Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Lemon and racism

  1. #1

    Default Lemon and racism

    Don Lemons quote:
    So, we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them. There is no travel ban on them. There is no ban on -- you know, they had the Muslim ban. There is no white guy ban.”
    So we have to stop demonizing people, that is unless they are white people, then it’s ok.
    Don Lemon then defends his statement:
    “So people who were angered about what I said are missing the entire point,” Lemon said about his earlier statements. “We don’t need to worry about people who are thousands of miles away. The biggest threats are homegrown. The facts prove that.”
    I have no problem with his statement of facts, another fact is that white men make up the majority of serial killers. Where I take issue is the racist sentiment in stating “ There is no white guy ban”. Even if I were to take his sources at face value (there are other sources of dispute), it’s still of no consequence. Simply put white is not an ideology, and to categorize a racial group as an ideology is racist. He could have said right wing, left wing, nazi or whatever, but he didn't. He attached a racial profile to an ideology(which there are many different reasons for these terrorist acts) Furthermore to impose a ban (whatever his motive) on a racial group is racist. I would have to wonder how a ban would be effected in a country where the majority of males happen to be white, and how this racist sentiment would work.


    What if Sean Hannity of Fox news were to say something of the same sort:
    So, we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest murder and rape threat in this country is black men, and we have to start doing something about them. There is no travel ban on them. There is no ban on -- you know, they had the Muslim ban. There is no black guy ban.”
    What then if Sean Hannity were to defend such a statement:
    “So people who were angered about what I said are missing the entire point,” Hannity said about his earlier statements. “We don’t need to worry about people who are thousands of miles away. The biggest threats are homegrown. The facts prove that.”


    Is there anyone who believes that the alphabet news media (ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc. etc.) wouldn’t be running a 24hr cycle showing Hannity’s racist remark? Of course the politicians would weigh in on such a statement and rightly calling it disgusting, hateful etc. etc.


    Lemon says that people are missing the point, but it is Lemon and CNN are missing the point. It’s not about the statistics! It’s about his racist motivated statement that there should be a ban (of some sort) against a group of people based on race, a “white guy ban”. Is any of the alphabet media calling this racist out?


    Am I wrong on this, if so explain how this isn’t racist and why it’s ok to dehumanize a group of people based on their race.

  2. #2

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    There's also the panel shortly before that where he and some of his guests called Kanye West all sorts of colour-related names (including a "token negro", which is hilarious coming from them) and suggested he was mentally ill.
    You can tell Don Lemon is the token retard on CNN because he failed to grasp the distinction between a group based on faith (admittedly, the word "Muslim ban" is very misleading for what that travel ban really constitutes) and a group based on physical characteristics.

  3. #3

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    There's also the panel shortly before that where he and some of his guests called Kanye West all sorts of colour-related names (including a "token negro", which is hilarious coming from them) and suggested he was mentally ill.
    You can tell Don Lemon is the token retard on CNN because he failed to grasp the distinction between a group based on faith (admittedly, the word "Muslim ban" is very misleading for what that travel ban really constitutes) and a group based on physical characteristics.
    A distinction without a meaningful difference.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    A distinction without a meaningful difference.
    You think there isn't a meaningful difference between a physical trait and a religious belief? Sounds like somebody would feel quite at home in the alt-right.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    You think there isn't a meaningful difference between a physical trait and a religious belief? Sounds like somebody would feel quite at home in the alt-right.
    The Alt-Right think there is a difference. Hence why they keep crying that "Islamaphobia isn't racism". "We don't hate Brown people we just don't like their hateful religion". Discrimination on either religious or racial prejudice is wrong. Don Lemon is guilty of being a moron, which are aplenty on both sides of the spectrum. The difference is, the right-wing parties in Europe are cozying up way too close to such nutbags on the right. The one good thing I can about UK Tories is that they actively seek to avoid associating with similar filth even if they enjoy their support. Can't say much the same for the guys in Brazil, Italy, France, or Hungary though.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    The Alt-Right think there is a difference.
    No, they think that race is destiny and that Middle-Eastern people are bound to be Muslim, or gravitate towards Islam or similar beliefs, because of their biological nature. Yo're confusing radical identitarians with classical liberals. I'm starting to think you don't even know what the alt-right is.


    Hence why they keep crying that "Islamaphobia isn't racism". "We don't hate Brown people we just don't like their hateful religion".
    I'm sure that there's a minority who thinks like that, but they're not representative of people critical of Islam. Hell, they're not even necessarily identical with the alt-right (see above).


    Discrimination on either religious or racial prejudice is wrong.
    Yes (assuming it's genuine). But there's still a fundamental difference.


    The difference is, the right-wing parties in Europe are cozying up way too close to such nutbags on the right.
    A direct consequence of the supposedly moderate "liberal leftists" doing the same with the radical Marxist and anti-white fringes, for the last 40 years.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    No, they think that race is destiny and that Middle-Eastern people are bound to be Muslim, or gravitate towards Islam or similar beliefs, because of their biological nature. Yo're confusing radical identitarians with classical liberals. I'm starting to think you don't even know what the alt-right is.
    You definitely don't know what alt-right is if you think they have any consistent ideological framework. They don't.

    I'm sure that there's a minority who thinks like that, but they're not representative of people critical of Islam. Hell, they're not even necessarily identical with the alt-right (see above).
    Of course not. But you're assuming I'm talking about Islam critics. On the contrary, I am one of them as I am an atheist. I detest all religion and Islam in particular, as the most dangerous and toxic form today. The sad part is, White Christians in America are doing their hardest to catch up.

    Yes (assuming it's genuine). But there's still a fundamental difference.
    Which is why I said it's not a meaningful difference. The end result is the same. People utter dumb like "it ain't racism if it's about their culture" are just idiots. It's fine to debate specificity in terms, but not when we're applying them to a general context. 0

    A direct consequence of the supposedly moderate "liberal leftists" doing the same with the radical Marxist and anti-white fringes, for the last 40 years.
    Your phantom of "marxism" is the most absurd thing pepole keep complaining about Along with post-modernism, SJWs, and counter racism. It's inane and reeks of conspiracy.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Typically the biggest racists (under conventional definition of the term) tend to be people that call themselves 'antifascists" or "anti-racists" and foam out of their mouths from anyone to the right of neocons. At the same time such people would believe in such racist (again, under conventional definition of the term) concepts as "white patriarchy" or "white privilege" but again, in lieu of ability to prove that such things exist they are more likely to call questioning such "racist" as well and the circle completes.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by Heathen Hammer View Post
    Typically the biggest racists (under conventional definition of the term) tend to be people that call themselves 'antifascists" or "anti-racists" and foam out of their mouths from anyone to the right of neocons. At the same time such people would believe in such racist (again, under conventional definition of the term) concepts as "white patriarchy" or "white privilege" but again, in lieu of ability to prove that such things exist they are more likely to call questioning such "racist" as well and the circle completes.
    the biggest racists aren’t antifa, but nice try.

  10. #10

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    the biggest racists aren’t antifa, but nice try.
    Antifa aren't racists but they are on the same spectrum of authoritarians and xenophobes on the left wing sort.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    You definitely don't know what alt-right is if you think they have any consistent ideological framework. They don't.
    Depends on how narrowly you define their movement.


    Of course not. But you're assuming I'm talking about Islam critics. On the contrary, I am one of them as I am an atheist. I detest all religion and Islam in particular, as the most dangerous and toxic form today. The sad part is, White Christians in America are doing their hardest to catch up.
    Well the thing is, those Christian crazies might be annoying and even commit the occasional terror attack in the US, but they don't bother us here in other parts of the world.


    Which is why I said it's not a meaningful difference. The end result is the same. People utter dumb like "it ain't racism if it's about their culture" are just idiots. It's fine to debate specificity in terms, but not when we're applying them to a general context. 0
    If you don't consider it a meaningful difference, you'll always do injustice to people who're honestly critiquing religious or cultural practices without being hostile on an ethnic level.


    Your phantom of "marxism" is the most absurd thing pepole keep complaining about Along with post-modernism, SJWs, and counter racism. It's inane and reeks of conspiracy.
    Actually, the Social Democrats (even the very moderate ones), as well as all other officially "leftist" parties - including most "Green" parties - here in Europe are firmly entrenched in Marxist philosophy, which is what they were founded on in the first place. This isn't controversial in the slightest, and no European leftist would deny that. If you don't believe me, pick up a bloody history book for once. They represent a huge chunk of the voting population in most countries.


    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    the biggest racists aren’t antifa, but nice try.
    Who do you think is more racist than them?

  12. #12

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by athanaric View Post
    Depends on how narrowly you define their movement.
    They're not a small movement. The alt-right co-opt a number of contradicting ideas and groups. The blanket term can be criticized as being too nebulous, but in the end it's fairly accurate. The alt-right includes anything from white-supremacy, neo-fascism, to anarcho-capitalism and radical libertarianism. Now that's not to say that every neo-fascist or libertarian is alt-right, but there is significant overlap. There's also of course the irony of "political correctness" that many people hide behind. "I'm not alt-right, I'm X and that's not alt-right" despite endorsing many alt-right positions and beliefs... I mean the ironic part is those people are just too political correct to properly label their views, so they hide behind specificity.

    Well the thing is, those Christian crazies might be annoying and even commit the occasional terror attack in the US, but they don't bother us here in other parts of the world.
    I quite agree. On the other hand, Europe suffers far more from toxic form of nationalism as a flipside.

    If you don't consider it a meaningful difference, you'll always do injustice to people who're honestly critiquing religious or cultural practices without being hostile on an ethnic level.
    I'm not sure I understand. Could you perhaps give me an example?

    Actually, the Social Democrats (even the very moderate ones), as well as all other officially "leftist" parties - including most "Green" parties - here in Europe are firmly entrenched in Marxist philosophy, which is what they were founded on in the first place. This isn't controversial in the slightest, and no European leftist would deny that. If you don't believe me, pick up a bloody history book for once. They represent a huge chunk of the voting population in most countries.
    I'm talking about "Cultural Marxism" and the constant discourse of how Western culture is under siege. For your point though, I do not see "leftist" parties being Marxist as an issue. In the same way that I do not see Libertarian ideological leanings in GOP platforms of the 60s and 80s as problematic either.

    Who do you think is more racist than them?
    Quite simply the actual fascists, racists, and conspiracy theorists. People like Stefan Molyneux and James C Buchanan and Pat Buchanan. Not to mention the thousands of American "militias", nationalists groups, and others who are often listen on SPLC. Antifa? They're not even on the list. It's not "racist" to hate fascists, alt-right, and other nationalist groups who espouse hateful ideology. I for one, am glad that someone is taking the fight to them directly. There is nothing brave about a bunch of misguided souls protesting to deport all the immigrants or whatever other discriminatory crap the alt-right protests about.

  13. #13
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    8,764
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    They're not a small movement. The alt-right co-opt a number of contradicting ideas and groups. The blanket term can be criticized as being too nebulous, but in the end it's fairly accurate. The alt-right includes anything from white-supremacy, neo-fascism, to anarcho-capitalism and radical libertarianism.
    In that case why is ‘alt-right’ commonly used disparagingly. If it simply meant alternative to mainstream right, it would not be considered a criticism not a description. For example Blue dogs are technically alt-left, but it isn’t a meaningful descriptor.

    The alt-right are racial identitarians, like Richard Spencer who to my knowledge coined the term, and David Duke.

    The alt-right, as the American movement, will see that to be white is to be Christian, to be Arab is to be Muslim, withhiut an inbetween. This is a bad mindset to conflate religion and race too much (I’m not saying there an’t many intersections, but to literally compare a Muslim ban to a white guy ban is as illogical as comparing an Arab ban to a Christian ban. It makes no sense.)

    I'm not sure I understand. Could you perhaps give me an example?
    Here is an example of when some people take it to an extreme and think Islam criticism (from atheists)=racism.

    Last edited by Aexodus; November 08, 2018 at 04:50 PM.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    The alt-right aren't just racial identitarians. They're frequently anti-feminists, homophobes, and islamaphobes. They're a very broad category that supports each other and has significant crossover in beliefs. Alt-right is a meaningful descriptor especially since the rhetoric and general platform is so often similar.

    Now in regards, to ethnicity, culture, or religion. Why should the three be treated differently? That's what I'm getting at. If someone is Persian, Muslim, or Jewish, what practical difference does that make as to how the government should treat them?

  15. #15
    Aexodus's Avatar Persuasion>Coercion
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    NI
    Posts
    8,764
    Blog Entries
    2

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    Quote Originally Posted by Sukiyama View Post
    The alt-right aren't just racial identitarians. They're frequently anti-feminists, homophobes, and islamaphobes. They're a very broad category that supports each other and has significant crossover in beliefs. Alt-right is a meaningful descriptor especially since the rhetoric and general platform is so often similar.
    You realise making that mistake legitimises the actual alt-right by lumping them in with what you call anti-feminism, homophobia, and Islamophobia, and I call equality (with feminism now being about about equity), even the mildest social conservatives, and atheists like Sam Harris. This allows people like Steve King to creep into the limelight because you’ve made anti-feminists, conservatives, and anti-Islam groups or critics of it.

    I am absolutely not saying that’s the intent, but it is the effect.

