Can American conservatism survive intact & unadulterated?

[Enoch the Red]

As the video shows, he also used magic to make them mock him and jeer at him. The true power of an elder is an awesome thing to behold. The kids, with their feeble under-developed minds, didn't stand a chance. They were like puppets.

I might be missing something, but it certainly appears as though the kids kept doing what they had been doing prior to his appearance, only with the strange and unasked for addition of a man beating a drum in their faces. I guess I'm unsure what reaction was to be expected? I would expect something similar if I had walked into a crowd of chanting teenagers and started beating a drum, and I am lacking elder magic.

Meanwhile, crickets about the threats of and wishes for violence against these students from public figures, the blatant racism, homophobia, and incitement from the Black Israelites, and nothing even resembling humility from you about a clearly complex situation.

[Aimless]

I might be missing something, but it certainly appears as though the kids kept doing what they had been doing prior to his appearance, only with the strange and unasked for addition of a man beating a drum in their faces. I guess I'm unsure what reaction was to be expected? I would expect something similar if I had walked into a crowd of teenagers and started beating a drum.

You are missing something. The mocking dances performed right in his face and around him are in response to his drumming and chanting. The tomahawk chops are in response to his drumming and chanting. The boorish yelling and the parodies of Native American chanting are in response to his drumming and chanting.

The video you posted is like an amateurish youtube version of one of those weird-ass Andy Thomas paintings, with the narrator making inferences about the boys' thoughts and feelings that are simply not supported by the contents of any of the videos, highlighting a tiny fraction of the audible remarks, and attempting to cast suspicion on Philips based on an incomplete and conspiratorial re-telling of his account. Philips and his companions may have originally intended to go up to the Lincoln Memorial, but it's clear from his statements and from the video that intervening in the shouting match between the two groups, and facing up to the group of young men he says he heard making hurtful and derogatory comments, became a more immediate objective. It's not mysterious or suspicious that he went up to the group of high-schoolers--he's already explained why he did so.

[Aimless]

https://youtu.be/L8kxeFb84iw?t=72

That is some really poorly written MAGA fan-fiction.

[Ominous Gamer]

https://www.democracynow.org/2019/1/...digenous_elder

The kid's excuse, through a PR firm (lol) was that blocking the path was his way to "diffuse" the situation.

[Wraith]

I thought the first 12 minutes of this had a good summary of everything:


Although I'm fully aware that opinions have already been formed and it's too late to change them.

[Lewkowski]

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news...t-wishing-cov/

"A Los Angeles production studio manager and journalist is out of a job over a pair of tweets that wished death on the Covington Catholic High School students who were involved in a media firestorm over the weekend.

Erik Abriss, a post-production supervisor at INE Entertainment and a pop culture contributing writer at Vulture magazine, wrote Saturday, “I don’t know what it says about me but I’ve truly lost the ability to articulate the hysterical rage, nausea, and heartache this makes me feel. I just want these people to die. Simple as that. Every single one of them. And their parents,” according to The Wrap."

Rekt

https://www.thetelegraph.com/enterta...r-13550657.php

"Film producer Jack Morrissey apologized Monday for joking about “MAGA kids” going “screaming, hats first into the woodchipper.” The tweet was accompanied by an iconic image from “Fargo” in which a dead person’s blood flies from a woodchipper."

Here's hoping Jack Morrissey never works in Hollywood again. James Gunn was fired for telling frequent child rape jokes but at least he never (to my knowledge) actually advocated for the deaths of children or their sexual assault. Can't say the same for this numskull.

[wiggin]

Am I the only one who is wondering where their chaperones are during this whole mess? There's obviously two basic narratives here: one of rowdy teenagers acting like assholes on a trip to DC, another of kids not knowing how to respond to real or perceived provocation by adults. I personally suspect it's a combination of the two - no one comes out of this looking particularly good.

But regardless of what the truth is, where the hell were the adults? They should have been there either to rein in the kids who whose actions were unacceptable, or to intervene when the kids were being provoked or threatened. This was a slow moving confrontation; there should have been ample opportunity for someone to do their job.

I've been involved in political advocacy, both as a teenager and an adult. Every time I've seen, the kids' part of the advocacy is always tightly controlled and scripted, precisely because of the potential volatility of the situation. It's inexcusable that the school didn't do a better job. Whether it was because of incompetence or indifference I can't say.

[Ominous Gamer]

Am I the only one who is wondering where their chaperones are during this whole mess? There's obviously two basic narratives here: one of rowdy teenagers acting like assholes on a trip to DC, another of kids not knowing how to respond to real or perceived provocation by adults. I personally suspect it's a combination of the two - no one comes out of this looking particularly good.

These are high schoolers, so the adults may not look much older and may be buried in the crowd since most of the video is from the lower angles. According to what little is coming out from the kids, one of the chaperones approved the school chant to drown out the other group. That increase in hostilities is what brought the drummers over.

But that doesn't explain where they were during the rape jokes or when the kids were harassing random women.

[Lewkowski]

These are high schoolers, so the adults may not look much older and may be buried in the crowd since most of the video is from the lower angles. According to what little is coming out from the kids, one of the chaperones approved the school chant to drown out the other group.

But that doesn't explain where they were during the rape jokes or when they were harassing random women.

James Gunn child rape jokes or just regular rape jokes? Just curious.

[Aimless]

These are high schoolers, so the adults may not look much older and may be buried in the crowd since most of the video is from the lower angles. According to what little is coming out from the kids, one of the chaperones approved the school chant to drown out the other group. That increase in hostilities is what brought the drummers over.

But that doesn't explain where they were during the rape jokes or when the kids were harassing random women.

Not sure those kids were from the same school. Anyway, there were apparently five chaperones there with the boys:

https://eu.cincinnati.com/story/news...-c/2636426002/

[Ominous Gamer]

Not sure those kids were from the same school. Anyway, there were apparently five chaperones there with the boys:

https://eu.cincinnati.com/story/news...-c/2636426002/

Not a big sports guy but isn't that C logo on the far left the Covington logo? and while I didn't go through the nearly 2 hours of uncut video looking for the adult its said he pops up in that video too.

edit: same kid is standing behind the smug kid from the original video:
https://rightedition.com/2019/01/20/...proached-them/

[Aimless]

Not a big sports guy but isn't that C logo on the far left the Covington logo? and while I didn't go through the nearly 2 hours of uncut video looking for the adult its said he pops up in that video too.

edit: same kid is standing behind the smug kid from the original video:
https://rightedition.com/2019/01/20/...proached-them/

Maybe, maybe not:

Twitter Link

Sad either way. It's a meme that just refuses to die.

[Lewkowski]

Am I the only one who is wondering where their chaperones are during this whole mess? There's obviously two basic narratives here: one of rowdy teenagers acting like assholes on a trip to DC, another of kids not knowing how to respond to real or perceived provocation by adults. I personally suspect it's a combination of the two - no one comes out of this looking particularly good.

But regardless of what the truth is, where the hell were the adults? They should have been there either to rein in the kids who whose actions were unacceptable, or to intervene when the kids were being provoked or threatened. This was a slow moving confrontation; there should have been ample opportunity for someone to do their job.

I've been involved in political advocacy, both as a teenager and an adult. Every time I've seen, the kids' part of the advocacy is always tightly controlled and scripted, precisely because of the potential volatility of the situation. It's inexcusable that the school didn't do a better job. Whether it was because of incompetence or indifference I can't say.

Wiggin is it too much for you to read up on it? The chaperone was there and gave them permission to do a school chant.

[Ominous Gamer]

chaperone front and center during the "its not rape" joke

[wiggin]

Neither of you get it. Lewk, whether or not I believe the carefully tailored story put out by the student's representative, the videos clearly show a situation with inadequate or nonexistent supervision, and the kids are not behaving appropriately.

OG, where are the rest of them? Where is he later? One chaperone with poor control over a big group of boys is inexcusable.

Frankly based on triangulating accounts about other incidents at the school I'm inclined to think they are indifferent or even encouraging of such behavior - if so, the biggest indictment in this whole mess is the school staff.

[Hazir]

One has to wonder why Philips had the idea of dealing with somewhat excited behavior of teenagers by confronting them with a ritual he had no reason to think they would understand.

[Aimless]

One has to wonder why Philips had the idea of dealing with somewhat excited behavior of teenagers by confronting them with a ritual he had no reason to think they would understand.

It's possible he was not being rational, or that he was mistaken, or that he thought it would be enough to draw their attention and stop their shouting regardless, or that he simply wanted to do his own thing, or any of a number of reasons we may speculate about without being able to confirm. Asking people why they acted the way they did, in an emotionally charged situation, is often a fool's errand that won't get you a better answer than, "Because...???"

[Enoch the Red]

What I have yet to see is anyone here supporting death threats or threats of physical violence. This is you having an imaginary conversation again.

This is not an imaginary conversation. This is actually happening, whether your choose to acknowledge it or not. Public figures are or have openly called for violence. It has become the story. The only reason we are talking about what turned out to be a tempest in a tea pot is because you and Loki brought it up, and the only reason you knew about it was because it was already a fire storm. In reality, it was a nothing story, blown way out of proportion, and the consequences for those involved are still unclear. For someone who is harping on context, you seem to pick and choose when it applies very selectively.

I'm sorry, but you can't keep pulling straw man arguments out of your ass, waving them in my face and expecting me to think they smell like roses. Based on accounts posted on social media since this video went viral, I've formed an opinion that there seems to be a pervasive culture of bigotry and tolerance for bigotry at this school. That would be a systemic problem. It does not automatically mean that every single person attending or working at that school is a hateful bigot. For example, those who are the greatest victims of this bigotry may not be bigots themselves. But I get it, it's easy to forget that crushing straw men isn't impressive in the real world when you spend all your time fighting in an imaginary world.

As you have noted, you can form any bad opinion you want. What it gains you to jump to these conclusions without evidence I am not sure, but I suppose there is something to be said for smug righteous judgment, perceived moral superiority, and indignation. If there is evidence for a pervasive culture of bigotry, please provide it. What I have read from you are individual accounts, often times involving extra curricular activities, of students.

I am open to the possibility I have an incomplete picture of the school, (from what I have seen the black face claims seems flimsy, but is probably the most troubling). In fact, I know I do. I am not arguing is that the school is perfect, it's students and staff blameless, their motivations pure - all I am comfortable saying is that I don't know - and neither do you. I haven't interacted with anyone at the school, I am not privy to the inner workings of the school, I am not aware of the consequences and punishments that might or might not have been meted out for student behavior. Because there is so much that is unknown, what is gained by jumping the gun and painting everyone with the same brush? A fleeting feeling of disdain and the approval of your tribe? Do you somehow believe that guilt must be shared in order to make change?

You look at the world through a filter that makes systemic and structural problems invisible and provides cover for those who exploit those problems. Hence my remark about you not seeing the forest for the trees.

You see the world as you believe it should be--not as it is. Social groups--especially voluntary social groupings--are not arbitrary, and only someone whose view of the world is entirely devoid of context would believe they are. It is not an arbitrary choice to send your child to an expensive all-male (and, by all accounts, almost all-white) Catholic high school, for example; people don't make such decisions by throwing dice, and the decisions are consequential. The culture of an institution is not arbitrary either--esp. not in an institution that purports to adhere to the values enshrined by a religion, upholds a code of conduct, and has both the ability, the authority and (ostensibly) the inclination to promote some behaviors while discouraging others. Sending a class on a long trip to another city in another state, to participate in an anti-abortion march, is not an arbitrary decision. A lot of people deciding to wear MAGA hats is not an arbitrary decision. MAGA hats don't just randomly and magically materialize on top of people's heads.

I am open to the possibility that my intellectual framework is deficient in identifying larger structural or institutional issues. It is not just possible, it is a certainty that there are systemic injustices that need to be addressed. What I am not comfortable with is claiming systemic injustice without proof. Perhaps my standard is too high - but what I think is more likely is yours is too low, or non existent.

You're giving yourself too much credit. I said that, as far as I could tell, OG hadn't posted anything similar to what you posted. I had not, at that point, read the thread that has gotten you so remarkably excited. I explained this to you, in a later post, where I also said I disagreed with that person's characterization of the video, after having read the thread. Do you not understand how time works in the real world? Does time work differently in your reality?

Let me get this straight. Your argument is I should have known that you didn't perform even the most basic fact check of what you were saying, and then when I went back and showed you what it was that you were tacitly agreeing to support, that somehow it was my fault for not knowing that you couldn't be bothered to make sure you weren't making an idiot out of yourself. Not only that, but by doing so I was claiming that you and OG were the same liberal hydra-person, and that I am delusional and have no concept of how time works - instead of the reality of simply taking what you had written at face value at the time you said it. Got it.

Luckily, as you have said prior, we have a record of what was actually written, and when.

I understand that you seem to make a habit out of jumping to conclusions and not performing even rudimentary checks as to the veracity of what you are posting when it confirms your biases. That you think that somehow is a defense and a failing of mine illustrates just how little you care about accuracy. Best of all is attempting to gaslight the forum into accepting that you hadn't in fact said what you said - well, I suppose that's why I have no problem thinking you are not only not arguing in good faith, you are purposefully being dishonest. We know you aren't stupid Minx, quit pretending to be.

Except that most of your statements in this thread appear to be sincere expressions of your views, feelings, thought-processes, whatever they are. Have you been lying this whole time? That's... kind of a weird thing to do, but, sure, whatever floats your boat ya weirdo

Absolutely, most of my statements are a sincere expression of my views, feelings, and thought processes. The ones where I make overbroad statements, while calling my opposition childish things like asshats and pieces of shit are simply (bad?) caricatures of what you have consistently written in these forums.

Philips said that he decided to intervene in the conflict between the two groups. He did not say he was just standing around minding his own business when he was suddenly ambushed by racist kids who were sought him out. That was clear when I first encountered the story. It was certainly clear when you started ranting about it here in this thread, but it appears you don't even know the facts about what facts are being alleged. It was clear that Philips went up to them. Their behavior following his decision to intervene is also clear--they chose, as a group, to parody his chanting, and to mock him. Philips also alleges they made derogatory remarks about Native Americans. Now, you may believe he's lying about this, and I wouldn't be surprised if you do, given your own questionable relationship with the truth in this discussion where you keep implying that people have said things that they have not, in fact, said.

Again, you willfully choose mischaracterize both my argument and me. Even after the facts came out, OG was still saying that the students surrounded Philips and were getting up in his face. The news media reported the same thing. I am not privy to what you knew and when you knew it. I am privy to what was being reported at the time, and what was said here. Being surrounded by students when you walk into their midst is not the same as being surrounded by students while minding your own business, or in the middle of a march. Students getting into your face is not the same as approaching them, squaring off with them, and beating a drum in their face.

