Warning Signs of Satanic Behavior. Training video for police, 1990
the perfect photoset
Journalist and artist Shirin Barghi has created a gripping, thought-provoking series of graphics that not only examines racial prejudice in today’s America, but also captures the sense of humanity that often gets lost in news coverage. Titled “Last Words,” the graphics illustrate the last recorded words by Brown and other young black people — Trayvon Martin, Oscar Grant and others — who have been killed by police in recent years.
Anonymous said: For me, social justice warrior is a bad thing. I'm a fan of equality for everyone, and I like to think I'm not a jackass. I'm certainly not on gamergates side. But social justice warriors tend to sound a lot like the guys who beat the shit out of me in school for being a "creeper" and I don't feel comfortable around the more aggressive SJW stuff. It's really not hard to see a threat behind a lot of SJW talk, especially if it's been the kind of thing that has turned into fighting before.
While do understand your appeal for civility, anon, I think that the term Social Justice Warrior is being used not as a descriptive term for people using (subjectively) extreme methodology, but for a set of ideologies. The fact that I was accused of Social Justice Warrior-ing is, I think, indicative of this, because I don’t feel that anything I’ve done is terribly confrontational or offensive, let alone abusive or extreme. (Correct me if I’m wrong.)
Which leads me to believe that Social Justice Warrior is merely a pejorative term used rhetorically to label people who take particular ideological stances (especially concerning feminism and gender, but also LGBTA+ and race issues), to make it appear as though they are being unreasonable or extreme. “Don’t listen to her, she’s only a hysterical SJW”, &c.
Fact is, there isn’t an objective definition to be had for a Social Justice Warrior, unless it’s the literal meaning of “someone who fights for social justice”, and that (as a label) is only bad if you think social justice itself is bad. I certainly don’t think it is. Beyond that, you are certainly free to disagree with what shape social justice should take and what methodologies should be used in its name; it’s not like there’s an absolute consensus on either point.
“Social Justice Warrior” is a phrase that’s helpful in the same way that “politcally correct” is helpful. We all pretty much know what they both mean, but they say a lot more about the person using those phrases than whatever they’re used to describe. When someone describes you as politically correct, there’s a pretty chance that what they mean is, “you person make an effort to be respectful of other races/genders/religions/etc., but when I say that, I mean it as an insult.” When someone says, “I’m not politically correct,” what they probably mean is, “I’m aware that saying racist (or whatever) stuff is hurtful and offensive, and I’m comfortable doing it anyway, because I’m a piece of shit.” It’s great when people talk without irony about political correctness because it helps prepare you for the garbage they’re about to talk next. SJW? Same deal. Just come right out and say, “this person is calling me out on my shitty opinions, and it’s making me uncomfortable.”
nebuvisse said: Of course there was poc in middle aged Europe! How else would we have gotten small pox and the black plague? XD
First of all, “middle aged Europe”
Second of all, your understanding of epidemiology would be laughable if it wasn’t just an excuse to say a racist thing. Well, congratulations. You’ve said a racist thing. Ha ha, people of color spread diseases. Super hilarious.Hmm, maybe if you want to learn more about how “small pox” is spread, take a look in here
No sufferance for racist dickheads, but plenty of time for a link sourcing that image of a 700-year-old butthole pic. Medievalpoc=integrity.
But I think it says something about white people that they’re more okay with the idea of their ancestors being isolated from all interracial contact for the majority of history
than they are the idea of their ancestors knowing and cooperating with non-white people
I think that this basic idea, the kind of imagined total isolation, feeds into the idea that there are “racial achievements”. Everyone’s seen those kind of posts, or heard something like that from someone they know.
If not, I think it’s safe to say that as he was born in Germany to European parents, he was PROBABLY WHITE and can PoC PLEASE stop trying to take credit for the achievements of white people?
Along with demands that I personally “prove” the races of long-dead figures of European historical importance.
This person feels 100% comfortable and confident to literally claim the accomplishments of a deceased German composer as a racial achievement of some kind. And there are a lot of white people perfectly willing to back up this idea.
Now, I’m going to go ahead and show you where this idea came from. It was quite literally invented as a justification for the chattel enslavement of people considered “Black”.
Here’s a pretty concise version of what I mean from Enlightenment Thinker Immanuel Kant:
The Negroes of Africa have by nature no feeling that rises above the trifling. Mr. [David] Hume challenges anyone to cite a single example in which a Negro has shown talents, and asserts that among the hundreds of thousands of blacks who are transported elsewhere from their countries, although many of them have even been set free, still not a single one was ever found who presented anything great in art or science or any other praiseworthy quality, even though among the whites some continually rise aloft from the lowest rabble and through superior gifts earn respect in the world. So fundamental is the difference between these two races of man.
That their temperament has not become entirely adequate to any climate can also be inferred from the fact that it is hard to find any other reason why this race, which is too weak for hard labour and too indifferent for industrious work, and which is incapable of any culture even though there are enough examples and encouragement in the vicinity [namely, the example set by the European colonial settlers], stands far below even the Negro, who occupies the lowest of all other levels which we have mentioned as racial differences .
As an interesting aside, even though the scholar who wrote the excoriating paper above notes the hypocrisy inherent in touting Kant as the best of Enlightenment moral philosophers, they still repeat the same old historically inaccurate lies they have been told over and over in a classroom, as part and parcel of an education they paid dearly for:
We should also remember that Enlightenment colonialism was the first time that whites were largely exposed to other races, and that Mendel and Darwin were not even born yet.
As anyone who’s been following this blog for five minutes knows by now, that is a double untruth.
1. That all Europeans during this time were “whites”
2. That these “Whites” had NOT already been exposed to “other races”.
Even among proponents of taking the CRT scalpel to some of out most deeply biased aspects of education, are still in far too many ways, writing in a vacuum.
This is why interdisciplinary research and academic writing is SO. CRUCIALLY. IMPORTANT.
Even critical works like that of Eigen and Larrimore feel compelled to ameliorate open denunciation of Kant as one of the foremost contributors to the invention of race:
Robert Bernasconi has argued that it is Immanuel Kant who should be credited with having “invented” the concept of race, since it is Kant “who gave the concept sufficient definition for subsequent users to believe that they were addressing something whose scientific status could at least be debated.”
And here we have the justification and entitlement inherent in the aforementioned white nationalist’s call for “proof”, worded thus:
Can anyone actually provide a reputable and non-biased source to prove that Beethoven was, in fact, a PoC?
With the already foregone expectation and conclusion:
If not, I think it’s safe to say that as he was born in Germany to European parents, he was PROBABLY WHITE and can PoC PLEASE stop trying to take credit for the achievements of white people?And there you have the progression of one of the most insidiously long-lived versions of racism. A version that is codified right into the structure of our educational system.After all, if you’ve taken History of Modern Philosophy, one of the most popular humanities requirements and/or degree-requirement satisfying electives, you know Kant. Or at least, you remember the phrase “Kantian Synthesis” from high school.The concept that the “Fathers of Modern Philosophy” came up with their ideas in a complete and total vacuum, isolated from all other nations and what we would now call “Races”, is a white supremacist ideal that all Americans are spoon-fed starting in high school, sometimes earlier.We are told that they were influenced by Greek and Roman philosophers, ignoring the fact that these ancient texts were preserved mainly in the Islamic world during the European Medieval period, and were brought back starting in the 1200s* by travelers from both areas of the world who copied out surviving manuscripts from the Classical period.And of course, if you want to learn anything about what has been dubbed “Eastern Philosophy”, you must take an entirely separate class; often one that does not count toward your humanities degree.Yes, this is an art history blog. But it is also more that that, because the appalling lack of interdisciplinary research and publishing on these rather specific topics, in addition to the overspecialization of academic departments, leaves gaps in theory so wide you could drive a snowplow through them.Even the most highly educated people will still believe that Early and Late Medieval as well as Early Modern Europe was racially isolated.This myth serves nothing but white supremacy and bad history.It serves nothing but 200 more films with all-white casts.This is the MYTH of European culture that has leaked into ours. And to my understanding, a great deal of European cultures as well. This is something we should all be thinking about, because to think is to question, and to question is the first step of change.—-* YMMV; something something I’m generalizing
Last year, 22-time Emmy award-winning reporter John Stofflet posted this news video he created for KING-TV in 2004, featuring Paul Smith and his artistic talents.
"When someone says, "I could never do that," Paul answers, "what can you do?”
Isaac Asimov - Earth is Room Enough
Five Reasons to Vote Out Arkansas Rep Tom Cotton
1. He gives hypocrisy a new name.
- He is the sole sponsor of the bill H.R. 2239: Stop Court-Packing Act. The purpose of this bill is to stop President Obama from “Packing” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The hypocrisy here is that the court in question is literally “Packed” with Republicans and this bill’s actual purpose is to keep the court “Packed.”
2. He isn’t a fan of protecting assault victims.
3. He stands against his own constituents.
- On Farm Bill, Tom Cotton Chooses Washington Special Interests Over Arkansas – Votes With Club For Growth & Against Fellow Arkansas Republicans
4. He believes in “blood guilt.”
- He wanted to automatically punish anyone who violated US Sanctions with Iran with no judge, jury, trial or court. As bad as that is, he didn’t stop there. He also believes that we should equally punish the spouse, children, parents, cousins, ect of said supposed “Criminal.”
5. He isn’t homophobic but…
Tom Cotton is a despicable man.
I went to high school with Tom Cotton; he was a senior when I was a freshman. He was kind of a smarmy asshole, but he was a very intelligent kid that people assumed would do something worthwhile with his life. Not sure what happened between then and now to turn him into the actual villain he is today, but his politics are disgusting and the way he runs his campaign is shameful. I don’t live in Arkansas anymore, but I hope to hell they have the sense to vote him out of office and into obscurity.