Michael Savage vs. Britain - Page 2

dukefleed, let me put this in terms you might understand:

When Captain America gets mad at Iron Man for not letting the Falcon ride shotgun in the Avengers quinjet and calls him a racist, Iron Man can either say, "Hey, maybe I was being racist" and review his actions or he can brush it off and say, "Hey, Cap, you're full of shit, and I didn't let the Falcon ride shotgun because... he always leaves Cheeto crumbs on the seat, not because he's black." In either case, he's still Tony Stark, a wealthy industrialist with everything going for him.

But if J. Jonah Jameson has been pushing an agenda against homose... wait, let's just say he's pushing an anti-mutant agenda. And he says that ho... er, mutants should not be allowed to raise children, because they might... do things to them or indoctrinate them into mutant-iality. Don't you think that might manifest in laws (or at least public sentiment) against a known lesb... er, mutant, like Mystique adopting a child to replace the one she lost when Rogue defected to the... Uncanny X-Men???

[Rain Dog, I know. I hate myself sometimes.]

And beyond the institutional concerns, racism isn't liked, but there's nothing that makes one inherently a racist; you're free to change your outlook, whereas being black, homosexual, female, etc. is linked to one's very persona. You can't escape insults leveled on a race, gender, or sexual orientation, whereas you can simply choose not to be racist.

I don't belive I'm going to say this but,

Fleed is right, there are no "scales of Racsim" it's wrong on any level

Oh, I guess I forgot that employment was the basis for determining all means of discrimination.

Seriously, you don't want to get into this discussion. You're going to look stupid.

You must not have read the post he was responding to very carefully, because I don't believe I was arguing that. Perhaps you'd like to read my dumbed-down-for-fleed version above?

In principle, you made a good point about the IRA, Rain Dog, but it's important to remember that the view (from both an Irish and British perspective) on how that was handled is less than flattering. Yes, they have experience, but the bungles they perpetrated hardly make the British an absolute authority on the matter.

Well first off, racist may be a description, but it certainly has derogatory connotations. Racism is looked down upon and it should be. But the idea that all conservatives (she said it, not me) are racist is just plain stupid and to me, it is hateful. It's hateful because she's attacking a group of people, that I belong to, and putting a terrible connotation towards all of us. She's also playing the politics of division as well. For someone who supported Obama so strongly, shouldn't she follow the ways of our President?

My major problem with her comments were these.

"And you know, you can tell these type of right wingers anything and they'll believe it, except the truth. You tell them the truth and they become -- it's like showing Frankenstein's monster fire. They become confused, and angry and highly volatile. That guy, causing them feelings they don't know, because their limbic brain, we've discussed this before, the limbic brain inside a right-winger or Republican or conservative or your average white power activist, the limbic brain is much larger in their head space than in a reasonable person, and it's pushing against the frontal lobe."

This is from a blog on February 12. http://www.ecorazzi.com/2009/02/12/w...on/#more-13424

JG: The reason a person is a conservative republican is because something is wrong with them. Again, that’s science – that’s neuroscience. You cannot be well adjusted, open-minded, pluralistic, enlightened and be a republican. It’s counter-intuitive. And they revel in their anti-intellectualism. They revel in their cruelty.

I don’t know if you heard me talking to Jenny a while ago, but I was saying that first you have to be an asshole and then comes the conservatism. You gotta be a dick to cleave onto their ideology.


JG: It’s not even nutty. It really is neuroscience. I truly believe that it has something to do with their limbic brain. I really believe that some people’s limbic brain dominates more than others. Our limbic brain controls all our emotions and it causes us to be irrational. Our limbic brain goes into action when we’re ecstatic, frightened, when we’re having sex. I really believe that if a neuroscientist examined the brain of somebody who identified as a conservative, they would find it’s wired differently.

Sounds like hate speech to me.


Oh and this white, male, heterosexual privilege you're talking about? I have no idea what that is. If someone called me a racist or homophobe, the stigma could stick. Just look at the woman golf pro who made that lynching comment about Tiger Woods. Sure, we aren't talking about it now, but go to her Wikipedia page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_Tilghman

The controversy is right there for all to see. She was humiliated, suspended from work, and protested against by Al Sharpton. She will always be remembered for that comment, no matter how harmless it was in all respects. Tiger didn't even think anything of it!

Our society attacks racism as it should, but there's a difference between Kelly Tilghman and neo-nazis walking down the streets of Joliet, Illinois. Tilghman's comments, which could certainly be described as a small mistake that deserves a steadfast apology, turned into something larger than it should have been.

Racism is a very persuasive connotation in this country and a white person being branded as such can be extremely deadly to one's reputation, especially if they are a professional like Tilghman. For someone like Don Imus or Michael Savage, it just enhances their rep as dickheadish and inflammatory. But for someone else, it could destroy a career.

Sorry, but I just don't buy this because I was born a straight white guy that I was born more privileged than most people. Sure, maybe the WASP with money is more privileged than 95% of the American public, but straight generalizations about any class of people are usually completely wrong.

Yeah, seriously. There is no real difference between the likes of Savage and some of these people. I'm not a fan of Savage or any right wing talk show host, but to only ban this guy comes off as terribly unfair. If you're gonna ban Savage, you gotta ban other hosts as well.


You're absolutely right.

See, this is the best argument someone can make about this. I can buy this. Although, I still don't see why it just has to be Savage. Hannity? Limbaugh? Beck? A left winger? All or nothing, I say.

A touchy response there methinks.

If that's not what you were are arguing then I'm sorry for misreading your post.

Many conservatives don't. That's why you tend to get called racist, sexist, and homophobic more often than liberals. D,oh! Generalizing again.

On an individual level, sure. There are super-poor straight white guys, hugely influential lesbians, powerful black men, etc. But there are more institutional and social barriers confronting people who are not white, male, and straight. That's why the individuals who manage to get past those barriers are considered exceptional. This isn't rocket science.

It's a combination of those barriers and simply the odds that allow us to make generalizations.

For all I know, you're a white man who was born into absolute poverty. But the odds are on your side right off the bat - you are less likely to have been than a black man. For all I know, you're a white man who's the recipient of frequent sexual put-downs or a victim of rape - but the odds are that you're not. For all I know, you're a guy who's been discriminated against because you prefer fucking women to men, but I have no idea exactly where or how this would happen.

Basically, there are barriers that you will never confront as a straight, white, male. This doesn't mean you won't confront barriers. But they will not be the same, and, due to the fact that our society comes from a long line of European patriarchies, they will probably not be as substantial. Also, the barriers you will face will not be unique to white, straight men, but may also apply to the non-privileged.

Rutgers.

DaveB, I don't need anything...dumbed down, as I am not...The dummy here. Sure...I love comics, but I understand history (it was one of my best subjects in school, on all levels) and I understand that you are a bit...too big for your britches, if you think that as a liberal, what you say is too hard for us...conservatives to understand.

Don't engage, Dave. Don't engage.

Yeah, I know. Besides, I don't know enough about Transformers to construct another analogy.

I'd put a drawing of DaveB's brain next to duke fleed's actual one and the drawing would come out ahead. Just saying.

Wait. People are saying that white males in this generation are not privileged? Seriously?

Mr. Freeze, Don't engage, don't worry, I am not asking for DaveB's hand in...marriage. I am as real as any other poster on...CHUD.COM, don't be so awed by...The Rain Dog's hateful Gospel, against me, that you become his...acolyte.

This post is

Alan "Nordling" Cerny, Now that is intelligent, a drawing of...DaveB's Brain would come out ahead, of my actual brain?

Stelios, There are priviliged people, and there are in all races and creed...those that feel they are above, others. In fact...many politicians would fit that description.

For fuck's sake...when will this end...I don't...give a shit..but can we take a..vote...and..just..


Fuck, fuck superity fuck fuck. I read it and my brain turns to mush. I'm usually not an asshole but this is one tired meme that has run its course. Give it up or get out.

And to save time:

*insert shitty nerd/geek stereotype references with a plethora of ellipses and bad puns in response here*

Bancroft Agee, I like you too...so do not blow a gasket.

It's been ten minutes since I read this, and I'm still giggling like a loon.

I'm not saying that at all.

I'm saying that just because someone may be white and male doesn't mean they're privileged. I think it's a ridiculous generalization.

Are white males more privileged than blacks on an average? Sure. I'll agree to that.

Does that mean that all white males are privileged? No.

Not all white males in America grow up to be John D. Rockefeller.

No one is saying that. There's quite a difference between being a Rockefeller and simply having your job application taken seriously.

That's an assbackwards interpretation of the argument at hand.

No one's saying that all white heterosexual males are individually privileged. I'm saying that the white male subset of humanity as a whole enjoys many more advantages than say black males, or asian women or any equivalent I can think of. The heterosexual part of them even more so.

I don't think it's that unreasonable to expect the party that has the power to have a little thicker skin. If someone calls me a racist honky I'll laugh it off and literally forget about it 30 seconds later. I don't expect someone that's called a pervert or a fag because he's homosexual to have the same reaction.

The argument that white males are disadvantaged (beyond reprehensibly bad schools, a toxic food supply and dwindling prosperity--aspects of life he shares with everyone who is not this nation's coddled rich) is pure fail. That opinion comes from restricting one's information sources to narrow channels to ensure that all information backs up the central premise. It's pointless to even argue about it.

The truth is that the poor of any race, creed, color or sexuality have more in common with each other than they do with their counterparts in the top 5%.

Do most people even know who Michael Savage is? I wasn't aware of the guy until his MSNBC weekend show where he infamously told a caller to "get AIDS and die!"

That was day one for me, as well. I don't really seek these lunatics out, so it's wonderful when cable news networks turn the rocks over for me.

Frankly, the Animosity Bureau in my soul is busy enough with mAnn Coulter and Michelle Malkin on constant rotation. My disgust for them knows neither rest nor end.

I used to listen to him when I had a 2 1/2 commute to work. Not a lot of choices on AM talk radio :-)

He's enjoying every minute of this of course.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8037025.stm

In a way, Ann Coulter is probably more hateful than him to be quite honest.

That's okay Dave. In fact, I think I want to make love to this post a little bit. Bless you sir.

Actually Bobby I completely agree with you, just look at the blunt misapplication of the Prevention Of Terrorism Act as a perfect example of not only fucking it up, but excaserbating the problem.

I meant it more in the way that it adds context to the British governments action in this case rather than the 'over-reaction' some of our stateside friends are painting it as. That doesn't mean they're that much better at dealing with modern terrorism, just that it's been a reality for them that much longer.

I know stel, that this thread has descended into a plea for poor misunderstood and maligned white western males would be hilarious if it wasn't so fucking tragic and mind boggling.

Guess what, there are African Americans of wealth and privalage in the states, in fact your presidents one, does that mean racism is officially over?

Fark.

You're funny... make me laugh some more.

Jesus how did this thread devolve so quickly?

This thread proves that racism is alive and well on all sides!

You should throw out the "white people can be niggers too!" defense to complete the tired argument that devalues the racism of the white, industrialized world because they heard Chris Rock call out crackers once.

I did not make any such argument and you are being an asshole by assigning that kind of offensive opinion to me

What I wrote was that the 1960's paradigm of "White Power Rulez" is no longer relevant to this century. Look at the US Census data. Demographically "White Anglo Saxon Protestants" ARE a minority in large parts of the US now (esp the West Coast), and will be overall within a few decades. Europe is not far behind.



MY opinion (NOT YOUR opinion projected onto me) is that Social / Economic class is more relevant to the discussion of "haves vs have not's" than race.

Now, if I've followed this thread properly you shouldn't be offended unless you're poor, black or gay. Failing that, you just shake it off.

Oh, and it'd help if you're Tony Stark, too.

Numerical evidence means jack all. The "More of them, less of us" argument in regards to racism and it's effect on society implies that both are already on an equal footing. History has shown that "minority" isn't so much a number but a classification in terms of one's status within a society.



Blatantly ignoring the issue of race, in particular it's role in current and historical American society, in a discussion about the "haves vs have not's" is hogwash. Do you honestly believe poor whites are treated the same, overall, as poor blacks/hispanics/asians? That they face the same challenges, stigmas and barriers to achievement?

If you do I suggest you roll into the ghettos and impoverished areas of New York, Detroit, Boston, Atlanta, Los Angeles, Chicago, New Orleans, Nashville, Memphis, Louisville or any city with any significant minority population and tell me how many white devils you see.

I'm here all night, try the veal and don't forget to tip your waiter.

Bancroft, Cylon; are both of you guys white?

I don't think the census data makes a difference. Look at the people in power and you see a common theme -- white males. That's not going to change easily as no one in power likes to give it up. And even though it's a fact that the poor of all races have more in common than they do with the rich, stoking bigotry has helped divide and conquer the unwashed masses. Racism is the ideal distraction for any powerful body.

In terms of attitudes changing, I think education and economic equality are the only things that will help pull everyone out of the mire. Racial awareness and curiosity is natural; bigotry, resentment and suspicion are taught, so I think even as older generations perpetuate racist attitudes, independent thinking and enlightenment could eventually win the day.

Wow yt, you have a lot more faith in humanity than I do.

The census data matters because it shows where we are and were we are going: WASPs can't hold on to power much longer because there aren't enough of them anymore. Also the ones in power (esp for the previous 8 years) have really fucked themselves over.

I completelty agree with your 2nd paragraph. Obama getting elected as the first African American did not end racism but you can't tell me that doesn't represent a quantum leap over the America of 1960.

Overall, no.

In places, definitely. The folk of Appalachia face the same obstacles. But then, they are slowly starting to be recognized as a minority.

White as white. Raised on or near Navy bases where I was one of few whites (most of the people I grew up with were a mix of white, black, asian etc ). Also spent my adolescence in South Carolina, so yeah I've seen a lot racism in action, on both sides.

Numbers aren't necessarily key when evaluating privilege.

This blog (written by a guy) does a nice job of summarizing some issues of male privilege. Notably, the first manifestation of privilege that he mentions is the privilege to be oblivious to the fact that privilege exists.

A similar list on white privilege, written by the woman who inspired the male privilege list on that guy's blog.

Some thoughts on white privilege by professor of journalism. Here's a follow-up.

And, finally, a list on heterosexual privilege.

Most of the stuff mentioned on these lists isn't really quantifiable. You can't address it with stats. And you can probably take issue with some of the items, but I believe they're meant to serve as food for thought, not necessarily as universals.

Truth regarding poor Appalachian whites.

Although their plight will be blamed on their political leanings in here I'm sure.

The "white privilege" list is pretty on and off. Point #20 is kind of funny thought since it depends entirely on your chosen profession.

Point #11 hits close to home, but completely dismisses the fact that punctuality is often related to culture.

It's a nice idea but it's a fantasy. The ones in power have indeed f*cked themselves (and everyone else) over, but that doesn't mean they're going to let go of power without a dirty fight. Also, check out the population disparities in South Africa and see how well that has worked out for the black population. Census data matters but it doesn't dictate racial attitudes or racist practices. Here's what makes a much more powerful impression: education and economic opportunity for the under classes. If poor whites aren't being squeezed by the upper classes economically they won't be so inclined to find scapegoats. If poor blacks have better economic opportunities they can make the lives of their children better than theirs in terms of education and opportunity, and same with poor whites.

Agree, and I also think that Obama will make a huge impression on this generation of children who will grow up with a positive, powerful role model of mixed race.

No, their plight will be blamed largely on class, which no one here has discounted at all. No one's said that race, gender, and sexual orientation present the only barriers in American society. Thing is - if you're born into Appalachian poverty and manage to overcome the inherent economic and educational problems, it's not like your Appalachian-ness will follow you around on job interviews or prevent you from marrying who you want.

But please, keep keep throwing these isolated examples of unfairness to straight, white guys out. It makes your position seem increasingly sympathetic.

You don't know this forum very well.

I disagree. I had to lose the accent before I could be taken seriously at many job interviews. Apaprently the "hillbilly" dialect makes you unhirable, much the way some people won't be hired for their "urban" dialect (which, I'm sure you'll agree is thinly veiled racism).