living my life, trying to be productive, and miserably failing at both.

  • 2 Posts
  • 11 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 25th, 2021

help-circle

  • if we were talking about lemmygrad, I would agree, but personally lemmy.ml is a place for me that I enjoy browsing and posting to. anyway I think it’s the best opportunity for anyone interested in making a centrist or apolitical instance and get the label of “flagship instance” on joinlemmy to help it grow and become as big as lemmy.ml, it will also make it easier for people who don’t like the politics of lemmy.ml to choose an instance knowing that it has no strong political affiliation.

    but I agree the folks on lemmygrad can be a little bit … let’s say annoying.

    also interesting that their only problem seems to be about the “genocide”.


  • White isn’t a race, its a social construct that has come for historical reasons to stand for a group of European colonialists from a variety of countries.

    I never said white is a race either. I didn’t even mention white. we were talking about Anglo-Saxons I assume? even then I clarified in one of my comments that Anglo-Saxons aren’t technically a race.

    I’d tread very carefully if I were you

    and now I’m getting ban threats from an admin of lemmygrad because we disagree over a title. why are you so hostile? did I say anything outrageous without knowing? I apoligoze if I did, but can you point to it?

    white supremacists whining about “reverse racism” here.

    bold claim. I never suggested, or even implied that white people are superior or any bullshit like that. as I said I didn’t even mention white, you brought it up. I just said saying that an ethnic group has a negative trait in their DNA is racist. but apparantly it’s a controversial take on lemmygrad.ml

    and you would do me a favour if you don’t classify me in the “reverse racism” crowd. I did not say there’s sytematic racism against “white people”, I didn’t even come close to that. it was just a title.

    but well, thanks for your warning, and for not banning me. I enjoy talking to you guys, just wished you would reply to me and explain why I’m wrong, instead of downvoting me. that would make a more productive discussion, and a more pleasant experience.


  • just saw this comment and now I wanna cry T_T

    so now I’m just someone biting a “bait”, with a “superiority complex”, someone “not likely to join the side of the oppressed”, and having “the emotional basis of my beliefs” being “white supermacy”. at least you considered an alternative, someone

    who have been told from cradle to grave, in media and culture, that they’re inferior to whites, and that the only way to be successful, is to emulate whites, the way they talk, dress, etc.

    which I can’t tell if is better or worse.

    not to mention the one calling me a reactionary or suggesting I don’t understand the pain of indigenous people. all that because I rightfully called out a genuinely racist title? you people are so fucking cruel.

    a few days ago there was a thread on lemmy.ml and we all blamed sinophobes for their bigotry, but when it’s reversed it’s ok? we said dismissing an open source CPU for being Chinese is bigotry, and it’s not an acceptable excuse that “they mean the communist party would put backdoors in it”. but now “white people are genetically berutal against indigenous people” is a delicate metaphor? don’t be so biased. racism is wrong, no matter the race.

    edit: this reminds of a thread on lemmygrad a while back, when I explained why tiktok might even be worse than instagram or youtube (its addictive aspects) and how it can be even more harmful (by lowering the attention span to 15 seconds of esily digestable videos), but apparantly lemmygrad users believed being Chinese makes it ok somehow? like have some consistency guys.


  • ah, it’s just getting worse. we’re on the same side (at least regarding this issue), yet we can’t agree on such a simple thing.

    This article is about how the US and Canada are shifting the blame for the boarding schools that killed thousands of natives for generations and the forced assimilation of those people.

    I whole-heartedly agree that this subject needs more attention. what has happened is beyond anything I can describe, and it hasn’t even happened long ago, so the “it was previous generations” excuse doesn’t work. it’s hard evidence that the government and church are corrupted as hell, and don’t deserve their position.

    be upset that the title alludes to DNA I guess. It’s real easy to find the author’s use of the term “DNA” in the title upsetting when you’re not in the hundreds of indigenous groups who’ve been forced into generations of oppression at the hands of Anglos.

    how is this relevant? and how does it justify the title?

    It’s a provocative title, it’s meant to catch your eye.

    it doesn’t make it ok, making racist statements to get our attention to an important thing is still wrong. I would also add that if the author’s intentionwas to highlight the crime commited by North American countries, they’re failing miserably, all we’re talking about is the title and if it’s racist or not.

    Now actually read the article

    I agree with the content of the article.

    and understand that it’s pulling attention to the treatment of indigenous people by Anglo governments.

    a noble goal, but as I mentioned, it seems that they’re not achieving their goal by that title.

    Treatment that Anglo governments are currently trying to deny while claiming the boarding schools for the Uyghur are the same thing.

    I agree, they’re not in a position to lecture the world about human rights. also in my opinion, the claims that “millions of Uyghurs are held in concentration camps against their will, it’s a genocide!” are utter bullshit. this article could be a great opportunity to show that these countries aren’t concerned about human rights, but all it’s accomplished is making us argue about its title.

    I don’t know what you want to achieve with the rest of your comment. but let’s see your reaction if we change the title to be about another race. if someone had said “being slaves is the African’s DNA”, wouldn’t you call it out? or would you start defending it by saying “see, DNA means history here, the writer must be trying to make us pay attention the crimes commited against Africans”, “oh no, African isn’t a race, so this is not racism” and “tell it to that tribe killed by those Africans!”, “author is trying to get your attention, it’s justified.”




  • honestly at this point I can no longer tell who’s a lib. at first I thought libs were american democrats, then I saw people calling centrists libs too, and recently I’ve seen people calling anarchists libs too. so I don’t really know, but that’s why I specified that I meant American liberal.