    You say that it’s a meaningful descriptor when the rhetoric and general platform is so often similar. What is it that all these groups have in common Sukiyama? Not just a couple, all. I don’t want to play 6 degrees of separation.

    Also it’s ridiculous that those actual legitimate groups ‘support and crossover’ with the KKK and neo-nazis.

    This is the definition the Associated Press uses.

    "alt-right":
    A political grouping or tendency mixing racism, white nationalism and populism; a name currently embraced by some white supremacists and white nationalists to refer to themselves and their ideology, which emphasizes preserving and protecting the white race in the United States.
    Now in regards, to ethnicity, culture, or religion. Why should the three be treated differently? That's what I'm getting at. If someone is Persian, Muslim, or Jewish, what practical difference does that make as to how the government should treat them?
    Because you don’t choose your skin colour. I’m not saying that religious discrimination is okay or acceptable, but there’s a difference between considering banning a race of people to limit the spread of that race, and considering banning followers of a religion to limit the spread of an ideology (Islamism). The second actually has a justified end to the means, the first does not.
    Last edited by Aexodus; November 08, 2018 at 05:20 PM.
    Patronised by Pontifex Maximus
    Quote Originally Posted by Himster View Post
    The trick is to never be honest. That's what this social phenomenon is engineering: publicly conform, or else.

  16. #16

    Default Re: Lemon and racism

    @the video.

    I mean I really don't see the problem here Aexodus. I did watch the entire video, and I really don't see what was so wrong with it. Yeah, Ben was a little unhinged, but the basic idea that he's trying to promote is certainly true. The vast majority of religious people, any religion are simply not engaged in extremism. They're either uneducated in the radical forms of their religion, or they are not seriously invested in it. And the rest of the video goes into this point as well, while admitting that it's okay to criticize Islam and that there are lots of extremists as well as backwards people.

    Quote Originally Posted by Aexodus View Post
    You realise making that mistake legitimises the actual alt-right by lumping them in with what you call anti-feminism, homophobia, and Islamophobia, and I call equality (with feminism now being about about equity), even the mildest social conservatives, and atheists like Sam Harris. This allows people like Steve King to creep into the limelight because you’ve made anti-feminists, conservatives, and anti-Islam groups or critics of it.

    I am absolutely not saying that’s the intent, but it is the effect.
    Sure, but I mean I did address this point earlier.

    " Now that's not to say that every neo-fascist or libertarian is alt-right, but there is significant overlap. There's also of course the irony of "political correctness" that many people hide behind. "I'm not alt-right, I'm X and that's not alt-right" despite endorsing many alt-right positions and beliefs... I mean the ironic part is those people are just too political correct to properly label their views, so they hide behind specificity."

    I mean again, I think the "lumping" is a two-fold problem.

    1. Not everyone who's anti-feminist, homophobe, etc is alt-right
    2. Those who are alt-right, often deny that they are and hide behind a blanket of ambiguity.

    I think it's important to realize that the alt-right is now a large movement, and their rhetoric has been embraced by a large segment of the population, even many people who would vote "leftist". I know some Democrats who adopted many of the alt-right talking points, like "crooked Hillary" despite a large amount of evidence pointing otherwise. The whole movement has brought the level of discourse to a new low.

    You say that it’s a meaningful descriptor when the rhetoric and general platform is so often similar. What is it that all these groups have in common Sukiyama? Not just a couple, all. I don’t want to play 6 degrees of separation.

    Also it’s ridiculous that those actual legitimate groups ‘support and crossover’ with the KKK and neo-nazis.

    This is the definition the Associated Press uses.
    There are several traits. Opposition to "leftism" on the basis of conspiracies/fringe theories. Strong identification with right-wing populist movements. Cynicism in regards to the media, which is to say the embrace of the "Fake News" meme to a point where they are critical and cynical of mainstream source of information without any regard for the veracity of the actual information. I should opposition to mainstream movement in general, but I think you get the idea. Alt-Right is a particular flavor of rhetoric, you know it when you see it as it tends to follow the trends I outlined, I can't think of any others at this very moment but I'm sure there's others I missed.

    Because you don’t choose your skin colour. I’m not saying that religious discrimination is okay or acceptable, but there’s a difference between considering banning a race of people to limit the spread of that race, and considering banning followers of a religion to limit the spread of an ideology (Islamism). The second actually has a justified end to the means, the first does not.
    What? When is it ever justified? We don't ban toxic ideologies because they're "evil". We ban them because people use them to potentially incite violence. I don't think it's ever okay to discriminate on any basis except social context.

Posting Permissions

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