rogers park bryan wrote:
leashyourkids wrote:
What else would he be saying, RPB? Do you think all of these guys are saying that literally NO blacks are victims in any way in the whole world for any reason? Is that really your takeaway?
He's saying that, by and large, blacks aren't victims in America due solely to their skin color.
Well then he should say that instead, much clearer.
leashyourkids wrote:
But in your quest to show how open-minded you are, you have tried to delegitimize any opinion which seeks to make generalizations about a group of people. What if I told you that black people have a history of being treated poorly in this country? Would you tell me that it's "not my place" to say that and that there may have been individual black people who were treated fine? Because then you're making the argument you made fun of WfR for last week.
There is no quest. Im just honest with what I believe and how I view things. I'm sorry if that rubs you the wrong way.
But those two things you pointed out are not equal.
There are facts we can all agree on showing blacks have been mistreated in the past.
If he has factual evidence that no black people are victims of skin color, id love to see it.
If he has factual evidence that by and large they are not victims, Id love to see that and would agree.
There is really no good justification for him phrasing it as an all-encompassing statement and I understand if someone who was the victim of racism would not be really thrilled to hear this guy say it that way.
Also, you get upset when people generalize Trump voters or southerners, so Im going to have to ask you to pick a lane on whether generalizations are good or not.
I say not.
That literally is what he says. I don't know how you could listen to Larry Elder or anyone speak and draw the conclusion that they are saying no person in the world is ever a victim of anything at any time. And that's exactly what you're saying. You're just drawing the conclusions you want to in order to make a bad faith argument.
The question of whether his argument is a good one or not is not what I'm discussing. I'm not trying to advance his arguments. I'm showing you how ridiculous it is to say that anyone at any time for any reason should be told it's not their "place" to make an observation unless they are literally trying to give the perspective of someone they are not. But that's not what they're doing. They're making statements about groups of people that do not require them to have been those people in order to make the statements.
For example, I could tell you that Jews were treated horribly during the Holocaust. I could not, however, tell you what their perspective was. Larry Elder can tell you his opinion that blacks, by and large, are not victims due to their skin color anymore. The only thing he wouldn't have a "place" saying would be to try to describe the perspective of another black person. But that doesn't mean that we all just get to declare whether we are victims or not based on our own subjective experience. His conclusions are drawn from arguments that he makes... and Larry Elder makes them very well.
There is a difference between generalizing people based on some quality they possess ("all Trump voters are racist!") and the condition they live in ("Black people primarily live in urban areas"). It's a false equivalency.
How can there be 2 different sentence for the same offense? (possession of cocaine)
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
That yard sign can't disguise your obvious uber-capitalist bourgeois values.
