Page 11 of 24 FirstFirst ... 91011121321 ... LastLast
Results 301 to 330 of 691

Thread: Can American conservatism survive intact & unadulterated?

  1. #301
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    I was posting before this conversation began, so I must not be having a conversation with you. That's how reality works, right?
    Definitely, context matters.

    You seem to have a penchant for making unfounded assumptions. A school's culture is not necessarily immutable. However, the testimonials of former Covington students as well as others who've interacted with Covington students indicate that the culture of bigotry has endured for many years. A school's culture is not necessarily monolithic, but the testimonials also indicate that there is a widespread tolerance at this school for bigoted behavior.

    You're free to accept or reject whatever you like in order to sustain your context-free ideological delusions where literally nothing is ever connected to anything else and there are no forests, only trees that are confused about their experiences. For my part, I'll continue to believe that a large number of independent testimonials, from individuals who've attended the school at various points over many years, alleging a widespread culture of bigotry... may actually be indicative of systemic problems.

    This school is, however, responsible for how it deals with those of its students who mistreat their fellow students, or otherwise violate the code the school ostensibly requires its students to adhere to.

    Hello, straw man, I've been expecting you.

    This is basically the philosophy of a sentient turnip being espoused by a living human being. It is absolutely extraordinary, but in a sad way. If you believe it's meaningless or insignificant that a large number of testimonials from students who have attended the same school all contain similar allegations about a pervasive culture of bigotry and tolerance for bigotry then I honestly have no cure for your malfunction. You'll just have to keep living in your own world.
    Unfounded assumptions? Pull the other one. I mean, I heard that someone from Covenant may have killed someone sometime. I think that clearly points to a permissive acceptance of murder culture and violent behavior.

    You seem surprised that the worst recollections of people are brought to the fore during a public fracas. I am not. It's called selection bias. If an organization is suddenly thrust into the spotlight in a negative way, it should surprise no one that people who have had bad experiences with it are going to get more attention. That in and of itself tells you nothing. Someone with as much education as you have is no doubt familiar with this. Thus you are either being purposefully obtuse, intellectually dishonest, naive, or you are not being rigorous in your thinking. Possibly some combination thereof.

    This does not preclude the possibility that Convenant is indeed staffed and attended only or primarily by racist bigots. I think that is a very unlikely scenario. I get the impression you do not.

    I hate to break it you, Enoch, but what you're doing here... it's precisely the kind of thinking racists exploit in order to evade detection and accountability. You played yourself, bro.
    Sick burn man. No, wait, you're the racist.

    Yes, yes, I realise that within the framework of your sustained delusion, you're an individual and a free thinker, while OG and I are part of a multi-headed single-brained liberal outrage-hydra, but I hadn't read that thread, and I disagree with her characterization & analysis of the full video.
    We get it, piece of shit asshats like you frequently interject yourself into conversations without knowing the proper context, and without even knowing the most basic facts.

    In fact, based on an N of 1, I think we can agree it's true of all Scandahoovians.

    That seems eminently reasonable, right?

    It's a minor point, but you are wrong. Collectively, the videos show Philips walking up to the group, and barely moving, and students who were out on the edges of the crowd move closer and begin to encircle him, with his own group at his back.
    Right, because he walked into the crowd beating his drum, causing the antagonizing group as well as his own group to follow in behind him. In what world could this not be reasonably considered aggressive? Again, I ask, what was supposed to happen? Were the kids supposed to scatter before him... because reasons?


    Before Loki posted the video, I had no idea there was a Catholic boys' school--full of racist, homophobic and sexist bigots--by the name of Covington Catholic High School.
    Well, golly, now after reading a couple twitter posts you are an expert who is more than capable of rendering judgment upon the whole school, its alumni, faculty and staff. I mean, that analysis doesn't get any more rigorous. We tremble before your righteous glory.

    No, Tucker old boy, what's truly remarkable is that you're so obsessed with a tiny fringe group--a cult--of complete nutjobs that you can't participate in a conversation about problems in mainstream society... and, yet, I note that almost none of your posts over the past few years begin with a blanket condemnation of fringe extremist cults. That's really suspicious, man. Why don't you condemn tiny groups of extremists all the time?
    Are you not even trying? I get it. You backed the wrong horse. You look foolish. The right course of action is to look into yourself and find something resembling humility. I think you used to have some. If only your toxic masculinity would allow you to admit it.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 01-22-2019 at 08:53 PM.

  2. #302
    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.
    "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)

  3. #303
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Ominous Gamer; 01-22-2019 at 08:43 PM.
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  4. #304
    Quote Originally Posted by wiggin View Post
    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.

