Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX
https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us … 22325.aspx

According to Property Claim Services, which keeps statistics on such events, the more costly disturbances have historically been covered by states’ insurers of last resorts.

The 10 most expensive civil disorders in the US, measured by insured loss in 2013 dollars, include:
Rodney King riots – April 29 -May 4, 1992; Los Angeles; $1,287 million
Watts riots – August 11-17, 1965; Los Angeles; $325 million
12th Street riot – July 23, 1967; Detroit; $293 million
Arthur McDuffie riots – May 17-19, 1980; Miami; $184 million
Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination riots– April 4-9, 1968; Washington, DC; $161 million
New York City blackouts – July 13-14, 1977; New York City; $108 million
John Weerd Smith riots – July 12, 1967; Newark; $105 million
Baltimore Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination riots – April 6-9, 1968; Baltimore; $94 million
Chicago Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination riots – April 4-11, 1968; Chicago; $87 million
NYC Chicago Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination riots – April 4-11, 1968; New York City; $27 million
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+492|3423
are you really disputing the fact that poor people who burn down their own neighbourhoods are in a more parlous state than middle-class, white, corporate america?

the whole spectre of 'burning and looting' that hangs over BLM protests – all 3% of them that involve any damage to property whatsoever – is an invention of the right-wing media, to scaremonger. it is precisely a tactic to ignore the social and political demands of the protestors, the reformists or radicals, whatever, as you like it, and to turn it into a story about 'defending property'. law-and-order in the right-wing worldview is cops keeping people off streets and away from their valuable property.

you and larssen parrot this shit, hook line and sinker. 'better hope BLM don't burn down your apartment eh'. there have been multiple HUGE BLM protests in my city, including my neighbourhood and road (it's a main road in the city centre). never once have i feared for property damage. that's because it is retarded. i'm more interested in what they have to say whilst you keep going on and on about how, ackshually, business owners affected by BLM could never claim insurance, as if they're white settlers being mistreated by zimbabwe or whatever-the-fuck.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EZ1dhAjX0AAUm4l.jpg

omg i'm terrified in my own neighbourhood!

ffs

Last edited by uziq (2021-06-18 01:16:41)

uziq
Member
+492|3423
editor-at-large for the financial times brings an anthropological background to the FT.

very interesting little talk.

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

There's not always a one-size-fits-all answer to what insurance will or will not do for you. Sometimes you have to fight them over stuff they're explicitly supposed to cover you on, and of course sometimes they'll tweak your rates if you make claims.

I know a business owner who reports jack all (unless it's something really big) because he kept getting stung on that. Another person who got t-boned in a parking lot and screwed over by insurance and lawyers. Car wouldn't even be classified as totaled, despite being rendered unroadworthy. As the anecdote went, the opposing lawyer was good friends with the arbitrator and spent a lot of time in between sessions yucking it up. More time in-session picking the victim apart than the person who caused the wreck.

People who can only afford shitty insurance policies are probably going to get a shitty payout that won't do much to bail them out. That was pretty evident with the stupid metallic plans for health insurance for instance. If you're well off, you can afford the insurance that will pay for more. Brliliant. Once again, the poor suffer.
Larssen
Member
+99|1858

uziq wrote:

ethnic national german identity against all other europeans was the main show? so that's why hitler placed the nordic races at number one?

a pointless digression with no bearing on BLM anyway.

might i suggest you read mein kampf if you want to get your head around how hitler considered race? the whiter you were, the more phenotypically 'nordic', that is, the 'purer' you were. slavs, romas, polish were all 'mongrelised' to some degree. it wasn't only about skin pigmentation. and the jews were resolutely NOT considered white by nazi race science.

there is an entire fucking chapter in mein kampf about nation and blood and hitler talks, at extreme and odious length, about 'jewish blood'. jews were NOT considered to be part of the same race as fucking germans ... christ almighty.