With headlines from the NYT, (since corrected but still available on google) like: Boys in 'Make America Great Again' Hats Mob Native Elder at ... and this kind of reporting claiming that this occurred during an Indigenous Peoples march, or that they were surrounded by the boys you again choose to ignore the context of the conversation. These claims were, and are still being repeated by some, including OG.

This is pretty asinine, even by the standards you've set in this conversation, and it bears almost no resemblance to anything I've said in this thread. Your fondness for melodrama is not matched by your skill with delivery, and, as I have already explained, straw man arguments are not very compelling in the real world--no matter how effective they may be in your imaginary world. I cannot take responsibility for things you've just imagined me saying. Fanfiction is not reality.

Pretty clear you're happy as a pig in mud carrying on an imaginary conversation with the imaginary characters in your tWF fanfic.

Right - you have never once said that, "there was a Catholic boys' school--full of racist, homophobic and sexist bigots," or for that matter that the entire country of Britain, made up of millions of individuals with all manner of different beliefs, are on aggregate assholes.

Nothing to see here folks. Minx would never make sweeping generalizations of large swaths of people in order to justify his frequent raging outbursts.

[Aimless]

This is not an imaginary conversation. This is actually happening, whether your choose to acknowledge it or not. Public figures are or have openly called for violence. It has become the story.

If you think you're speaking to public figures, I think I need to tell you something right now, so that you don't waste any more time: you're speaking to a non-public person on an internet forum, and I haven't called for violence against these kids. If you believe I have, then you're imagining things.

The only reason we are talking about what turned out to be a tempest in a tea pot is because you and Loki brought it up, and the only reason you knew about it was because it was already a fire storm. In reality, it was a nothing story, blown way out of proportion, and the consequences for those involved are still unclear. For someone who is harping on context, you seem to pick and choose when it applies very selectively.

It's perfectly reasonable to disregard context if it can be determined to not be salient or alter the analysis substantially. I note that you've lost your shit over a "nothing story", to the point of making up nonsense and trying to pull me into an imaginary fight.

As you have noted, you can form any bad opinion you want. What it gains you to jump to these conclusions without evidence I am not sure, but I suppose there is something to be said for smug righteous judgment, perceived moral superiority, and indignation. If there is evidence for a pervasive culture of bigotry, please provide it. What I have read from you are individual accounts, often times involving extra curricular activities, of students.

That is evidence supporting a pervasive culture of bigotry: a series of individual students' accounts of the treatment they were subjected to by other students, a series of accounts of the behaviour of Covington students during encounters with students from other schools, and the school's apparent failure to do anything about it, despite their much-vaunted ideals. I'm not particularly surprised someone like you would reflexively reach for a convenient "just a few bad apples" kind of argument; that's what makes you so useful to those who benefit from the protection of society's willful blindness. But that is beside the point; my reason for posting that link was to add nuance to Loki's assertion in the Trump thread about the behavior depicted in the video being an illustration of "Trump's America". My view was and still is that, though many of these people may have fully embraced Trump, their behavior predates Trump. They represent a contingent of conservatives that may always be drawn to Trump-like demagogues, so long as those demagogues have the right enemies and support the right kinds of bigotry.

I am open to the possibility I have an incomplete picture of the school, (from what I have seen the black face claims seems flimsy, but is probably the most troubling). In fact, I know I do. I am not arguing is that the school is perfect, it's students and staff blameless, their motivations pure - all I am comfortable saying is that I don't know - and neither do you. I haven't interacted with anyone at the school, I am not privy to the inner workings of the school, I am not aware of the consequences and punishments that might or might not have been meted out for student behavior. Because there is so much that is unknown, what is gained by jumping the gun and painting everyone with the same brush? A fleeting feeling of disdain and the approval of your tribe? Do you somehow believe that guilt must be shared in order to make change?

You've spent the past few posts engaging in a classic display of tribal aggression, and you've repeatedly attempted to rope me into your imaginary tribal fight, so I suggest you do something about the beam in your own eye first.

I am open to the possibility that my intellectual framework is deficient in identifying larger structural or institutional issues. It is not just possible, it is a certainty that there are systemic injustices that need to be addressed. What I am not comfortable with is claiming systemic injustice without proof. Perhaps my standard is too high - but what I think is more likely is yours is too low, or non existent.

I have my priors, and you have yours. The videos--and even the accounts of the culture of the school--don't really move the needle in any particular direction for either of us.

Let me get this straight. Your argument is I should have known that you didn't perform even the most basic fact check of what you were saying, and then when I went back and showed you what it was that you were tacitly agreeing to support, that somehow it was my fault for not knowing that you couldn't be bothered to make sure you weren't making an idiot out of yourself.

No, my argument is that I hadn't seen OG post anything of that sort, and I was focused on the claim about the kids ending up surrounding Philips. Having been contradicted, you obviously felt the urge to move the goalposts so that you could find something--anything--to punish me for. Then you flipped out like a little baby and decided to continue making an idiot of yourself when I said that I disagreed with the account posted in the thread OG linked to, after reading it, because obviously that didn't satisfy your primitive tribal need to punish the enemy.

Not only that, but by doing so I was claiming that you and OG were the same liberal hydra-person, and that I am delusional

That is certainly how you're acting.

and have no concept of how time works - instead of the reality of simply taking what you had written at face value at the time you said it.

I said you're acting like you don't know how time works when you tried to continue berating me, accusing me of dishonesty and of endorsing a view that I disagreed with even after I'd offered my explanation and also expressed my disagreement with that person's account. This latest remark of yours makes me wonder, once again, whether or not you know how time works. Once you know something, it's really dumb to pretend to rewind the clock so that you can pretend you don't know.

Luckily, as you have said prior, we have a record of what was actually written, and when.

Clearly not advantageous to your case.

I understand that you seem to make a habit out of jumping to conclusions and not performing even rudimentary checks as to the veracity of what you are posting when it confirms your biases. That you think that somehow is a defense and a failing of mine illustrates just how little you care about accuracy. Best of all is attempting to gaslight the forum into accepting that you hadn't in fact said what you said - well, I suppose that's why I have no problem thinking you are not only not arguing in good faith, you are purposefully being dishonest. We know you aren't stupid Minx, quit pretending to be.

At this point, it's clear you yourself have lost track of what it is you're trying to argue. It is hilarious to see you pursuing this line of attack, by the way, given your own asinine defense of the analysis presented in the melodramatic fanfic video you posted.

Absolutely, most of my statements are a sincere expression of my views, feelings, and thought processes. The ones where I make overbroad statements, while calling my opposition childish things like asshats and pieces of shit are simply (bad?) caricatures of what you have consistently written in these forums.

This may be difficult for you to understand, given that you perceive everything that happens here through your tribal lens, but snark and caricatures are both more effective when they're somewhat accurate. I generally don't make overbroad generalizations from N=1, except from the perspective of someone who is either extremely skilled at disregarding evidence, or extremely skilled at eliminating evidence by conflating it. Nor are any of my priors based on a single anecdote. In the context of an informal discussion, a large number accounts should be regarded as N > 1, or at least equal to however many accounts can be found or implied (ie. if one person's account describes several cases of a particular kind of behaviour). I frequently post links to stories about individual anecdotes that I consider to be illustrative, but if I post a hundred such anecdotes it's kinda dumb to then suggest that they amount to a single piece of evidence. Forests are made up of many trees; if I post ten thousand different photos of individual trees from different forests, that doesn't mean that there's no such thing as a forest.

Again, you willfully choose mischaracterize both my argument and me. Even after the facts came out, OG was still saying that the students surrounded Philips and were getting up in his face. The news media reported the same thing. I am not privy to what you knew and when you knew it. I am privy to what was being reported at the time, and what was said here.

Yes, the students appear to have surrounded Philips, and gotten up in his face, shortly after he walked up to them. You keep trying to pretend you're agnostic while implicitly demanding we accept your subjective categorical interpretation of the facts, but we clearly disagree about what the facts are--and, in your case, what the facts are alleged to be.

Being surrounded by students when you walk into their midst is not the same as being surrounded by students while minding your own business, or in the middle of a march. Students getting into your face is not the same as approaching them, squaring off with them, and beating a drum in their face.

Even in early reports it was clear from Philips's own words that he chose to intervene, for reasons he himself provided, and the mob-like behaviour of the students is apparent in all the videos. A mob doesn't stop being a mob just because you approach it. Their mockery isn't less distasteful because Philips walked up to them. More importantly, what Philips says he heard the students say doesn't become less distasteful because Philips made the decision to intervene. Some no doubt disbelieve him, but I currently have no compelling reason to not believe he heard what he says he heard.

With headlines from the NYT, (since corrected but still available on google) like: Boys in 'Make America Great Again' Hats Mob Native Elder at ...

Doesn't appear to dispute that he was basically surrounded by the kids.

and this kind of reporting claiming that this occurred during an Indigenous Peoples march

Carelessly ambiguous reporting about exactly when it happened (claiming it happened during the march rather than shortly after the march had concluded) and about Philips's service record, but does not dispute the mockery.

or that they were surrounded by the boys

Which they appear to have been. More importantly, the part about being surrounded formed part of a quote: HH stated that they were kind of, like, surrounded by the kids.

Right - you have never once said that, "there was a Catholic boys' school--full of racist, homophobic and sexist bigots,"

Oh, I see what you're doing. You're taking "full of" to mean "100% filled, exclusively". That is certainly one way to interpret what I said, but, tell me, if I were to tell you you're full of shit, would you take that to mean that I believe you're a walking, talking, typing human-shaped bag full of nothing but feces? In informal conversations, saying that a Y is "full of" X is, more often than not, another way to say, "There are a lot of X:es in Y." Since you clearly have a problem with my phrasing, allow me to clarify my previous statement: there is a Catholic boys' school by the name of Covington High School, where there are a lot of racist, homophobic and sexist bigots.

or for that matter that the entire country of Britain, made up of millions of individuals with all manner of different beliefs, are on aggregate assholes.

Even if one's position is that supporting Brexit makes a person an asshole, one must concede that 48% of UK voters did not support Brexit. Around half or more of the people in UK are deeply opposed to Brexit and disapprove of its consequences, especially for themselves personally but also for others. Unfortunately, a majority of active British voters ultimately did join forces with racists, xenophobes and other assholes, enabling these groups and giving them their tacit approval, while a plurality of voters ultimately persuaded a party (later, govt) to commit to xenophobic policies such as the hostile environment--which has had a tremendous human cost--and the promise to severely restrict immigration to just tens of thousands per year; and such a large portion of the British public favours jingoism, racism, and xenophobia that such things have become the bread and butter of the most successful members of the British press, and viable platforms for too many British politicians and pundits who now openly engage in the most despicable rhetoric. Just a few bad apples, no forest to see here.

Nothing to see here folks. Minx would never make sweeping generalizations of large swaths of people in order to justify his frequent raging outbursts.

Again, what you said was:

The unfortunate corollary to what appears to be your position is that people can be 100% guilty without evidence or reason. I would guess that boy was already guilty in your mind because he wore a red hat. He was guilty because he was protesting abortion. Sadly I suspect what he did or did not do, does not really matter to you. He is guilty because the mob said so.

If you can't keep up with your own remarks, I don't know how to help you.

[Lewkowski]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...-story/581035/

//

How could the elite media—The New York Times, let’s say—have protected themselves from this event, which has served to reinforce millions of Americans’ belief that traditional journalistic outlets are purveyors of “fake news”? They might have hewed to a concept that once went by the quaint term “journalistic ethics.” Among other things, journalistic ethics held that if you didn’t have the reporting to support a story, and if that story had the potential to hurt its subjects, and if those subjects were private citizens, and if they were moreover minors, you didn’t run the story. You kept reporting it; you let yourself get scooped; and you accepted that speed is not the highest value. Otherwise, you were the trash press.

At 8:30 yesterday morning, as I was typing this essay, The New York Times emailed me. The subject line was “Ethics Reminders for Freelance Journalists.” (I have occasionally published essays and reviews in the Times). It informed me, inter alia, that the Times expected all of its journalists, both freelance and staff, “to protect the integrity and credibility of Times journalism.” This meant, in part, safeguarding the Times’ “reputation for fairness and impartiality.”

I am prompted to issue my own ethics reminders for The New York Times. Here they are: You were partly responsible for the election of Trump because you are the most influential newspaper in the country, and you are not fair or impartial. Millions of Americans believe you hate them and that you will causally harm them. Two years ago, they fought back against you, and they won. If Trump wins again, you will once again have played a small but important role in that victory.

//

Love it. Oh yeah it turns out Phillips didn't serve in Vietnam (he did serve but was not deployed to war). From what I can tell the error didn't come from Phillips but came entirely from the media. What a shit show.

[Steely Glint]

Imagine if Lewk held the right wing media outlets he favours to the same standards of accuracy and impartiality he expects from the 'elite' media.

[Ominous Gamer]

Do you really want him making a new thread every time Fox covers a republican being a perv but lists them as a Democrat?

[Steely Glint]

Not starting threads about obliviously wrong stories from ownthelibs.com would be a start.

[GGT]

I agree with wiggin's criticism of the chaperone. The school and the parents should have had higher expectations and better rules for the students' behaviors, and the chaperone shouldn't have allowed them to chant or 'engage' in what was clearly an escalating mob-type situation.

[Lewkowski]

escalating mob-type situation.

Was it though? No punches were thrown. No piss bottles were hurled. While the Black Hebrew whack jobs were verbally toxic, that isn't illegal and apparently are well known in the area for talking shit but not actually being violent.

[GGT]

Kids on a chaperoned school field trip shouldn't have gotten involved. Adults can do whatever they want, free speech and all that. But the adult chaperone was in charge of minors, and should have known that teenagers don't always know how to avoid conflict, but can be drawn to it (out of curiosity), often with bad results.

Maybe you're objecting to the term "mob-type" and would prefer "herd mentality" instead.

[Lewkowski]

Kids on a chaperoned school field trip shouldn't have gotten involved. Adults can do whatever they want, free speech and all that. But the adult chaperone was in charge of minors, and should have known that teenagers don't always know how to avoid conflict, but can be drawn to it (out of curiosity), often with bad results.

Maybe you're objecting to the term "mob-type" and would prefer "herd mentality" instead.

You realize they were literally there to be part of a political event, right?

[GGT]

You realize they were literally there to be part of a political event, right?

Yes. A political event (anti-abortion) that was already highly charged, with a history of confrontation and conflict. You don't send a group of kids to a "pro-life" march with a chaperone who gives permission for them to chant, as if it's a school pep rally, let alone stare-down a Native Tribal elder drumming.

Those kids were put in a situation they didn't know how to deal with and weren't prepared for. And they had a shitty chaperone. Even their conservative Catholic pro-life message failed.

[Unheard Of]

https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/...mpression=true

I am shocked to read of a cop helping Nazis.

[Enoch the Red]

If you think you're speaking to public figures, I think I need to tell you something right now, so that you don't waste any more time: you're speaking to a non-public person on an internet forum, and I haven't called for violence against these kids. If you believe I have, then you're imagining things.

And I should probably take a moment to let you know that you are not actually talking to Nick Sandmann right now. Which means that our conversation is involving individuals who weren't directly involved in the event - you know, typically how discussions in online forums regarding current events work. These conversations regularly involve events, statements, and people who aren't actively participating in the conversation.

This must come as a shocking development for you, I know.

That is evidence supporting a pervasive culture of bigotry: a series of individual students' accounts of the treatment they were subjected to by other students, a series of accounts of the behaviour of Covington students during encounters with students from other schools, and the school's apparent failure to do anything about it, despite their much-vaunted ideals. I'm not particularly surprised someone like you would reflexively reach for a convenient "just a few bad apples" kind of argument; that's what makes you so useful to those who benefit from the protection of society's willful blindness. But that is beside the point; my reason for posting that link was to add nuance to Loki's assertion in the Trump thread about the behavior depicted in the video being an illustration of "Trump's America". My view was and still is that, though many of these people may have fully embraced Trump, their behavior predates Trump. They represent a contingent of conservatives that may always be drawn to Trump-like demagogues, so long as those demagogues have the right enemies and support the right kinds of bigotry.

--

This may be difficult for you to understand, given that you perceive everything that happens here through your tribal lens, but snark and caricatures are both more effective when they're somewhat accurate. I generally don't make overbroad generalizations from N=1, except from the perspective of someone who is either extremely skilled at disregarding evidence, or extremely skilled at eliminating evidence by conflating it. Nor are any of my priors based on a single anecdote. In the context of an informal discussion, a large number accounts should be regarded as N > 1, or at least equal to however many accounts can be found or implied (ie. if one person's account describes several cases of a particular kind of behaviour). I frequently post links to stories about individual anecdotes that I consider to be illustrative, but if I post a hundred such anecdotes it's kinda dumb to then suggest that they amount to a single piece of evidence. Forests are made up of many trees; if I post ten thousand different photos of individual trees from different forests, that doesn't mean that there's no such thing as a forest.

Where is the evidence that the school failed to do anything about it, within the scope of their sphere of responsibility? Where are the numbers that show how widespread this is, and how many instances are the same students acting as provocateurs. If you have one student that goes out of their way to offend everyone they meet, does that indicate a pervasive culture of bigotry? I can think of a number of kids that I went to high school with that would fit that definition. And you are right - it is possible to miss the forest for the trees, however you can also construct an imaginary forest by showing the same tree ten thousand times from different angles. Without more information, there is no way of knowing what you are doing - however that doesn't seem to give you any pause. Again, what is to be gained?

No, my argument is that I hadn't seen OG post anything of that sort, and I was focused on the claim about the kids ending up surrounding Philips. Having been contradicted, you obviously felt the urge to move the goalposts so that you could find something--anything--to punish me for. Then you flipped out like a little baby and decided to continue making an idiot of yourself when I said that I disagreed with the account posted in the thread OG linked to, after reading it, because obviously that didn't satisfy your primitive tribal need to punish the enemy.

I said you're acting like you don't know how time works when you tried to continue berating me, accusing me of dishonesty and of endorsing a view that I disagreed with even after I'd offered my explanation and also expressed my disagreement with that person's account. This latest remark of yours makes me wonder, once again, whether or not you know how time works. Once you know something, it's really dumb to pretend to rewind the clock so that you can pretend you don't know.

I see now that I didn't clearly give you the plaudits you very obviously feel you needed for not defending what is pretty obviously indefensible. Good for you Minx! Now that you have gotten your pat on the head, can we move on to what was actually at issue? Which wasn't that you finally went back to correct the record, (Nicely done!) it's that you decided to take a stand which you obviously should not have taken based on your clearly nonexistent understanding of what you were agreeing to:

...but afaict OG has not posted anything in this latest conversation that even comes close to the weird-ass fanfic of your video. Endorsing a narrative isn't a problem in and of itself--and you don't believe it is either, or you wouldn't be trying to shoehorn this conversation into your own pet meta-narrative. My criticism of the video was based on my assessment that the narrator was saying really dumb things that were very clearly not supported by the available evidence.

OG did in fact post something in the latest conversation that far surpassed the bizarre commentary on the video I posted - more on that later - and in your very next sentence you not only seem to confirm your endorsement of that fact, but you say it is supported by the available evidence. Now, while we are all very proud of you for finally deciding to perform even the most basic fact check of what it was you were endorsing, the dramatic irony of failing to understand that you were actively engaged in exactly the same lapse of judgments that foisted this "controversy" into the public view in the first place is still lost on you. Deciding to take a stand without first understanding what it is you are standing for isn't a virtue, it is being foolhardy.


I don't think you are being dishonest because you didn't take the time to understand what it was you were saying - that was just being sloppy and careless. I think you are being dishonest because of how you chose to acknowledge your mistake, and then attempt to reframe the conversation as though you were somehow the victim.

At this point, it's clear you yourself have lost track of what it is you're trying to argue. It is hilarious to see you pursuing this line of attack, by the way, given your own asinine defense of the analysis presented in the melodramatic fanfic video you posted.

Let's look at the sum total of my "defense" of the melodramatic fanfic video that you seem so hung up on: (emphasis added)

I posted the video only to show him walking up and into to the crowd, and not for the ridiculous play-by-play analysis of what happened.

...I can't help but notice your correct criticism of the video's creative narrative...

As I said, the video was posted only to show him walking up and into the group. It was the one that popped up on Youtube when searching for it. Did the text somehow obstruct that for you, or are you tilting at straw windmills?

Now can you kindly explain just what in the hell you are going on about? You want to talk about losing the plot - pot, kettle calling.

Yes, the students appear to have surrounded Philips, and gotten up in his face, shortly after he walked up to them. You keep trying to pretend you're agnostic while implicitly demanding we accept your subjective categorical interpretation of the facts, but we clearly disagree about what the facts are--and, in your case, what the facts are alleged to be.

Even in early reports it was clear from Philips's own words that he chose to intervene, for reasons he himself provided, and the mob-like behaviour of the students is apparent in all the videos. A mob doesn't stop being a mob just because you approach it. Their mockery isn't less distasteful because Philips walked up to them. More importantly, what Philips says he heard the students say doesn't become less distasteful because Philips made the decision to intervene. Some no doubt disbelieve him, but I currently have no compelling reason to not believe he heard what he says he heard.

Doesn't appear to dispute that he was basically surrounded by the kids.

Carelessly ambiguous reporting about exactly when it happened (claiming it happened during the march rather than shortly after the march had concluded) and about Philips's service record, but does not dispute the mockery.

Which they appear to have been. More importantly, the part about being surrounded formed part of a quote: HH stated that they were kind of, like, surrounded by the kids.

Thankfully, we don't need to rely on your mealy-mouthed defense of these articles. Retractions have been posted, headlines changed, and editors notes added for a reason. Words have meaning, and whether or not you choose to acknowledge it, they were used poorly, or perhaps less charitably deceptively in almost all instances of early reporting.

Also, this was not an undocumented event. There are literally hours of video from multiple different angles, taken by people on both sides of the issue. The video has been analyzed and poured over by both supporters of the kids, and those who support Philips. I have yet to see anything supporting his claim of xenophobic or racist chanting (well, except for the racist, xenophobic things said by the BHI - but we all know that those don't count). Is it possible it happened and hasn't yet been seen, or wasn't documented. Yes. Is it possible that it never happened and Philips was mistaken or intentionally being misleading? Yes. In the absence of evidence to the contrary I would tend to believe that which can be shown, which is that those chants did not happen, or were not widespread enough to be easily discerned. I understand why it is that you may prefer to ignore that evidence though.

Oh, I see what you're doing. You're taking "full of" to mean "100% filled, exclusively". That is certainly one way to interpret what I said, but, tell me, if I were to tell you you're full of shit, would you take that to mean that I believe you're a walking, talking, typing human-shaped bag full of nothing but feces? In informal conversations, saying that a Y is "full of" X is, more often than not, another way to say, "There are a lot of X:es in Y." Since you clearly have a problem with my phrasing, allow me to clarify my previous statement: there is a Catholic boys' school by the name of Covington High School, where there are a lot of racist, homophobic and sexist bigots.

Even if one's position is that supporting Brexit makes a person an asshole, one must concede that 48% of UK voters did not support Brexit. Around half or more of the people in UK are deeply opposed to Brexit and disapprove of its consequences, especially for themselves personally but also for others. Unfortunately, a majority of active British voters ultimately did join forces with racists, xenophobes and other assholes, enabling these groups and giving them their tacit approval, while a plurality of voters ultimately persuaded a party (later, govt) to commit to xenophobic policies such as the hostile environment--which has had a tremendous human cost--and the promise to severely restrict immigration to just tens of thousands per year; and such a large portion of the British public favours jingoism, racism, and xenophobia that such things have become the bread and butter of the most successful members of the British press, and viable platforms for too many British politicians and pundits who now openly engage in the most despicable rhetoric. Just a few bad apples, no forest to see here.

Again, what you said was:

If you can't keep up with your own remarks, I don't know how to help you.

Funnily enough, I define an asshole as a person who is behaving like an asshole. Actively and consistently engaging in bigoted, gaping asshole-ish behavior like making harmful sweeping generalizations based on limited evidence, labeling large groups of people - entire countries even - in derogatory ways, and then clutching at their pearls when their piss poor behavior is called out, but you do you.