  5. #305


    chaperone front and center during the "its not rape" joke
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  6. #306
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    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.

  7. #307
    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.
    "When I meet God, I am going to ask him two questions: Why relativity? And why turbulence? I really believe he will have an answer for the first." - Werner Heisenberg (maybe)

  8. #308
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    Definitely, context matters.
    Yes, and that is how we know that the boys were also responding to Philips's drumming and chanting. Their mocking dances were directed at him, when he stood before them. Prior to that, they were doing other things that weren't directed at Philips. Their parodies of his chanting were in response to his drumming and chanting. Prior to that, they were shouting other things, in response to other people.

    Unfounded assumptions? Pull the other one.

    You seem surprised that the worst recollections of people are brought to the fore during a public fracas. I am not. It's called selection bias. If an organization is suddenly thrust into the spotlight in a negative way, it should surprise no one that people who have had bad experiences with it are going to get more attention. That in and of itself tells you nothing. Someone with as much education as you have is no doubt familiar with this. Thus you are either being purposefully obtuse, intellectually dishonest, naive, or you are not being rigorous in your thinking. Possibly some combination thereof.
    I'm sorry, I haven't been smoking from the same crack pipe as you, so I have to ask: what exactly gave you the impression I was surprised? As for bias, whether you consider recall bias or selection bias, testimonials that allege systemic problems--corroborated eg. by accounts of racist dog-whistle chants, documented use of blackface, stigmatization of LGBT+ youths etc--cannot be dismissed as insignificant anecdotes. The vast majority of people attending CCH do not belong to those minority groups that are targeted by bigots, while many may be complicit in the bigotry; their accounts of how every day at CCH was just a normal day are not informative. You're implicitly pushing a very naive conception of systemic problems that basically states that a culture of racism, for example, can't be said to exist in an organization unless each and every member of a racial minority is racially abused all day every day, and all the majority members acknowledge this to be the case. In reality, those who are not victims of abuse will frequently not indicate any awareness of abuse occurring, while victims will see not only their worst abusers but also those who are just casual participants, those who give tacit approval, those who tolerate abuse and those who attempt to cover it up.

    Sick burn man. No, wait, you're the racist.
    I'm sorry, but I think clarity is important in these discussions: I'm not calling you a racist, I'm saying that the "heuristics" you employ are the same ones racists exploit when they manage to pull the wool over the eyes of their useful idiots.

    I think we can safely say that piece of shit asshats like you frequently interject yourself into conversations without knowing the proper context, and without even knowing the most basic facts.
    Reading the thread, which I now see has had a wildly disproportionate impact on your composure, was unnecessary when it came to answering the specific question you had about OG's specific claim of Philips being "surrounded". It was clear that you yourself did not have a grasp of the context or the facts, so I provided a clip showing he was surrounded, and later pointed out that the longer video does not support your claim that Philips somehow pushed himself into the crowd--that, instead, the crowd folded around him. It's not a big deal, but clearly it was super important to you. Reading the twitter thread became necessary later on, when you began to froth at the mouth over my failure to criticize something OG had posted, so that's when I read it, and I concluded that I disagreed with her portrayal of the video. But then you lost your shit again because now your delusion about me and OG being the same person was suddenly being challenged.

    In fact, based on an N of 1, I think we can agree it's true of all Scandahoovians.

    That seems eminently reasonable, right?
    *shrug* I'm not really all that Scandinavian, whereas you're increasingly beginning to resemble a caricature of... I don't even know what you're supposed to be anymore other than "not like those LIBRULS waaahh".

    Right, because he walked into the crowd beating his drum, causing the antagonizing group as well as his own group to follow in behind him. In what world could this not be reasonably considered aggressive? Again, I ask, what was supposed to happen? Were the kids supposed to scatter before him... because reasons?
    He did not walk "into" the crowd so much as he walked up to it. There were a number of choices available to the children. They could have moved, if they felt he was being aggressive. They could've called for help if they felt they were being harassed, which they certainly were by the other group. They could've listened without mocking him. Philips alleges he heard several of them make derogatory remarks about Native Americans, and they certainly had the option not to say such things. Those are a few of the options that were available to them and their adult chaperones.

    Well, golly, now after reading a couple twitter posts you are surely an expert who is more than capable of rendering judgment upon the whole school, its alumni, faculty and staff. We tremble before your righteous glory.
    I can form an opinion based on the information available to me. You can choose to form a different opinion, or not form any opinion at all. Your snark, however, is misguided, and reflects your naive straw-man conception of systemic problems--everyone must be 100% guilty of everything all the time--rather than my thoughts about the school in question.

    Are you not even trying? I get it. You backed the wrong horse.
    Oh my god you ridiculous man, you don't even know what horses there are to back. I get it, you're really keen on this whole global liberal conspiracy narrative, but if you want to have a real conversation I suggest you first end the imaginary conversation you're having with your imaginary opponents.
    Last edited by Aimless; 01-22-2019 at 09:39 PM.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  9. #309
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    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/
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  10. #310
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    Yes, and that is how we know that the boys were also responding to Philips's drumming and chanting. Their mocking dances were directed at him, when he stood before them. Prior to that, they were doing other things that weren't directed at Philips. Their parodies of his chanting were in response to his drumming and chanting. Prior to that, they were shouting other things, in response to other people.
    I agree. Clearly some of the behavior and mocking was directed at Philips. It was juvenile. It is not how I would want my children to behave.

    However, I am not shocked by juvenile behavior coming from juveniles. If an elderly German man playing an accordion pushed his way into that crowd, I would not be surprised to see parodies of him, confusion, and mocking. It was childish behavior. What I have yet to see is behavior that warrants death threats, threats of physical violence, and a virtual lynching.

    I'm sorry, I haven't been smoking from the same crack pipe as you, so I have to ask: what exactly gave you the impression I was surprised? As for bias, whether you consider recall bias or selection bias, testimonials that allege systemic problems--corroborated eg. by accounts of racist dog-whistle chants, documented use of blackface, stigmatization of LGBT+ youths etc--cannot be dismissed as insignificant anecdotes. The vast majority of people attending CCH do not belong to those minority groups that are targeted by bigots, while many may be complicit in the bigotry; their accounts of how every day at CCH was just a normal day are not informative. You're implicitly pushing a very naive conception of systemic problems that basically states that a culture of racism, for example, can't be said to exist in an organization unless each and every member of a racial minority is racially abused all day every day, and all the majority members acknowledge this to be the case. In reality, those who are not victims of abuse will frequently not indicate any awareness of abuse occurring, while victims will see not only their worst abusers but also those who are just casual participants, those who give tacit approval, those who tolerate abuse and those who attempt to cover it up.
    I fully expect that there are sexist, or racist, or homophobic bigots at that school - in both the staff and the student body. It is likely true of any group of people sufficiently large. What I have not seen you provide is good evidence that goes beyond Twitter posts and anecdotes, something I hardly consider to be revelatory, especially in light of the scandal. It seems sufficient for you though to write off a school and everyone in it, so keep up the good work comrade!

    I'm sorry, but I think clarity is important in these discussions: I'm not calling you a racist, I'm saying that the "heuristics" you employ are the same ones racists exploit when they manage to pull the wool over the eyes of their useful idiots.
    Then please, be clear. What heuristics do I employ? Looking at people as individuals instead of members of arbitrary groups? Ah yes, the tool of the super racist.

    Reading the thread, which I now see has had a wildly disproportionate impact on your composure, was unnecessary when it came to answering the specific question you had about OG's specific claim of Philips being "surrounded". It was clear that you yourself did not have a grasp of the context or the facts, so I provided a clip showing he was surrounded, and later pointed out that the longer video does not support your claim that Philips somehow pushed himself into the crowd--that, instead, the crowd folded around him. It's not a big deal, but clearly it was super important to you. Reading the twitter thread became necessary later on, when you began to froth at the mouth over my failure to criticize something OG had posted, so that's when I read it, and I concluded that I disagreed with her portrayal of the video. But then you lost your shit again because now your delusion about me and OG being the same person was suddenly being challenged.
    ...but afaict OG has not posted anything in this latest conversation that even comes close to the weird-ass fanfic of your video.
    If you believe OG has stated something that is really dumb and unsupported by any evidence, you're perfectly capable of raising that objection yourself.
    I clearly was giving you too much credit, and taking what you said at face value. I apologize. I recognize now something resembling honesty can not be expected in a conversation with you.

    *shrug* I'm not really all that Scandinavian, whereas you're increasingly beginning to resemble a caricature of... I don't even know what you're supposed to be anymore other than "not like those LIBRULS waaahh".
    The caricature starts with an M and ends with an inx.

    He did not walk "into" the crowd so much as he walked up to it. There were a number of choices available to the children. They could have moved, if they felt he was being aggressive. They could've called for help if they felt they were being harassed, which they certainly were by the other group. They could've listened without mocking him. Philips alleges he heard several of them make derogatory remarks about Native Americans, and they certainly had the option not to say such things. Those are a few of the options that were available to them and their adult chaperones.
    And Philips had the option of not interjecting himself into the situation. Again, the original story was that he was surrounded by these students while minding his own business. That is not factually what happened. He was not surrounded by these students who were seeking him out to mock him and intimidate him.

    I can form an opinion based on the information available to me. You can choose to form a different opinion, or not form any opinion at all. Your snark, however, is misguided, and reflects your naive straw-man conception of systemic problems--everyone must be 100% guilty of everything all the time--rather than my thoughts about the school in question.
    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.

    Oh my god you ridiculous man, you don't even know what horses there are to back. I get it, you're really keen on this whole global liberal conspiracy narrative, but if you want to have a real conversation suggest you first end the imaginary conversation you're having with your imaginary opponents.
    When you are ready to talk I'll be happy to listen.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 01-23-2019 at 04:35 AM.

  11. #311
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    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/
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  12. #312
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post

    If an elderly German man playing an accordion pushed his way into that crowd, I would not be surprised to see parodies of him, confusion, and mocking.
    Yeah but he'd be white, so that's OK in the book of racists who think racism against white folks isn't racism.

  13. #313
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Amsterdam/Istanbul
    Posts
    11,319
    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.
    Congratulations America

  14. #314
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    I agree. Clearly some of the behavior and mocking was directed at Philips. It was juvenile. It is not how I would want my children to behave.

    However, I am not shocked by juvenile behavior coming from juveniles. If an elderly German man playing an accordion pushed his way into that crowd, I would not be surprised to see parodies of him, confusion, and mocking. It was childish behavior. What I have yet to see is behavior that warrants death threats, threats of physical violence, and a virtual lynching.
    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.

    I fully expect that there are sexist, or racist, or homophobic bigots at that school - in both the staff and the student body. It is likely true of any group of people sufficiently large. What I have not seen you provide is good evidence that goes beyond Twitter posts and anecdotes, something I hardly consider to be revelatory, especially in light of the scandal. It seems sufficient for you though to write off a school and everyone in it, so keep up the good work comrade!
    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.

    Then please, be clear. What heuristics do I employ? Looking at people as individuals instead of members of arbitrary groups? Ah yes, the tool of the super racist.
    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 clearly was giving you too much credit, and taking what you said at face value. I apologize. I recognize now something resembling honesty can not be expected in a conversation with you.
    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?

    The caricature starts with an M and ends with an inx.
    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

    And Philips had the option of not interjecting himself into the situation. Again, the original story was that he was surrounded by these students while minding his own business. That is not factually what happened. He was not surrounded by these students who were seeking him out to mock him and intimidate him.
    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.

    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.
    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.

    When you are ready to talk I'll be happy to listen.
    Pretty clear you're happy as a pig in mud carrying on an imaginary conversation with the imaginary characters in your tWF fanfic.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  15. #315
    Quote Originally Posted by Hazir View Post
    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...???"
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  16. #316
    Quote Originally Posted by Ominous Gamer View Post
    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:

    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  17. #317
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 01-23-2019 at 08:45 PM.

  18. #318
    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.

  19. #319
    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.
    Who can now look back with a sense of pride?

  20. #320
    Do you really want him making a new thread every time Fox covers a republican being a perv but lists them as a Democrat?
    "In a field where an overlooked bug could cost millions, you want people who will speak their minds, even if they’re sometimes obnoxious about it."

  21. #321
    Not starting threads about obliviously wrong stories from ownthelibs.com would be a start.
    Who can now look back with a sense of pride?

  22. #322
    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.

  23. #323
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    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.

  24. #324
    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.

  25. #325
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    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?

  26. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by Lewkowski View Post
    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.

  27. #327
    https://amp.theguardian.com/us-news/...mpression=true

    I am shocked to read of a cop helping Nazis.
    Some people are too dense to bother with

  28. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by Enoch the Red View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Aimless; 01-27-2019 at 08:12 PM.
    “Humanity's greatest advances are not in its discoveries, but in how those discoveries are applied to reduce inequity.”
    — Bill Gates

  29. #329
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimless View Post
    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.
    Last edited by Enoch the Red; 01-28-2019 at 05:11 PM.

  30. #330
    As a side note, does anyone think the initial video would have gone viral if the students hadn't been wearing MAGA hats? While there are a number of stupid reasons for the media to watch to latch onto this story I actually think the biggest reason is just routine "let's try to hurt Trump!"

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •