Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

For the serious discussion of weighty matters and worldly issues. No off-topic posts allowed.

Moderators: Azrael, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26823
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:14 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Saying it's a problem that should be ignored because there are worse problems out there is the First World Problems argument.
Good to know.

I'll make sure to inform anyone who shows up and makes that argument.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:18 am UTC

Ok, but this is seriously taxing my ability to believe. I grabbed the book and looked. If that particular story is true then I will kiss a jackasss. And if Brace believes that locking up black males for drug related offenses is a government conspiracy he gets my tin foil hat award. The principle of parsimony applies as far as I'm concerned. I don't have to believe in government conspiracies to account for it. The apparent truth is simpler and far more damning. The country is racist. I already knew that.

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Brace » Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:38 am UTC

This post had objectionable content.
Last edited by Brace on Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:40 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26823
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby gmalivuk » Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:48 am UTC

Brace wrote:Maybe I should start using my incredible power to be considered a liar at all times for good.
I think it's more than that. Stuff actually becomes untrue after you say it.

In which case, please repeat the following sentences:
Racism still exists.
Sexism still exists.
Transphobia still exists.
People are still and always will be assholes.
gmalivuk will not find thousands of dollars in the pocket of a discarded pair of pants later today.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Brace » Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:05 am UTC

This post had objectionable content.
Last edited by Brace on Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:40 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:39 am UTC

Brace wrote:It doesn't need to be a conspiracy per se, and I'm female, which should have been contextually obvious. Glad to know documented history becomes unbelievable when I'm the one recounting it. Maybe I should start using my incredible power to be considered a liar at all times for good.
Ok. You're female. My apologies. Just because he said it was true doesn't mean it was, there were no citations, he didn't say he was there, and he didn't cite a record. I'm quite sure that Stalin or his cohorts did all kind of things up to including mass murder. He was after all a murderous bastard. But I'll stand by my statement. My I ask you a question. The Pope says Jesus died at the cross. Do you believe that? However I didn't say you were a liar. Had I intended to, I would have used exactly those words. "Your a liar." I feel no compunction about doing so if you are. But I didn't. I'm not as smart and cutting as gmalivik. I said
morriswalters wrote: And if Brace believes that locking up black males for drug related offenses is a government conspiracy he gets my tin foil hat award.
That statement is fairly concise, if you can indeed read. It may question your mental state, but it doesn't call you a liar. Do you believe that is true? If you don't believe that, it doesn't apply. I didn't want to rewrite history so I left the he. If I address you again it will be as she, unless you request something different. I think it is a safe assumption on your part that I won't.

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Brace » Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:54 am UTC

This post had objectionable content.
Last edited by Brace on Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:40 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:57 am UTC

Ok. I don't assert it isn't true, but believing it as written is a reach for me. I see it as an exaggeration for effect. I can't know the truth.

I see enough conspiracy theories from my family and friends that my response to them is almost reflexive. I almost wish that the problem of black males in prison were that simple because the alternative is so much worse.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10549
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:48 pm UTC

It's less of a conspiracy and more human nature.

Juries are made up of people. People like people that remind them of themselves. Most members of the jury are not black. The black guy is instinctively "alien" to the people of the jury. Thus, the jury will be more hostile to black males.

Then there is the issue that juries are less about "have we been presented with enough evidence to say beyond a reasonable doubt this person is guilty" and more about "is this someone I feel safer having on the street or in prison". People's minds categorize everything they see into patterns, and the mind really hates it when it can't neatly categorize someone. Many people see a few signals of someone and their mind says "black, tattoos, bandana, pants around knees, must be a Black Brute". Some minds don't even make it to the tattoos before declaring the person to be a Black Brute. But once that narrative is chosen, the mind rejects whatever doesn't fit that narrative, because the mind hates changing itself.

User avatar
Brace
Posts: 1169
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 5:40 am UTC
Location: Denver, Co
Contact:

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Brace » Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:07 pm UTC

This post had objectionable content.
Last edited by Brace on Mon Oct 06, 2014 12:40 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
"The future is the only kind of property that the masters willingly concede to the slaves" - Albert Camus

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:31 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Correct. Because the people who send death threats and what not are reviled by society at large. They are widely recognized for what they are. Thus, they present little actual danger. Nazi's are not going to have any appreciable power in US society at large because their reputation is such that their endorsement or support is a negative thing. Ditto your other example. Nobody panders for the pedophile vote.
So because society pays lipservice to opposing their violence, we can safely dismiss the fact that Nazis continue to commit real actual hate crimes and pedophiles continue to really actually rape children, and instead focus on how terrible it is that someone complained about white people on their blog?


They are problems, but writing an article villifying them is...not really breaking any new ground. Or doing anything. Yeah, they should be dealt with, but for the most part, they already are. And over-villifying can lead to other negative ends(see, prosecuting minors for self-taken pictures or what not).

The evil that is accepted within a society is far more dangerous than the one which isn't condoned. Thus the description of poison(also, the hidden danger of poison is a pretty clear metaphor).

Brace wrote:Tyndmyr, I think you're only correct in noting that one can't openly support fascism. It's very easy to just rebrand it, or to sell fascist policy under different pretenses. Is there any reason to assume that the inadvertent effects of bad policy aren't actually intentional effects of policy with aims that can't be spoken aloud? Maybe the war on drugs is supposed to lead to the disproportionate imprisonment of blacks and the deaths of millions of mexicans. Maybe the otherwise arbitrary target of drugs is meant to reveal to those in power which people are inclined to buck authority. Solzenitsyn documented how after a speech at a factory in Stalin's USSR, the workers were caught in a position where they couldn't stop applauding, because the first person to stop would be under suspicion, so they kept clapping for 10, then 15 minutes. Finally the factory manager stopped, which let everyone else stop, and he was arrested. The point was to find out who had initiative and remove them from society, so that only the docile, pliable personalities were left. Maybe US policy is just a collection of really refined versions of these sorts of things.


This is *extremely* true...because we keep fighting identities rather than ideology. Humans are very, very good at hating based on identity, and that's the problem at it's core. Terrible ideas under a different name are still terrible, of course. You state openly that you're a facist, and you're discounted(or worse), but you state the same authoritarian ideology under a different label, and people take you seriously. They may even give you credit for "new ideas" or what not.

I am not trying to say that everyone interested in social justice partakes in this, of course...but there's a HUGE trend to get caught up in identity and resort to good ol' hatred against whatever the "bad" group is for your social circle. It doesn't particularly matter what the group is...repeating the cycle will only repeat the same outcomes.

gmalivuk wrote:Tyndmyr claimed that Nazis and pedophiles and people who send death threats pose "little actual danger", while meanieheads do.


Strictly speaking, I claimed that the meaniehead movement is poison to society. I do not claim it is the only negative effect on society, because that would be stupid. I'm not even sure it's the greatest threat. But it IS a threat, and a significant one, because they've gotten to a point where they've convinced themselves that the ends are worth adopting just about any means....and the ends becoming more and more self-congratulatory. So, you have a *lot* of people repeating the same patterns of hate they supposedly fight against, just with different groups.

morriswalters wrote:Ok, but this is seriously taxing my ability to believe. I grabbed the book and looked. If that particular story is true then I will kiss a jackasss. And if Brace believes that locking up black males for drug related offenses is a government conspiracy he gets my tin foil hat award. The principle of parsimony applies as far as I'm concerned. I don't have to believe in government conspiracies to account for it. The apparent truth is simpler and far more damning. The country is racist. I already knew that.


I don't think anyone claimed conspiracy at any point, for this or anything else. Racism in government is pretty much the same as anywhere else. Government just has power to act on it, and laws tend to stick around for a while, so racism in government is particularly visible and harmful. And I think she's on pretty safe ground observing that historically, drug crimes have been disproportionately enforced on minorities. I'm not even going to bother to cite souces, because it's so easy to find a near endless list of them for this.

Also, the applause story seems less improbable when you look at say, North Korea, which manages to produce insanity on a pretty routine basis. Extreme authoritarianism produces some pretty crazy crap as people try to get by, and ridiculous sham displays of enthusiasm are pretty much par for the course. Children in North Korea are trained from when they are small to perform giant choreographed displays...and insufficient enthusiasm is indeed a good way to attract the wrong sort of attention.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby LaserGuy » Wed Jul 23, 2014 2:43 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:It's less of a conspiracy and more human nature.

Juries are made up of people. People like people that remind them of themselves. Most members of the jury are not black. The black guy is instinctively "alien" to the people of the jury. Thus, the jury will be more hostile to black males.

Then there is the issue that juries are less about "have we been presented with enough evidence to say beyond a reasonable doubt this person is guilty" and more about "is this someone I feel safer having on the street or in prison". People's minds categorize everything they see into patterns, and the mind really hates it when it can't neatly categorize someone. Many people see a few signals of someone and their mind says "black, tattoos, bandana, pants around knees, must be a Black Brute". Some minds don't even make it to the tattoos before declaring the person to be a Black Brute. But once that narrative is chosen, the mind rejects whatever doesn't fit that narrative, because the mind hates changing itself.


Well, honestly, juries aren't really part of the problem because something on the order of 95% of cases in the United States are settled by plead bargain without a trial.

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby leady » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:28 pm UTC

I suspect if there was a study that drilled down narrowly rather than broadly that a massive chunk of the jury "bias" would vanish. Take

http://qje.oxfordjournals.org/content/e ... js014.full

for example, there is no reference to the socio-economics of the two districts and they have very different conviction rates in the raw data (appendix A), leading me to suspect that the 16% gap (the headline) has a large chunk of district selection bias in it, not racial

I'm not even sure it's the greatest threat. But it IS a threat, and a significant one


I don't know threat, but it is significantly expensive in indirect costs.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:34 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:I don't think anyone claimed conspiracy at any point, for this or anything else. Racism in government is pretty much the same as anywhere else. Government just has power to act on it, and laws tend to stick around for a while, so racism in government is particularly visible and harmful. And I think she's on pretty safe ground observing that historically, drug crimes have been disproportionately enforced on minorities. I'm not even going to bother to cite souces, because it's so easy to find a near endless list of them for this.

Also, the applause story seems less improbable when you look at say, North Korea, which manages to produce insanity on a pretty routine basis. Extreme authoritarianism produces some pretty crazy crap as people try to get by, and ridiculous sham displays of enthusiasm are pretty much par for the course. Children in North Korea are trained from when they are small to perform giant choreographed displays...and insufficient enthusiasm is indeed a good way to attract the wrong sort of attention.
If you wish to take the applause story as whole cloth, then do. I choose not to. That hit my WTF meter. Could it be true? Certainly. Was Stalin trying to kill initiative? I don't think his behavior was anywhere close to being that rational.

Racism never went away, it just became socially less acceptable. But you don't need that to put a million men in prison. All you need do is to be inflexible. Structural inequality will do everything else that needs to be done.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10549
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:35 pm UTC

If juries automatically declare redheads guilty, do you think redheads would get a good deal in plea bargaining? Part of the plea bargaining process involves bargaining power; if you are going to get screwed by the jury you have no choice but to accept a horrible plea bargain, but if there is no way a jury would convict you on any but the most frivolous of charges, you can plea bargain down to community service if anything at all.

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby leady » Wed Jul 23, 2014 3:45 pm UTC

regardless of whether your conviction rate is 60% or 80% in a jury trial, the plea bargain system works in the US because it uses disproportional threat

take 1 year plea or (60% or 80%) chance of 25 year sentence - I'm going to suggest the percentages are moot (made far worse as a gamble if its not your first time etc so its highly compounding)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10549
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby CorruptUser » Wed Jul 23, 2014 4:10 pm UTC

Except that the lower the chance gets, the better the plea deal has to be. If it's 99.9% chance of 25 years you pretty much have to accept a plea of 24 years. But if it's a 60% chance of 25 years, the plea better be 15 years or less.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Tyndmyr » Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:38 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:I don't think anyone claimed conspiracy at any point, for this or anything else. Racism in government is pretty much the same as anywhere else. Government just has power to act on it, and laws tend to stick around for a while, so racism in government is particularly visible and harmful. And I think she's on pretty safe ground observing that historically, drug crimes have been disproportionately enforced on minorities. I'm not even going to bother to cite souces, because it's so easy to find a near endless list of them for this.

Also, the applause story seems less improbable when you look at say, North Korea, which manages to produce insanity on a pretty routine basis. Extreme authoritarianism produces some pretty crazy crap as people try to get by, and ridiculous sham displays of enthusiasm are pretty much par for the course. Children in North Korea are trained from when they are small to perform giant choreographed displays...and insufficient enthusiasm is indeed a good way to attract the wrong sort of attention.
If you wish to take the applause story as whole cloth, then do. I choose not to. That hit my WTF meter. Could it be true? Certainly. Was Stalin trying to kill initiative? I don't think his behavior was anywhere close to being that rational.


If it was his personal intent or not, it matters little. The point is that it does so. There are pressures to conform. Sure, such pressures always exist, but in an authoritarian state, they are much stronger than we are accustomed to.

There was a recent study when examined german culture, and it turned out that those raised in an east german culture were much more prone to cheat. Sweeping behavioral changes appear to be a normal result of such overt authoritarianism. Why do you find it unbelievable?

And yeah, plea bargaining is probably negative in most cases even if you ignore racism and what not. Prosecutors can throw more things at you than appropriate, because incentives motivate them to make something stick. Even if your odds are pretty good, if the penalty for losing a trial is large enough, it may seem a poor bet. More so if you cannot afford good lawyers.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby morriswalters » Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:17 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Sweeping behavioral changes appear to be a normal result of such overt authoritarianism. Why do you find it unbelievable?
My default position as I have aged has become, "show me". When something like this pops up in conversations like these, alarm bells go off. Ding, ding, ding.

Random terror accomplishes the same thing. For a lower cost. You learn to cheat in authoritarian societies as a survival technique. The man that said the truth shall set you free was out of his mind. Particularly if he lived in Stalin's Russia. Or East Germany. And the behavior of East Germans shows that. The country was lousy with informers. White privilege is somewhat different don't you think?

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby elasto » Fri Jul 25, 2014 10:48 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Except that the lower the chance gets, the better the plea deal has to be. If it's 99.9% chance of 25 years you pretty much have to accept a plea of 24 years. But if it's a 60% chance of 25 years, the plea better be 15 years or less.

I'm not so sure about that. Going to prison for 24 or 25 years makes little difference - your life is effectively over either way. At least you have a 0.1% of not going to prison at all by refusing to plea.

And, if you plea, other avenues become much more closed off: By maintaining your innocence there's a chance there'll be a successful appeal ten or twenty years in. If you plead guilty there may be no option to appeal and you may get no compensation on being acquitted.

(All this is predicated on actually being innocent of course..!)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10549
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Jul 25, 2014 12:25 pm UTC

elasto wrote:(All this is predicated on actually being innocent of course..!)


Not necessarily. You can be guilty but still get off on appeal. A hearing a decade later, witnesses forget important details, or maybe the DNA test was done wrong, evidence gets misplaced, etc.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Jul 25, 2014 1:28 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
Tyndmyr wrote:Sweeping behavioral changes appear to be a normal result of such overt authoritarianism. Why do you find it unbelievable?
My default position as I have aged has become, "show me". When something like this pops up in conversations like these, alarm bells go off. Ding, ding, ding.

Random terror accomplishes the same thing. For a lower cost. You learn to cheat in authoritarian societies as a survival technique. The man that said the truth shall set you free was out of his mind. Particularly if he lived in Stalin's Russia. Or East Germany. And the behavior of East Germans shows that. The country was lousy with informers. White privilege is somewhat different don't you think?


Well, I do believe it was sourced.

And random terror does not accomplish exactly the same thing. Though...lets be honest, random terror is totally used to accomplish various ends, including in authoritarian governments. The truth doesn't set you free. Awareness is only the first step to freedom. It has to be claimed and defended.

To bring this back around to the topic...this isn't really what people are claiming is the case anymore. At least, in western cultures. Systemic advantages are pretty widely acknowledged as bad, and are either demolished, or in the process of being destroyed. It's a somewhat more subtle problem today. The racist who still exists, but who at least recognizes he shouldn't say it in public, and justifies his racist actions on other grounds.

It is indeed often exaggerated, but...it's still a real thing, yes.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby morriswalters » Fri Jul 25, 2014 2:42 pm UTC

I pursued it enough to obtain the book. Look at the attribution. I did.

Tyndmyr wrote:It is indeed often exaggerated, but...it's still a real thing, yes.
Of course it is. It's a human trait. Each favoring that which is familiar to them. Do you network? Do you have a list of people that you keep in touch with who can advance your cause if you need them? Do you Pledge the Allegiance to the flag? It's all the same thing. What happens is that you change the placement of pieces on the board. Who you hate and distrust. If it isn't race and sexual orientation, it's regional affiliation, religion, level of wealth. It happens on the micro level and the macro level. Sheer numbers in this country will assure white dominance for some time.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Tyndmyr » Fri Jul 25, 2014 3:27 pm UTC

While I agree, I definitely am not a fan of the pledge of allegiance.

I don't think we can entirely alter human nature(and am not entirely sure that we'd do so for the better if we could), but the pledge falls into state support of such divisions(the religious reference in particular). The state's role should be one of treating people equally and fairly, not trying to enforce or support divisions or inequality.

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Jul 25, 2014 4:48 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:Except that the lower the chance gets, the better the plea deal has to be. If it's 99.9% chance of 25 years you pretty much have to accept a plea of 24 years. But if it's a 60% chance of 25 years, the plea better be 15 years or less.


But the problem is, if you are innocent but there is some circumstantial evidence against you, are you prepared to gamble on, say 25 years with a 20% chance of conviction, or take 6 months but have a criminal record for the rest of your life? It's not hard to construct a prisoner's dilemma type situation where the trial penalty is sufficiently large that people will almost inevitably plead out regardless of the evidence against them. But then once you have that criminal record, you can't vote (in some states), you can't get wide variety of jobs, and if you're ever charged with a crime again, the criminal record can be used as evidence against you (and, if you're in a three-strike state, can set you up for a life sentence for a minor offense).

User avatar
Crissa
Posts: 294
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:06 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Crissa » Mon Jul 28, 2014 5:53 pm UTC

Social Justice does indeed work against things which are already illegal, like pedophilia. Social Justice movements include getting equal justice, not just some justice - it's illegal to kidnap or molest, but victims who are non-white get less resources devoted to them, for instance. Suspects who are in power get more leeway and often outright protection from authority (priests, for instance). It's illegal to beat your wife, but pointing out that sports stars get half the penalty for being arrested for beating their wife than smoking a joint and not getting arrested? Also social justice.

Anyhow... The idea that some people complaining that things aren't justice enough for them is some sort of problem is basically absurd. It sucks when you're on the wrong end, but you know what? Apologize, make amends, and let it go.

It's not difficult. I know it's difficult for several even here to own up to the fact they may do something that's not how they define themselves, but... Everyone makes mistakes. Learn from it.

Bigots don't learn, but we do, right? That's why we're interested in discussing this stuff? Right?

Yeah, I'm on the side of right alot. That's because I've argued about this stuff for decades. I've apologized for being wrong many times - like miscounting the number of rockets post election in Gaza, recently. It happens. And saying things which are taken incorrectly is bound to happen - English is not a perfect language in that regard. Just apologize, learn, and try not to do it in the future.

-Crissa

User avatar
Sprocket
Seymour
Posts: 5951
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 6:04 pm UTC
Location: impaled on Beck's boney hips.
Contact:

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby Sprocket » Tue Apr 07, 2015 3:29 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:we just assume that the character is whatever the author is, since most of them are author avatars anyway. Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is weird, in that we picture most of the Ankh-Morporkians as British even though Ankh-Morpork is obviously Rome. The others are easier to see as their obvious regions; Uberwald is Eastern Europe, The Counterweight Continent China, XXXX XXXX, the Witches Swiss, Chalk Scottish, one of them was Carthage/Klatch and another Ephebe, and Djelibeybi, and a few other places. Yugoslavia is there, somewhere. Maybe it's the names? Vetinari is Italian enough, but Sam Vimes, Lady Sybil, Fred Colon, etc, sound too British.

I always thought of Ankh-Morpork as clearly a fictional-medieval-fantasy charicature of NYC, at least the way he describes it in the first book. I think it was mostly something about believing yourself superior for living there simply because of having to put up with how miserable it is.
"She’s a free spirit, a wind-rider, she’s at one with nature, and walks with the kodama eidolons”
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Zohar wrote: Down with the hipster binary! It's a SPECTRUM!

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby eSOANEM » Wed Apr 08, 2015 12:49 am UTC

Have you seen the maps of Ankh-Morpork? It's pretty much a direct lift of London and, if we orient things so that the river flows in the same direction, the shades lines up with the east end, the fancy regions with the west end, the boring bits with south london and the isle of gods is where the isle of dogs is.

Geographically, there's no doubt it's London.

Other aspects, such as its politics are lifted from other cities though.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

jacobstevens
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Jun 19, 2013 6:19 pm UTC

Re: Is White Dominance Exaggerated?

Postby jacobstevens » Fri Apr 10, 2015 8:07 pm UTC

jseah wrote:...laundry list of examples that chinese people in Singapore/Malaysia do.


I found this to be the most fascinating & informative post of the entire discussion. Thank you very much, I appreciated it. I spent a week in Singapore 13 years ago, with a few locals I'd met online, and was given some interesting overviews of cultural differences, but this was immersive. Side note, a model scout convinced me to do a session for an upcoming ad campaign for a popular shopping mall there in Singapore, as a mime. Eye-opening gestures, "can't believe my eyes at how good these deals are!" kind of thing. Cardboard cutouts of me were printed. Wish I had one.


Return to “Serious Business”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests