better than denouncing and separation) to resolving differences – even radical differences.

 

The Traveler

[unixknight]

On 11/28/2016 at 10:47 AM, NeuroTypical said:

I already understood just about every conservative I know doesn't support that jargle, but nobody was saying it openly.  As Mirk said, denouncing a given isn't required.  But conservative's silence was being interpreted as agreement or support. Yeah, wrongly interpreted, but interpreted nonetheless.

Maybe this is my grumpy, jaded self talking but I don't think that interpretation is the result of any kind of reasonable thought process.  People who want to accuse Conservatives of supporting that stuff wouldn't change their minds just because we go around denouncing it.  They'd just change accusations and say we were only paying lip service, but secretly supported it anyway.

Edited November 30, 2016 by unixknight

[Traveler]

As open as I try to be to ideas, there are some ideas that are really foolish and stupid.  Sorry if the terms foolish and stupid are offensive to some or even many but sometimes even the very intelligent and clever do really stupid, foolish and silly things.  If one was to have a conversation with my dearly beloved wife they would find that despite my obvious intelligence – I daily do and say foolish and stupid things.  So if I happen to touch on something you do and call it stupid and foolish – please understand I am not calling you 100% stupid and foolish.

One of the most stupid and foolish things I observe people doing (even myself, from time to time when I am not thinking very clearly) is speaking for someone else – especially someone else that they do not agree with.  This is the very epitome of stupidity and foolishness.  Perhaps even worse than stupid and foolish it is an evil that creates animosity and hatred.  Conservatives have no right what-so-ever to speak for Liberals and vice versa.   What we all do have the right to speak for; is ourselves and our beliefs – that is the essence of freedom of speech.  But I do not believe freedom of speech includes or should include telling the world what someone that we do not like or disagree with believes.  The unauthorized speaking for someone else is (I believe) a kind of malicious and slanderous lie – even if we believe it to be true and is why good people avoid the art and craft of gossip.

For the most part, i believe if someone cannot find anything that they agree with the KKK or any person or group– it is most likely that they are prejudging (a bad kind of prejudice) and are misinformed.  The one exceptions – as there always seems to be an exception – is Satan.  But I still would avoid speaking for Satan or to his beliefs.  At least for me, I know that I do not understand at all why he believes to oppose G-d.  I think for all that so desire concerning him -  he will speak for himself.

 

The Traveler

[unixknight]

1 hour ago, Traveler said:

One of the most stupid and foolish things I observe people doing (even myself, from time to time when I am not thinking very clearly) is speaking for someone else – especially someone else that they do not agree with. 

That's fair, but at the same time it's not unreasonable to predict the behavior of others when they follow a consistent pattern.  I expect race baiters to always find an excuse to accuse whomever they want of racism and I've never seen any of them back down just because their target pleaded innocence.

In fact, what I've observed is that going on the defensive only serves to provoke more attacks and criticisms.  The only thing I've seen that does any good at all is to ignore them or, if a response is absolutely necessary, call them out for their own inflammatory rhetoric. 

[Just_A_Guy]

On 11/23/2016 at 0:18 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

In some ways, we have been victims of our own success on this issue.  We have achieved a near-consensus on the proposition that all men are at least created equal; which has made us intellectually lazy.  Meanwhile you have a subculture of bona fide racists trotting out pseudo-intellectual "theories" about how equality of opportunity is actually a bad thing, that members of disparate races cannot coexist, and so on; and this subculture is convinced that their ideas would win the day if only they were given a fair hearing. 

The way to keep racism in check is for the rest of us to bone up on our own ideals, draw the racists out of the shadows, non-judgmentally engage with them in open and fair debate--and win.

Every now and then, the folks over at The Atlantic poach one of my ideas (not really ) and turn it into a much more articulate column:

How Stigma Sows Seeds of Its Own Defeat

[unixknight]

On 12/3/2016 at 10:45 AM, Just_A_Guy said:

Every now and then, the folks over at The Atlantic poach one of my ideas (not really ) and turn it into a much more articulate column:

How Stigma Sows Seeds of Its Own Defeat

It isn't often that The Atlantic posts an article that I find much value in, but this is a good point and applies equally ell to Conservatism as it does to Liberalism. 

[mordorbund]

4 hours ago, unixknight said:

It isn't often that The Atlantic posts an article that I find much value in, but this is a good point and applies equally ell to Conservatism as it does to Liberalism. 

Indeed. Some time ago @Just_A_Guy mentioned that we are far enough removed from the Cold War (and WWII for anyone that's looking for an argument) that it's no longer sufficient to label something as "Socialist" and consider the argument done. We have to quit being lazy and 1) consistently define Socialism, 2) clearly identify the problematic aspects and why they're troublesome, 3) honestly assess when elements and principles are proposed solutions (and don't when they aren't), and 4) clearly articulate why this solution, in isolation, is still problematic, even if it isn't full-blown "Socialism".

As we saw in the DNC primary, the stigma against Socialism is gone and it is now championed. We are potentially facing a candidate in 4 years who may embrace it, and we have an electorate ready to hear it. That's 4 years to hone up on political and behavioral arguments that are more than merely demonizing naysayers. I fear that it might not even be 4 years, because in 2 years we may see the congressional backlash against a Trump administration (I'm not saying Trump is evil and people hate him, I'm saying after a President is elected, Congress usually experiences party power shifts to create gridlock).

[NeuroTypical]

Bringing this thread back to life.

Southern Baptist Convention Votes To Condemn White Supremacy

Sort of like the SBC's version of our Proclamation to the World on the Family.  

Quote

The Southern Baptist Convention voted to formally "denounce and repudiate" white nationalism and the alt-right movement at the church's annual meeting
...
The resolution decries "every form of racism, including alt-right white supremacy and every form of racial and ethnic hatred as of the devil."
...
The convention was created in 1845 after it split with northern Baptists over the issue of slavery. In 1995, the convention apologized for its role in sustaining and promoting slavery. Ten years later, in 2015, it passed a resolution supporting racial reconciliation.

 

[unixknight]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Bringing this thread back to life.

Southern Baptist Convention Votes To Condemn White Supremacy

Sort of like the SBC's version of our Proclamation to the World on the Family.  

 

Am I the only one who finds it mildly amusing self-contradictory to issue a proclamation against racism that specifically targets racism among members of a specific race?

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, unixknight said:

Am I the only one who finds it mildly amusing self-contradictory to issue a proclamation against racism that specifically targets racism among members of a specific race?

As ironic as those who prove their tolerance by screaming in rage at people who disagree with them 

[anatess2]

So... my son's birthday is coming up.  He gave me his "bday theme".  I work the theme into the cake design, the party favors, the give-away t-shirts, etc.  Well... the theme he wants is... tat-tada... KEKISTAN!  And he wants the Kekistan flag covering the entire full sheet of bday cake.  Yep.  So, I told him - do you know that a kid's scholarship to Harvard got revoked after Harvard Admin found out he posted pro-Kek posts on Facebook?  And my son said, don't worry Mom, I'm not going to Harvard and if BYU decides not to admit me because of my bday cake then I'm not going to BYU either.  Child...

Oh yeah, my kid gets a kick out of showing this video to his "triggered friends".  What can I say... he goes to an Arts School...

(P.S.  If for some crazy reason, somebody here doesn't know what Kekistan, Kek, Pepe the Frog, etc., is all about... well, no, it's not a Nazi, white supremacist whatever.).

 

Edited June 15, 2017 by anatess2

[unixknight]

44 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

So... my son's birthday is coming up.  He gave me his "bday theme".  I work the theme into the cake design, the party favors, the give-away t-shirts, etc.  Well... the theme he wants is... tat-tada... KEKISTAN!  And he wants the Kekistan flag covering the entire full sheet of bday cake.  Yep.  So, I told him - do you know that a kid's scholarship to Harvard got revoked after Harvard Admin found out he posted pro-Kek posts on Facebook?  And my son said, don't worry Mom, I'm not going to Harvard and if BYU decides not to admit me because of my bday cake then I'm not going to BYU either.  Child...

Oh yeah, my kid gets a kick out of showing this video to his "triggered friends".  What can I say... he goes to an Arts School...

(P.S.  If for some crazy reason, somebody here doesn't know what Kekistan, Kek, Pepe the Frog, etc., is all about... well, no, it's not a Nazi, white supremacist whatever.).

 

This is my favorite example of MSNBC being utterly ignorant and clueless.  I can't tell whether their research is utterly incompetent or if this is a deliberately misleading propaganda piece.  You won't find two accurate sentences in a row through the entire video.

Edited June 15, 2017 by unixknight

[NeuroTypical]

22 minutes ago, unixknight said:

This is my favorite example of MSNBC being utterly ignorant and clueless.

Odd, I didn't know MSNBC ended their segments with this: 

 

Wow - a Kek production, masquerading as an MSNBC expose on the Kek movement.  Now that's meta.  Also sort of the pinnacle of fake news.

Edited June 15, 2017 by NeuroTypical

[Blackmarch]

On November 23, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Godless said:

Over the last 10 days, Donald Trump has dedicated roughly a dozen tweets to whining about Hamilton, SNL, and the NYT, and exactly zero to addressing the rise in White Nationalist displays of support. If you want to denounce racists and Nazis, how about you start at the top?

Im half convinced he just uses his twitter to troll people..... Supposing half of the twitters that media rants about are even accurate.

[Ironhold]

6 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Odd, I didn't know MSNBC ended their segments with this: 

 

Wow - a Kek production, masquerading as an MSNBC expose on the Kek movement.  Now that's meta.  Also sort of the pinnacle of fake news.

It was intended both as a parody of MSNBC *and* a joke on people who take such things at face value. 

That being said, there *are* Mormon Kekistanis, so actual answers about what the movement's actually about can be easily had if you know where to ask. 

[unixknight]

12 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Odd, I didn't know MSNBC ended their segments with this: 

 

Wow - a Kek production, masquerading as an MSNBC expose on the Kek movement.  Now that's meta.  Also sort of the pinnacle of fake news.

When I saw that I took it to mean that was the logo of the people who posted the video.  So are we saying the entire thing is a fabrication, or that this is to show how off base the problem of MSNBC's distortions are?  I have so little confidence in MSNBC I honestly can't tell... 

Edited June 16, 2017 by unixknight

[NeuroTypical]

3 hours ago, unixknight said:

When I saw that I took it to mean that was the logo of the people who posted the video.  So are we saying the entire thing is a fabrication, or that this is to show how off base the problem of MSNBC's distortions are?  I have so little confidence in MSNBC I honestly can't tell... 

Yeah, I honestly thought the whole thing was just MSNBC being more clueless than usual too - until I saw that last screen.  Then I did a google and a youtube search, thought more deeply about what I know of these people, and it got more and more clear.  

The whole thing isn't a fabrication - it's a combination of real clips (some with people being serious and some not), and real and fake information, dressed up as an MSNBC segment.  But the voiceover isn't an MSNBC employee, and that segment never aired on MSNBC.  

No shame in falling for it - it's very professionally done.  Just a tiny titch away from what we actually see from MSNBC.