as for 'germany missed european colonialism and racist attitudes'. you kicked off modern genocide with the hereros. read a book. like all african colonialism it was propped up by a sense that the white race were the most 'evolved'. miscegenation and race mixing was a huge taboo in germany since way before the nazis elevated bad race science to a killing principle. ask a schwarze deutsch now after 3 or 4 generations if they feel 'fully german' and then explain to me why BLM doesn't have a point because 'it comes from america and europe doesn't see race'.
It's why we had two world wars on the continent you numbskull. You really are going to try and anachronistically impose the modern lines of social division on history so that you can waffle together the idea that somehow it was 'white supremacy' that was the real centerpoint of nazism? What a fucking surprise that under the surface there was a notion of a shared history among European powers, and some distantly sensed shared identity. But the dividing lines of race in the late 1800s to early 1930s obviously don't quite align with white supremacy if an overwhelming amount of literal white people were either considered mongrelised or otherwise 'not white' (read: not german, not the right blood, not us, you don't read hitler or anyone else speaking at length about the virtues of whiteness but of germanness rather) and sent to extermination camps. Your proof is in the pudding uzique ffs. German and in extension aryan ethnonationalism was not about white supremacy, it was about german and aryan ethnonationalism. Very much geographically contained to a particular area of Europe - all other Europeans were considered lesser, many to a fatal extent, and killed.

The impetus to german colonialism was NOT because of white supremacist ideology, rather more informed through the notion that colonial possession was the real proof of nationhood. The early german state was deeply envious of the french and the british and wanted to claim its 'rightful' position on the world stage above them. The aggressively expansionist attitude and resulting navy build up had a direct relation to the increasing tensions unleashed in world war 1. If you're going to tell me the world wars too were actually conflicts about white supremacy I'm about to throw a chair out the window. In between working far too long hours I don't have the infinite time you have to write endless paragraphs here devoted to questioning your horseshit.

Last edited by Larssen (2021-06-18 07:45:32)

Larssen
Member
+99|1858

uziq wrote:

yep yep. as i said, it comes down to this:

this uneasy proximity of an often-times racist capitalism to the birth and rise of liberal democracies is the WHOLE REASON why BLM's message cuts through to so many western nations today. you are going so far out of your way to miss this basic point when you talk about the 'cultural differences' between the USA and, say, belgium. you're really going to talk about the cultural differences between belgians and americans and not, er, the fact that both countries in their modern histories had huge slave-plantation systems using african labour? hahaha oh my god.
the western model that we celebrate so much today was only possible, only attained pre-eminence, through an era of capitalist expansion and extraction. and the ideology that fuelled such a global 'grab' was outwardly racist, at times on religious grounds (converting heathens), but more often using first 'enlightenment' and then 'darwinist' scientific principles.

the economic engine of europe's and the new world's development was racist in character. the institutions and structures which persist to this day, in governance, in policing, in universities, in the law courts, in every aspect of that 'developed' civic world, was funded by capitalist exploitation, and was structurally racist. and this persists to the present-day, modern era. even ex-colonial subjects in places like french indochina/vietnam or the british west indies could never hope to be accepted in the post-imperial centre, being restricted to becoming only model citizens in model schools in the peripheries. these groups have been and still are excluded and subaltern.

i literally cannot believe a european is going to sit here today and scoff at BLM as an 'american import', acting affronted as if it's a belgian presented with french fries and ketchup. the message that 'black lives matter' has valence in many western nations, especially those, seemingly like germany and belgium, that prefer not to examine their recent history.
Europe didn't trade slaves to work the fields in Europe. They were traded between the colonies. About 98%+ of the people who live here from non European backgrounds immigrated to Europe during the era of decolonisation. That and immigration to speed up the rebuilding of post-WW2 europe is the history which is most foundational to the social interactions within our own countries today. The overwhelming majority of non european peoples who live here didn't arrive as slaves but as gastarbeiter or decolonised citizens uziq. Starting in the 1950s, in the 1960s. It is then that the policies were made and crafted that have perpetuated a certain social division to today.

