POTUS 2016, part 3

[Malcolm]

And you did not refute ANY of the points he made...nice deflection. Besides I already know that more blacks are incarcerated than whites...he addressed that in the interview, and according to the facts and figures he cited it isn't due to "systemic racism"

Watch the movie, or better yet read the New Jim Crow, if you want "facts and figures":

I reached the conclusions presented in this book reluctantly. Ten years ago, I would have argued strenuously against the central claim made here—namely, that something akin to a racial caste system currently exists in the United States.

-- Michelle Alexander

And so far you still have not refuted any of the points he made...I am open to reading the book etc..I am open to differing viewpoints...are you?? I used to be far left until I noticed that the far left sounded an awful lot like the far right that I, at one time, would call "racist, misogynistic, homophobic, fascist, and lets not forget islamophobic". Then about a year ago I decided to open my mind a little...so instead of just reading Huffpo etc I started also reading Breitbart etc. to gain more than a one-sided viewpoint. If a person presents a view in a rational and fact based way I am open to listening..dont care if they are right/left, liberal/conservative. I refuse to buy into any narrative that is tried to be shoved down my throat by anyone. And I also look deeper with anyone that I am listening to, to find out what their agenda is...and EVERYONE has an agenda...even facts and figures can be skewed depending upon the persons personal agenda and the viewpoint they are trying to sell you. But I will say this...if a person starts their talk with "liberal america haters", "far right racist fascists" etc etc and liberally peppers their argument with name calling...I tend to tune them out....

I have no interest in convincing you of anything. But I am certain that Brietbart is a racist outlet for neonazis. That aside, a sober analysis of the facts, like the one presented by Alexander, should
awaken any thoughtful person to the fact that rascism remains systematically embedded in our society, so much so, that we are blind to it.

[Johnny Dangerous]

...
I see....so, if a gay person has (gasp) a conservative viewpoint this makes them guilty of "Uncle-Tomism"?...

Alas the modern Republican party is neither conservative nor really republican (small r) in that it has been taken over by extremists of all flavors, ones that make the dreaded John Birchers of the past look like Boy Scout Headmasters.

I dont entirely disagree with this...however the same thing has happened to the left as well...that's why I don't identify as being left/right, liberal/conservative any longer...

Really? How is mainstream liberalism "extreme", by supporting corporate interests, supporting gay marriage, what? If anything mainstream liberalism is mainly tepid.

[Malcolm]

I dont entirely disagree with this...however the same thing has happened to the left as well...that's why I don't identify as being left/right, liberal/conservative any longer...

A beautiful essay on white privilege by R. Derek Black, whose father started Stormfront:

Much has been made of the incoherence of Mr. Trump’s proposals, but what really matters is who does — and doesn’t — need to fear them. None of the ideas that Mr. Trump has put forward would endanger me, and I once enthusiastically advocated for most of what he says. No proposal to put more cops in black neighborhoods to stop and frisk residents would cause me to be harassed. A ban on Muslim immigration doesn’t implicate all people who look like me in terrorism. Overturning Roe v. Wade will not force me to make a dangerous choice about my health, nor will a man who personifies sexual assault without penalty make me any less safe. When the most powerful demographic in the United States came together to assert that making America great again meant asserting their supremacy, they were asserting my supremacy.

[Malcolm]

Alas the modern Republican party is neither conservative nor really republican (small r) in that it has been taken over by extremists of all flavors, ones that make the dreaded John Birchers of the past look like Boy Scout Headmasters.

I dont entirely disagree with this...however the same thing has happened to the left as well...that's why I don't identify as being left/right, liberal/conservative any longer...

Really? How is mainstream liberalism "extreme", by supporting corporate interests, supporting gay marriage, what? If anything mainstream liberalism is mainly tepid.

Well, apparently in Fa Dao's view, Blacks Lives Matter, Greenpeace, the Southern Law Poverty Center, the ACLU, Amnesty International, the Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, and NASA all qualify as extremist, whereas Brietbart has become reasonable.

[Caoimhghín]

Coëmgenu,

No you totally missed the point.

The point that some gay people are prone to internalizing homophobic discourse and having it come to inform their worldview in much the same way that some people of colour are prone to internalizing racist discourse and coming to believe it and spout it themselves? Cause that would be "Uncle-Tomism". Milo being a classic example.

I see....so, if a gay person has (gasp) a conservative viewpoint this makes them guilty of "Uncle-Tomism"? All gay people should be left leaning or they are a traitor to all other gay people? and the same applies to blacks who hold conservative views?? really?? seriously?? I have watched a few of Milos talks...dont agree with a few things that he says but it hardly makes him a traitorous "gay uncle tom"?

It's not about whether you want big or small government. It's not about if you are skeptical concerning how tax payers money is being spent or the merit of public works. These are all things, and there are more, that liberals and conservatives of any race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation, or even gender, are free to disagree on, and they frequently do.

But when a member of a group campaigns and advocates for the gradual stripping away of civil liberties, advocates for increased intolerance towards that group, performs a caricature of themselves to those in power to win temporary fame and notoriety, repeats and internalizes popular lies about themselves and their peers, and trumpets and expounds these lies to other people to those in power, that is what makes an Uncle Tom. Milo is the "sassy gay friend" archetype to homophobes everywhere: making them feel comfortable and justified in their backward thinking regarding gays.

[Malcolm]

Milo is the "sassy gay friend" archetype to homophobes everywhere: making them feel comfortable and justified in their backward thinking regarding gays.

Not to mention his rendering gay people of color as sex objects for his own exploitation.

[Caoimhghín]

Milo is the "sassy gay friend" archetype to homophobes everywhere: making them feel comfortable and justified in their backward thinking regarding gays.

Not to mention his rendering gay people of color as sex objects for his own exploitation.

That's not necessarily one of his qualities that make him an Uncle Tom, but it does showcase a double standard. Milo can sexually harass black men to his hearts content onstage. What would happen if a black guy stood up onstage an insinuated constantly that the white men in his audience all want his dick? He wouldn't have the platform Milo has for sure.

[Minobu]

I deeply apologize if i appeared to side with white supremacist a few weeks back.
I have never been even slightly bent towards this sort of thing in any way.
I was brought up to see racism as simple as a plague, and the work of total ignorance handed down in families.

In order to live with people seeing me as such ,by posting as such, i put it down to the grave position The USA is in right now.
It is so over the top that one just has to forgive them for they are in deep pain.


My view that the only real change comes from within , will be left to my Buddhist bent and dealt with in the Nichiren Shonin section.

To the USA members, "Good luck with your country".

[Johnny Dangerous]

I dont entirely disagree with this...however the same thing has happened to the left as well...that's why I don't identify as being left/right, liberal/conservative any longer...

Really? How is mainstream liberalism "extreme", by supporting corporate interests, supporting gay marriage, what? If anything mainstream liberalism is mainly tepid.

Well, apparently in Fa Dao's view, Blacks Lives Matter, Greenpeace, the Southern Law Poverty Center, the ACLU, Amnesty International, the Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, and NASA all qualify as extremist, whereas Brietbart has become reasonable.

It's that whole "it's biased to call out racism" argument, or something of the sort.

[Malcolm]

Really? How is mainstream liberalism "extreme", by supporting corporate interests, supporting gay marriage, what? If anything mainstream liberalism is mainly tepid.

Well, apparently in Fa Dao's view, Blacks Lives Matter, Greenpeace, the Southern Law Poverty Center, the ACLU, Amnesty International, the Sierra Club, Planned Parenthood, and NASA all qualify as extremist, whereas Brietbart has become reasonable.

It's that whole "it's biased to call out racism" argument, or something of the sort.

Sure, and recall that Fa Dao has been chief among those of us here hysterically decrying Muslims for being, well, Muslim.

[Fa Dao]

the "self righteous moral indignation" button is SO easy to push in some people....although you would think it would be more difficult in an "advanced" practitioner, apparently it isnt....I will stop now and try to be good..apologies

[Caoimhghín]

the "self righteous moral indignation" button is SO easy to push in some people....although you would think it would be more difficult in an "advanced" practitioner, apparently it isnt....I will stop now and try to be good..apologies

Would criticizing someone for advocating anti-Muslim ideology be "self righteous moral indignation" or would that simply be "righteous moral indignation"? Is it not righteous to defend the Muslims?

[maybay]

the "self righteous moral indignation" button is SO easy to push in some people....although you would think it would be more difficult in an "advanced" practitioner, apparently it isnt....I will stop now and try to be good..apologies

Would criticizing someone for advocating anti-Muslim ideology be "self righteous moral indignation" or would that simply be "righteous moral indignation"? Is it not righteous to defend the Muslims?

One article too many my friend.

[Malcolm]

the "self righteous moral indignation" button is SO easy to push in some people....although you would think it would be more difficult in an "advanced" practitioner, apparently it isnt....I will stop now and try to be good..apologies

One would think even beginners in Buddhadharma could understand that it is wrong to condemn the religion of an entire group of people.

[Malcolm]

[Fortyeightvows]

One would think even beginners in Buddhadharma could understand that it is wrong to condemn the religion of an entire group of people.

condemning a religion is not the same as condemning people. Another example is people whose religions practices involve hurting animals, we can condemn those practices and beliefs without being mean to the people.

[Malcolm]

One would think even beginners in Buddhadharma could understand that it is wrong to condemn the religion of an entire group of people.

condemning a religion is not the same as condemning people. Another example is people whose religions practices involve hurting animals, we can condemn those practices and beliefs without being mean to the people.

Sure it is. When you condemn a religion you automatically condemn the people who have a faith commitment to that religion.

There are many religions which validate animal sacrifice, Islam among them. There are other religions, such as Christianity, which proclaim that the entire domain of nonhuman nature has been divinely mandated to be under the suzerainty of humans, men in particular. I don't happen to subscribe to those particular beliefs, but I see no reason to condemn the whole of a religion merely because I disagree with some of its parts. All religions recommend to their adherents love and compassion as the way of life they should follow.

His Holiness, the Dalai Lama states:

• “All the world’s religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance and forgiveness, can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether.”

This is, in large part, a statement which reinforces my commitment to the promulgation of humanist ethics as the bedrock upon which people of different faith commitments can find common ground.

M

[dreambow]

"Sure, and recall that Fa Dao has been chief among those of us here hysterically decrying Muslims for being, well, Muslim" I may not agree with everything Fa Dao has to say but I don't find him hysterical anymore then I find you hysterical. Let people have their say!

[Malcolm]

"Sure, and recall that Fa Dao has been chief among those of us here hysterically decrying Muslims for being, well, Muslim" I may not agree with everything Fa Dao has to say but I don't find him hysterical anymore then I find you hysterical. Let people have their say!

Sure, you agree with him.

[dreambow]

Malcom you have become judge and jury here. No one is right a hundred percent of the time, there are many shades of grey in an on line dialogue or discussion. Keep that in mind.