Page 10 of 12

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-17, 15:07
by Yasna
Saim wrote:Sure, now you're restating your thesis as a metaphor, after some goalpost shifting ("called for retaliation"). You've already been shown why your prediction is baseless (in terms of, you know, what is actually happening and has happened; if you want to stay within the realm of thought experiments, inaccurate metaphors and extrapolations based on extrapolations be my guest), and your framing is incorrect, so I don't have anything else to say to you.

Before you stomp off to your room and slam the door, I'll remind you that it was an off the cuff one-line reaction, not a bloody thesis. No idea why you think I was trying to do a deep analysis with watertight logic. I guess you were just hunting for an argument to win on the Internet.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-17, 15:31
by Saim
Yasna wrote:not a bloody thesis.


Before I "slam the door" or whatever, I'll just clarify that I meant meaning #1 here, not meaning #2. I don't expect you to write a dissertation on terrorism.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-17, 16:32
by vijayjohn
Saim wrote:I unfortunately don't think we can rule out copycats of any ideological persuasion, I don't think any of us should be surprised if this keeps happening.

No, but that is at least a common pattern of these attacks. Extremists from group A attack random people who at least in theory are in some separate group B, extremists from group B use said attack as an excuse to then attack random people who are supposedly in group A. To me, it seems like Yasna's suggesting instead that just because of this one attack, Western cities are suddenly going to devolve into a state of gang warfare, and I don't see a reason to believe that that's what's happening.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-17, 17:20
by Car
The Christchurch-based Super Rugby team Crusaders is thinking about a name change following the terrorist attack (it surely wasn't just a shooting, ESPN). What do you think?

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-17, 17:30
by md0
Car wrote:The Christchurch-based Super Rugby team Crusaders is thinking about a name change following the terrorist attack (it surely wasn't just a shooting, ESPN). What do you think?

If the team feels uncomfortable with that name, I don't blame them. It is not the first thing I would want to change in the aftermath of such a horrible attack, but more power to them.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-18, 1:06
by Yasna
Can anyone read the Arabic in the picture?

Image

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-18, 3:34
by vijayjohn
Oh, I'm sure they're similar to these.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-19, 21:05
by Car
md0 wrote:
Car wrote:The Christchurch-based Super Rugby team Crusaders is thinking about a name change following the terrorist attack (it surely wasn't just a shooting, ESPN). What do you think?

If the team feels uncomfortable with that name, I don't blame them. It is not the first thing I would want to change in the aftermath of such a horrible attack, but more power to them.

A bit more on the topic. Fair enough, I think.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-19, 21:12
by linguoboy
Wow, I didn't realise they were only founded in 1996. I'd just assumed it was a much older name than that. '96 is awfully late to be giving such parochial names to professional teams. All of our worst team names date at least back to the 30s.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-20, 0:22
by Johanna
Most Europeans still have no idea what the Crusades were even about, except something having to do with that strip of land in the Middle East where most of the Bible takes place, and that at the time, it was seen as a good and righteous thing. You need to be a historian or a history nerd with an interest in that particular era and region to know some of what actually happened there.

In 1996, in a country literally on the other side of the world (Spain is the antipode of New Zealand's North Island)? Yep, I can very much see a sports team taking on that name as a positive thing.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-20, 1:11
by vijayjohn
I thought maybe they were just inspired by American sports teams. :P

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-20, 10:45
by Car
linguoboy wrote:Wow, I didn't realise they were only founded in 1996. I'd just assumed it was a much older name than that. '96 is awfully late to be giving such parochial names to professional teams. All of our worst team names date at least back to the 30s.

Well, Super Rugby is that young (as the article also mentions). Which makes some of the complaints seem so ridiculous compared to the tradition of many European teams. It's a relative young competition consisting of franchises, with the number of teams being changed a lot during that time, after all. Sure, it's not nothing and they've been that good, but still.

Johanna, did you really learn so little about the Crusades?

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-20, 17:36
by linguoboy
Johanna wrote:Most Europeans still have no idea what the Crusades were even about, except something having to do with that strip of land in the Middle East where most of the Bible takes place, and that at the time, it was seen as a good and righteous thing. You need to be a historian or a history nerd with an interest in that particular era and region to know some of what actually happened there.

Sad, if true. Unlike English, where the relationship between "Crusader" and "cross" is obscured, it's perfectly transparent in most other European languages, so the chauvinistic nature of the name should be immediately apparent.

Johanna wrote:In 1996, in a country literally on the other side of the world (Spain is the antipode of New Zealand's North Island)? Yep, I can very much see a sports team taking on that name as a positive thing.

It's not 1840 any more and information travels frequently and instantaneously between the Antipodes and the rest of the Anglosphere. New Zealand is particularly known for its strong cultural ties to England.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-22, 4:04
by vijayjohn
I honestly don't feel I ever learned all that much about the Crusades.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-23, 9:45
by md0
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/arti ... d=12215573
"NEW ZEALAND: Alleged Christchurch terror attacker's manifesto banned"

A bad decision I am afraid.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-03-23, 11:57
by Saim
Yeah I think that even if you come from the perspective that the State should regulate hate speech it doesn't make much sense to ban a specific text.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-04-25, 8:24
by mōdgethanc
Saim wrote:He also followed a bunch of white supremacists on Twitter, recommended a white supremacist YouTube
Who were these white supremacists?

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-04-26, 7:14
by Saim
mōdgethanc wrote:
Saim wrote:He also followed a bunch of white supremacists on Twitter, recommended a white supremacist YouTube
Who were these white supremacists?


On Twitter, Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern.

On YouTube, some guy who made animé reviews with jokes mocking the woman killed in Charlottesville and how Hitler was right and stuff.

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-04-26, 10:34
by mōdgethanc
what the fuck is it with every YouTuber being far-right

Re: Discrimination

Posted: 2019-04-26, 12:51
by Yasna
Saim wrote:
mōdgethanc wrote:Who were these white supremacists?

On Twitter, Stefan Molyneux and Lauren Southern.

It's hard to find an actual white supremacist these days as opposed to a white nationalist. For example, someone like Stefan Molyneux openly acknowledges that Askhenazi Jews and East Asians have a higher average IQ than whites, and some white nationalists look to Japan as a model state (highly developed and ethnically homogeneous).