Last edited by Larssen (2021-06-18 08:17:15)

Larssen
Member
+99|1858

uziq wrote:

you and larssen parrot this shit, hook line and sinker. 'better hope BLM don't burn down your apartment eh'. there have been multiple HUGE BLM protests in my city, including my neighbourhood and road (it's a main road in the city centre). never once have i feared for property damage. that's because it is retarded.
You are absolutely insufferable. I don't know how many pages of posts I've now devoted to explaining my position on identity, identitarianism, the problems in our social cohesion, I've literally worked with refugees at some point too - you can trace it all back and read for yourself a very reasonable picture. But no, if I don't parrot line for line whatever the fuck you're thinking, I must be a racist belgian provincial who suffers from white anxiety (????). Invariably your position seems to be that whenever there's ANY social cause found across ANY identitarian line that weaves a narrative of minority oppression, you'll be there front and center agreeing with all of it. It's like clockwork. And irrespective of any sort of context, you'll impose whatever academic analysis that is en vogue on the entire fucking planet.

I jested the last page that if BLM was as passionate about the economic dimensions as you profess they surely all voted for Bernie. They didn't, Uziq. If I recall a BLM group even interrupted a political campaign event of his to call him and his supporters racist white supremacists. So much for the deeply understood economic reform agenda underpinning it all. Doesn't seem to be so uncontentious an issue.

Last edited by Larssen (2021-06-18 08:16:09)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX
Its hilarious how uziq mindlessly parrots and copy-pastes this leftist woke claptrap, but at the same time contributes exactly nothing constructive himself and evacuates himself to a racist, insular, anti-gay, monocultural technocracy.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX

Larssen wrote:

I jested the last page that if BLM was as passionate about the economic dimensions as you profess they surely all voted for Bernie. They didn't, Uziq. If I recall a BLM group even interrupted a political campaign event of his to call him and his supporters racist white supremacists. So much for the deeply understood economic reform agenda underpinning it all. Doesn't seem to be so uncontentious an issue.
BLM are like libertarians, they want total freedom for themselves, no police and we know where that ends up.

https://www.history.com/.image/t_share/MTU3ODc4NjAwNTU5OTYxODIz/image-placeholder-title.jpg

Like Jay they think they'll each be better off when they make it to the ruling 1%, in fact 99% of them will be worse off.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

In Jay's defense and hand sanitizer notwithstanding, I think he has probably made more profound arguments than you have as of late, dilbert. At the very least, I haven't seen him equate furcon orgies with shamanism. Also he's only tired of spending time with his kids. You're tired of spending time with your whole country.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

I haven't seen him equate furcon orgies with shamanism.
Well nor have I. I accept the furry path has not been a straight one, this is what happens when people lose their way.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

"The furry path," lmao.
uziq
Member
+492|3423

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

yep yep. as i said, it comes down to this:

this uneasy proximity of an often-times racist capitalism to the birth and rise of liberal democracies is the WHOLE REASON why BLM's message cuts through to so many western nations today. you are going so far out of your way to miss this basic point when you talk about the 'cultural differences' between the USA and, say, belgium. you're really going to talk about the cultural differences between belgians and americans and not, er, the fact that both countries in their modern histories had huge slave-plantation systems using african labour? hahaha oh my god.
the western model that we celebrate so much today was only possible, only attained pre-eminence, through an era of capitalist expansion and extraction. and the ideology that fuelled such a global 'grab' was outwardly racist, at times on religious grounds (converting heathens), but more often using first 'enlightenment' and then 'darwinist' scientific principles.

the economic engine of europe's and the new world's development was racist in character. the institutions and structures which persist to this day, in governance, in policing, in universities, in the law courts, in every aspect of that 'developed' civic world, was funded by capitalist exploitation, and was structurally racist. and this persists to the present-day, modern era. even ex-colonial subjects in places like french indochina/vietnam or the british west indies could never hope to be accepted in the post-imperial centre, being restricted to becoming only model citizens in model schools in the peripheries. these groups have been and still are excluded and subaltern.

i literally cannot believe a european is going to sit here today and scoff at BLM as an 'american import', acting affronted as if it's a belgian presented with french fries and ketchup. the message that 'black lives matter' has valence in many western nations, especially those, seemingly like germany and belgium, that prefer not to examine their recent history.
Europe didn't trade slaves to work the fields in Europe. They were traded between the colonies. About 98%+ of the people who live here from non European backgrounds immigrated to Europe during the era of decolonisation. That and immigration to speed up the rebuilding of post-WW2 europe is the history which is most foundational to the social interactions within our own countries today. The overwhelming majority of non european peoples who live here didn't arrive as slaves but as gastarbeiter or decolonised citizens uziq. Starting in the 1950s, in the 1960s. It is then that the policies were made and crafted that have perpetuated a certain social division to today.
you are completely illiterate.

it doesn't MATTER that people didn't work in the fields in europe. the entire economies of european empire were propped up by invisible, unpaid labour and extraction from elsewhere. why do you think every single country in europe rushed to get colonies? it was a fucking requirement to be competitive with their (often times warring) neighbours. why do you think that is? because having a huge supply of basically free materials, resources and human labour was pretty fucking advantageous to the royal/national/imperial economy. FFS. 'europe's climate couldn't support cotton growing so it cannot be racist like america'.

do you think that using non-whites as chattel property and slave labour for centuries wouldn't contribute, or be conducive to, a racist ideology? how do you think (often times christian) ruling-class whites morally justified their use of slave labour and atrocities in the colonies? there wasn't a racist dynamic at work that denied humanity or 'dignity' to non-whites? really?

https://cdn.downtoearth.org.in/library/large/2016-11-03/0.14257400_1478172478_55-1-20161115.jpg

i cannot believe how shit your take is. 'europe didn't have slaves working in its fields so it can't be compared to america'. because having sugar plantations in the west indies or rubber plantations in africa is so much different. 'b-b-b-but black people in europe came AFTER the colonies collapsed; it's so much different to african americans, who stuck around after they were manumitted!'

black people came to germany in the 19th century in good numbers. aka the age of colonialism. i just mentioned the schwarze deutsch above. it was a big enough problem for there to be semi-official policies about their status. semi-official racist policies, that is. the european outlook on the world through the modern era was fundamentally RACIST and considered whites to be more 'elevated', 'noble', 'evolved', etc. choose your fucking word. from daniel defoe to rousseau, the early modern period is FULL of it. you claiming that social attitudes and race relations were created by policy in the 1960s is just so, so fucking funny.

Interracial couples in the [German] colonies were subjected to strong pressure in a campaign against miscegenation, which included invalidation of marriages, declaring the mixed-race children illegitimate, and stripping them of German citizenship.[7] During extermination of the Nama people in 1907 by Germany, the German director for colonial affairs, Bernhard Dernburg, stated that "some native tribes, just like some animals, must be destroyed".[8]
the idea that germany never had to confront or deal with colonialism, 'Others' or race relations until the turks came to rebuild it after world war 2 is SO FUCKING FUNNY. you genocided blacks in africa in 1890 ffs. tell me again how germany wasn't fundamentally a racist, white supremacist state because kebab shops and car-factory workers from ankara turned up. hahahahah. oh my GOD my guy.

https://www.dw.com/en/forcibly-steriliz … a-56175531

After the loss of the German colonial territories, the presence of black soldiers in the Rhineland was perceived as a humiliation. With the active participation of state and civil organizations, a racist propaganda campaign was launched under the title "Die Schwarze Schmach" (the Black Shame). Via leaflets, pamphlets and articles, these colonial soldiers were portrayed as "savage beasts" who raped and murdered the civilian population.

The campaign's supporters were not exclusively from nationalist or conservative circles. Racism and eugenics were deeply rooted throughout German society. Social-Democratic party politicians such as President Friedrich Ebert or Foreign Minister Adolf Köster decried a portion of French troops from the "lowest cultural level" and described the deployment as a "spiritual crime" against the German people.

A picture in the satirical German magazine 'Kladderadatsch' shows a 'savage black' French soldier taking off with a local white women.

It was a politically-calculated move to use racism to discredit the Versailles Treaty that blamed Germany for World War I and exacted massive reparations.

The hope was that international solidarity with Germany would be re-established based on common prejudices.

Defamatory articles about the colonial soldiers appeared worldwide, supported by propaganda material from the UK Foreign Office. For instance, British Labour MP Edmund Dene Morel falsely accused France of unleashing "savage blacks" and "primitive barbarians" on the German population, troops whose "unbridled bestiality" had resulted in numerous rapes.

Despite the racist propaganda, numerous love affairs blossomed between colonial soldiers and German women. This was an affront to nationalists who made the "desecration of the German woman" one of their fundamental themes. In the smear campaign, the female body symbolized the German national body and both had to be kept "pure."

After the First World War, relationships between black French soldiers and German women were taboo

The German propaganda machine reacted accordingly: Women who had relationships with soldiers of African heritage were denounced as dishonorable, a "white disgrace." And children from these unions were derisively called "Rhineland bastards."
https://static.dw.com/image/56148683_403.jpg

Last edited by uziq (2021-06-18 23:45:07)

uziq
Member
+492|3423

Dilbert_X wrote:

Its hilarious how uziq mindlessly parrots and copy-pastes this leftist woke claptrap, but at the same time contributes exactly nothing constructive himself and evacuates himself to a racist, insular, anti-gay, monocultural technocracy.
racist, anti-gay technocracy

i was at a gay bar last night having a laugh with my friends. you fucking kook.

australia is one of the most LGBTQ friendly countries in the world. that equates to about 79% approval or agreement with homosexuality. south korea has about 60% approval of LGBTQ lifestyles, and it's increasing every year. 'anti-gay'.

south korea a technocracy hahahahahahhaha.

every single one of their elected officials has ended up in prison or assassinated. but yes, a dictator's daughter becoming president ... just so technocratic. wait until you hear that all their global corporations are run by families and handed down from father to son! because what could be more technocratic than samsung being a family firm, right? by the way, they are mired in corruption and half of them are in prison too. T E C H N O C R A C Y, amirite?

read a book. they're quite fun. many pages! little squiggly lines on page! your eyes scan them! you learn things!

Last edited by uziq (2021-06-18 23:08:38)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

Off the beaten path for a moment, I would like to talk about Texas. I'm sure some of us remember seeing ERCOT in the news?

dailydot wrote:



‘Woke up sweating’: Texas power companies remotely raise temperatures on people using their smart thermostats
Smart thermostats can be remotely adjusted during periods of high energy demand.

Power companies in Texas are remotely raising temperatures inside of some customers’ homes amid the state’s ongoing energy shortage.

Houston resident Brandon English, whose home has an internet-connected smart thermostat installed, was shocked to learn of the practice after his wife and infant daughter “woke up sweating.”

Speaking with KHOU 11, English stated that despite his wife turning down the temperature before taking a nap with their 3-year-old child, the temperature in their home rose significantly.

“They’d been asleep long enough that the house had already gotten to 78 degrees,” English said. “So they woke up sweating.”

English, who expressed concerns over the potential for his young child to overheat and dehydrate, said it wasn’t long after that his wife received a text alert noting that the thermostat had been remotely altered during a three-hour “energy saving event.”

English appears to have enrolled the thermostat, operated by the company EnergyHub, an a program known as “Smart Savers Texas,” KHOU 11 notes. The program, which customers have to opt-into, allows power companies to remotely adjust thermostats when energy demands are high.

Upon realizing the details of the program, English says he immediately unenrolled: “I wouldn’t want anybody else controlling my things for me.”

The English family is not the only one in Texas that seems to be experiencing such issues. The Daily Dot came across multiple videos on social media from individuals who claimed that their thermostats were being altered remotely.

In those cases, residents with Google’s Nest thermostats received messages noting that their temperatures had been adjusted during an “Energy Rush Hour.”

The issue comes shortly after the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), the state’s power grid manager, called on customers to reduce their energy usage and adjust their thermostats to 78 degrees or higher.

Serious questions continue to be raised about the resilience of the privately-run grid in the wake of the devastating snowstorm last February that resulted in widespread power outages.

https://www.dailydot.com/debug/texas-re … ermostats/
There are programs like this elsewhere in the country, and from anecdotes they all seem to work differently. Automatic-enroll, misleading opt-in, or fees attached to opting out or not opting in.

From a post on imgur:

user wrote:

https://i.imgur.com/5h4D9FS.jpg

During the winter storm here in Texas, it was day 2 or 3 w/o power that some of the fat-ass corporate HQ's decided to bless us by turning off "non-essential" lighting, like outside lights. Nobody was at the buildings, so there was no reason to keep lights and crap on anyways. But, they made a big to-do about it, like "look at us, we're helping!" It took them TWO DAYS during a state emergency where people were freezing to death w/o power for them to get off their asses and decide maybe they need to stop being such a fucking burden on the energy grid.

The winter storm just created media awareness of our issue, though. For the past decade, we've had summer brown-outs and been told to reduce our AC usage like we're the fucking parasites sucking all the energy from the system.

Meanwhile, you drive down any highway in DFW, and you see corporate HQ's and massive office buildings lit up like roman candles at night. They don't give a flying fart how much power THEY use. They want to keep parking lots & buildings fully lit for security reasons as well as their ego boost of "we're a shining beacon of industry".

Meanwhile, peasants are told to sweat their butts off with 78 F AC.

Once again, corporations are passing the buck by blaming the little guy. The fat pig at the trough is telling the skinny runt to stop eating so much, and making the skinny runt feel like it's the problem.

When corporations start going dark at night to conserve energy ... you know, when everyone's at home trying to use their AC ... then I'll start giving a shit.

Until then, I pay my electric bill, and they can go fuck themselves.
uziq
Member
+492|3423

Larssen wrote:

uziq wrote:

you and larssen parrot this shit, hook line and sinker. 'better hope BLM don't burn down your apartment eh'. there have been multiple HUGE BLM protests in my city, including my neighbourhood and road (it's a main road in the city centre). never once have i feared for property damage. that's because it is retarded.
You are absolutely insufferable. I don't know how many pages of posts I've now devoted to explaining my position on identity, identitarianism, the problems in our social cohesion, I've literally worked with refugees at some point too - you can trace it all back and read for yourself a very reasonable picture. But no, if I don't parrot line for line whatever the fuck you're thinking, I must be a racist belgian provincial who suffers from white anxiety (????). Invariably your position seems to be that whenever there's ANY social cause found across ANY identitarian line that weaves a narrative of minority oppression, you'll be there front and center agreeing with all of it. It's like clockwork. And irrespective of any sort of context, you'll impose whatever academic analysis that is en vogue on the entire fucking planet.

I jested the last page that if BLM was as passionate about the economic dimensions as you profess they surely all voted for Bernie. They didn't, Uziq. If I recall a BLM group even interrupted a political campaign event of his to call him and his supporters racist white supremacists. So much for the deeply understood economic reform agenda underpinning it all. Doesn't seem to be so uncontentious an issue.
i am not identitarian. almost all left-wing analysis states that identity-based politics is a mistake and distracts from meaningful progress.

you on the other hand like to pretend that racism never existed and that imperial economies were not propped up by racist ideologies. that’s just so fucking funny. 'non-whites came to europe as part of decolonisation, therefore racism cannot have affected them'. 'black lives matter is a meaningless slogan in the european context'.

i’m not here promoting a society based on identity groups. i don’t believe in a politics of grievance. but official apologies, reparations and, you know, democratic equality are valid causes. germany hadn’t even admitted or apologised for most of its genocidal, racist colonialism in africa. nor has belgium. nor has france. nor has britain. but if i say that black citizens living in europe today feel a legitimate grievance, i’m suddenly consumed by ‘identitarianism’? lmao you truly are a trivial thinker.

‘not all black people voted for bernie sanders therefore BLM cannot involve economic critique’. and you were bemoaning a lack of nuance?

Last edited by uziq (2021-06-18 23:47:43)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX
Except BLM isn't really about historic slavery, its about blacks being persecuted in the modern day.

Which doesn't really apply in modern europe does it?

If it does why are they trying so hard to get in?

I mean, if it were so awful living under whites and having to walk past statues of slavers were so terrible you'd think they wouldn't want to come.

https://media.msf.org/AssetLink/1wh056y7e320a2bd2x40f23g6c6xu711.jpg
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

Let me reroute that and ask how many statues of slavers you we need, and erected under what circumstances.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+634|3690

Dilbert_X wrote:

If it does why are they trying so hard to get in?

I mean, if it were so awful living under whites and having to walk past statues of slavers were so terrible you'd think they wouldn't want to come.
I thought about this the other day. It is really a tough question for BLM supporters especially if the refugees aren't black. I very rarely ever hear anyone on the right make this argument because I guess it requires you to care about refugees though. There are probably some people out there who take All Lives Matter literally and seriously.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Let me reroute that and ask how many statues of slavers you we need, and erected under what circumstances.
Dunno, just leave the existing ones where they are?

Often being involved in slavery was small part of who they were.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

If it does why are they trying so hard to get in?

I mean, if it were so awful living under whites and having to walk past statues of slavers were so terrible you'd think they wouldn't want to come.
I thought about this the other day. It is really a tough question for BLM supporters especially if the refugees aren't black. I very rarely ever hear anyone on the right make this argument because I guess it requires you to care about refugees though. There are probably some people out there who take All Lives Matter literally and seriously.
In Europe at least most non-whites are there thanks to migration and the refugee process, not slavery, and they continue to come.

So again, if being surrounded by evil whites and the reminders of slavery why do they do it?
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

Dilbert_X wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Let me reroute that and ask how many statues of slavers you we need, and erected under what circumstances.
Dunno, just leave the existing ones where they are?

Often being involved in slavery was small part of who they were.
1.
Q: Alright so let's say we have an historic statue of a person in a neighborhood, race/politics unspecified. This person is later found out to have been a twisted serial killer who kidnapped and tortured many children. Should that statue be left up because "it's an existing one and should be left alone," or should it be removed.

A: ______________


2.
Q: For the above, say the statue was erected some 50 years after the person stopped being relevant, to push a mostly unrelated agenda. The person is still found out to have been a monster. Should the statue remain in place for "historic reasons," or should it be removed?

A: ______________


3.
Q: For either of the above questions, this statue is located outside of a school also named for this person. Should the statue be removed and the school renamed?

A: [ ] Yes, [ ] No


4.
Q: Another person who was a known slaver and rapist when his statue was erected, has had this statue in front of city hall for the past 80 years. Members of the community, including people of African American descent and women, work at this building. Is it tasteless to continue to allow this statue to loom over their daily lives, and be the first impression for guests at city hall?

A: [ ] Yes, [ ] No


5.
Q: What is more important? An old statue of questionable historic significance erected as a power play against a community, or said community's well being?

A: ______________
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,810|6076|eXtreme to the maX
1. Example please
2. Depends
3. As above
4. Links plz
5. Isn't said community free to go somewhere else? You'd think they would not go there in the first place or find somewhere else. Its like jews migrating to Austria then complaining they're surrounded by reminders of nazism and actual nazis.

Slavery was legal at the time most people were involved in slavery, rape and murder typically have never been legal.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

These are all hypotheticals, so links are not needed. You knew this, but ducked most of the questions anyway. Rather like I thought you would.

It's interesting that you say the community should just move somewhere else for the sake of a statue, though. Even the ones too poor to move, I imagine. That city hall statue must be really crucial for something that emptying a town is The Solution. Should a community not have some power over their surroundings? What about the city government, should they be held hostage by an "historical society" manned by two redditors on twitter?
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6742|PNW

Anyway, here's a somewhat long environmental article on drinking water in the US. Interesting, gross stuff, but too long to post in full here.

'All the water's bad': In McDowell County, you have to get creative to find safe drinking water
To get drinking water, Burlyn Cooper and his neighbors have to collect runoff from the rock face of a mountain. It’s contaminated, but it’s all they have.
https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environ … e-n1270405

excerpt wrote:

An estimated 2 million Americans live without access to either safe drinking water, indoor plumbing or basic sanitation, according to DigDeep, a nonprofit that works to bring water to Americans without it. This "water access gap" disproportionately affects low-income, rural communities and people of color — communities left behind by the massive national investment in public water infrastructure in the past century.
I guess 2 million people should just pack up and move with the money they don't have to a place they can't afford.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard