669 karma · joined August 20, 2014
It does because you're relying on racial identity to determine who pays and who receives rather than who stole and who was stolen from. The matter of who did what to whom is "settled" in the sense that all parties are dead.
> I don't hope for cosmic justice, I think justice is up to us humans.
What is your solution to the "stolen land" problem?
Regardless of "whose" territory they reside in and regardless of their racial origins, the people have a right to self-governance. Your proposal for an American Indian ethnostate where other ethnicities are subjugated and deprived the right to representative democracy is disgusting, illiberal, and racist.
Recall what you said because it seems you have forgotten:
> forced you to submit to their authority without your consent. That must just be terrible.
"you" being white people (presumably but non-American-Indian is more correct) and "their" being American Indians. That was your appraisal of the situation. You are in support of one racial identity compelling the submission of another.
And if you think this is a stretch (or that you were just making light) I spelled out your racial ideology explicitly in my previous post. To which you responded:
> Yes, because [...]
But you have a reason, as people often do. I don't buy the "legal" argument. It has been legal to commit a great many evil acts throughout history. No, I believe your reasoning is two fold:
1). You believe the ancestors of one ethnic group committed genocide against the ancestors of another ethnic group.
2). You believe land belonging to the ancestors of one ethnic group was appropriated by the ancestors of another ethnic group.
That's why you come to the conclusion that modern peoples should be rewarded or punished based on their racial identity. Its a racial tit-for-tat where the children of abusers are punished for actions completely outside of their control.
> The ideology is, simply, morality and respect for the rule of law.
I have a different appraisal and I think you can guess what it is.
---
I know what your response will be. Its the tribe's land by right (which is an organization that has survived the duration and which has been materially harmed), it has every right to seek remediation. To which I would agree (maybe to your surprise).
But the people who reside within the territory must be, by moral law, given the right to participate in the government of the territory. And if they are not, then the people will exercise their natural right to protest, revolution, and self-governance.
They should not be subjugated to a single racial identity. I don't doubt their legal ability to do it. I doubt the morality of it. And I doubt the people who seem to cheer this "reversal".
A visitor obeying a territory's laws is one thing but a group of people forcibly removed from their country are in a peculiar situation which requires, in my opinion, their consent to be governed regardless of what piece of paper gives what racial identity the right to rule a parcel of land.
You believe its right to subject a person who lives in Oklahoma, who has never lived in a country other than the USA, who has never stolen anyone's land, to the non-representative rule of a person (who's land was never stolen) because of their racial origin?
I'm very interested in the ideology that led you to these beliefs.
It really doesn't and saying otherwise doesn't add anything to the conversation (see what I did there).
Do you really believe the Russian and German empires should reclaim their "rightful" territories in Europe? Do you believe Europe should reassert its domination over Africa because it had strong political control over it in recent history? What about the British Raj? What about Hong Kong?
"Time and space" is a bullshit argument and you don't believe it yourself. How could you? "So and so" holding "such and such" lands at "this and that" time is the basis of 99% of wars throughout history.
Its a stupid way to think. Its a stupid way to govern.
Is it any surprise then that a lucky few who forgo cash in favor of worthless pieces of paper become super rich after the stock rises?
1. https://www.geekwire.com/2018/amazon-criticized-ending-wareh...
If anything these videos should continue to exist as a siren call for increased education funding and initiatives.
Millions of people complaining about "Muslim terrorism" led to you being inappropriately placed on a no-fly list. Millions of people complaining about "the Jew" led to significant and severe atrocities (plural...).
Millions voted for Trump. Millions voted for Clinton. Millions voted for Bernie. And millions will vote for the next Stalin, Hitler, or Mao.
I don't disagree that there is a problem with policing but I can't conceive of a more evil world where millions of people are just listened to without question.
By being born to an area you have done something special. You have received the special benefit of local education and infrastructure, you have familial and social connections to the people of that local area. You may even have a shared sense of local obligation to uplift the people you live near.
The problem with importing foreign labor isn't that they can't develop feelings of community or form social ties to an area. It's that someone local is harmed or excluded (after significant investment in them) while a foreign worker is underpaid and overworked in a job that exists because of the local's tax dollars.
We're allowing greed to create a permanent underclass of locals who can not climb the social hierarchy while also importing highly-educated quasi-slaves into the country. The whole thing reeks of economic opportunism and, to me, represents the very worst of capitalism.
Your source also suggests unarmed white people are nearly twice as likely to be shot than unarmed Hispanics. Doesn't that contradict the narrative of racist motive by white police?
I have to wonder how many people were killed by police. Was it 100 or 10,000? The difference in magnitude could see these racial biases diminish or worsen.
Also if you think tech isn't concered about "BLM" then you haven't visited a single tech website in the past two weeks. There are banners and calls for change everywhere...
It's like multi-threading 2+2.
I mean think about it. Whats the difference between sending message A and then message B versus sending messages A and B into a queue and letting some async process pop from it? Less complexity and guaranteed message delivery come for free in single-threaded code.
Am I wrong? What am I missing?
Everyone who writes software on macOS is probably virtualized already. Really shouldn't be any downside to this for the vast majority of programmers.
If the police were not there my life would have been at imminent risk. And if the police show up their lives are at imminent risk. So the cops have to show up and they have to wear riot gear.
I've had to live with months of protest downtown. People protesting to release prisoners because of coronavirus. People protesting to lift the coronavirus lock downs. In those cases there was no riot gear. Minimal police presence. When Friday's protest came around it immediately felt different. The people were much more angry and much more hostile.
People were looking at the Minneapolis riots with envy. People were shouting about the righteous cause of riots and looting. "Its the language of the unheard." Despite noble protestations that they were only going to loot the wealthy corporations with fat insurance contracts, they ended up looting everything. They ended up shooting each other far from police lines. They ended up burning police cars that were parked far away from police lines. They lit buildings on fire that could have very easily spread to neighboring apartment buildings.
You said:
> nothing about CPDs behavior looked like "keep people safe"
I disagree. "People" are more than just the rioters. They are rioters. They are residents in the immediate area. They are residents outside the immediate area who were spared the carnage by virtue of CPD's actions.
You can talk all you want about "subtle escalations". But truth be told anything the "authorities" do will be considered an escalation because the mob is not rational. It is primed to perceive anything and everything as a reason to execute its collective will.
My biggest takeaway is local events translate to global action in the crowd (police or protestors). And it leads to all this misunderstanding. "What I was just standing here. Why are you pushing me?". Because jackass, a group of people 10 feet away from you threw rocks and bottles at the police. Sorry you got shoved but shit happens.
Below are my unorganized thoughts. Just wanted to get them out.
---
There were like 100k people at 2:30 (maybe more I didn't count I'm just guessing). These people were mostly peaceful. The worst thing they did was chant obscenities about the police and jump on the cars of bystanders. Not the worst thing in the world but not the nicest way to protest either. I don't hold it against them.
By 6ish there were maybe 10 or 20 thousand hardcore protestors remaining. The people legitimately concerned about police brutality but not clinically-insane-enough-to-march-for-four-hours-saying-the-same-thing-to-no-one-in-particular went home.
These diehards are mostly a bunch of power tripping assholes. "Fuck 12", "ACAB", "Pigs", running up to the police line and trying to 'punk' them out. Just stupid. The weaker and frailer they are the more it seemed they had to say. They know they have all the power when they're with the crowd. Its simultaneously the most pathetic and the most terrifying thing you've ever seen because one of these cracked out weirdos is probably going to try to light your building on fire soon.
And then the fires start. Police cars, a 7-11, doesn't matter. The protestors block the street when firefighters roll up to put it out. They eventually move but I couldn't tell you why. Big shoutout to CFD for being total badasses. I wasn't about to walk out in the crowd even if I were disguised as a "protestor". They make their way to the fire, get it out ASAP and roll out before the crowd has a chance to completely engulf them. Though I never saw the bulk of the crowd leave the police lines.
I have to criticize CPD a little here. I was legitimately concerned my wife and I were going to burn to death in our apartment. I didn't have faith that the CPD could prevent someone from lighting my building on fire.
Thankfully it never came to that.
The police were completely outnumbered and were generally powerless to do anything when the crowd was in its full force. There were people with hammers breaking up the sidewalk to use chunks of debris as weapons against the police. The police just stood there unable or unwilling to prevent it.
In my mind, the police were present to A). soak up as much of the crowds rage as possible and B). prevent the really heinous shit from going down. I'm not talking murder. I'm talking burning an apartment building down with all the people inside heinous. Several murders happened behind the crowds (i.e. bad people are using the crowd as a human shield to do whatever they want). The police didn't (maybe couldn't) budge. Even if they did try to prevent it the crowd would have raged at their intrusion into "their" space.
After curfew the cops went on the offensive. The police began to march. Pushing the remaining "protestors" further and further south outside of the loop. This involved rubber bullets and I assume tear gas but I couldn't actually see this part. Along the way the rioters looted every business (aside from the Crocs store hilariously enough) from Wacker all the way to Roosevelt. I assume they looted further down but I didn't feel like walking any further through the ruins of my city.
That's basically it.
Loving the casual racism. Keep up the great work.
But of course, you're right. All criticism of the Chinese state must be couched in the language of America's own failures. They're just like us after all. Maybe when they nuke Japan we will acknowledge our own sins rather than dare criticize our dear friends in the CCP.
I think "valuing originality" is a human trait. Putting a monetary value on it is a capitalist invention.
Sound like you'll be bringing lower quality remote engineers into a lower quality remote environment. Don't be surprised when that strategy blows up.
Can anyone expand on this? I'm not well versed in Rust lore and have just used that module in a recent learning project.
I think we can both conclude that automated censorship systems will fail because they fail to capture "context clues, human judgement, imperfection, inaccuracy".
And, I think you'll agree, proactive censorship systems are authoritarian by default (even if that authority is private). Their purpose is prevention not resolution. In that sense, there can be no trial, no jury, no judge, not even a plaintiff to accuse you.
So we move on from the corporate world and enter the legal world. The world of government. How best to determine and punish hate speech? Does intent matter if the offense was deep and damaging? Do you jail the author? Fine them? Destroy their works? I think no matter which path you choose you can draw comparisons to every totalitarian government that has ever graced this earth.
If I am nothing else I am a humanist. I believe in the progress of humanity -- all humanity. You, your friends, and the white supremacists who post pepe memes to scare and annoy them.
Time is long. Systems that we put in place now will be with us for generations. Society's attitudes will shift -- for better or worse. The only thing protecting us from each other are the systems we agree to. The systems that permit the most freedom at the least harm.
In my mind, there is no censorship device that can withstand time.
That's all I have to say. Best of luck to you.
Not at all. I think you've just misunderstood what gender fluidity is.
Gender fluid is a class of non-binary gender expression. Non-binary is a spectrum of gender identities. Gender fluidity by definition is the ability to fluidly transition between different gender identities.
Gender identity is itself a personal sense and how you sense your gender can change if you are gender fluid.
So I ask again:
> Are gender fluid people considered under this definition?
And now I have a few more questions:
Are you willing to admit your previous statements can marginalize people and strip them of their identity? Are you willing to accept that your previous statements are, in fact, hate speech according to the social morays of our time? Should your innocent mistake be removed from the internet for fear of harming a gender fluid person?
Are gender fluid people considered under this definition? Having a gender identity might be immutable but gender identity is not static. It can change. That by definition is not immutable.