A few thoughts about January 6, 2021

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
3,741
2,676
118
It isn't about racism. If anything, it's about people who are willing to turn any discussion of any problem into accusations of racism. I'm not saying people storming the capitol don't include racists. They may very well all be racists. But that doesn't matter, that doesn't make it about racism, and attacking it from an unrelated angle obviously isn't going to lead to solutions. It frankly makes it seem like you are perfectly willing to allow or even exacerbate other issues if you can use them to call more attention to your own issues. And that's pretty crappy.
It's not unrelated to racism, though. There are millions of Americans for whom the fear of change to their perceived American way of life is heavily linked to the decline of the white (non-Hispanic) majority. This is the relevance of Xsjadoblayde's post, as this fear and distaste for foreigners and foreign culture is a fundamental strand of the alt right and the sorts of extremists who stormed the capitol. At a very superficial level, the storming of the Capitol was about fears of a fraudulent election, but in reality the motivations underpinning a lot of these people and movements are much deeper and significantly contributed to their actions that day.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,800
315
88
Country
USA
It's not unrelated to racism, though. There are millions of Americans for whom the fear of change to their perceived American way of life is heavily linked to the decline of the white (non-Hispanic) majority. This is the relevance of Xsjadoblayde's post, as this fear and distaste for foreigners and foreign culture is a fundamental strand of the alt right and the sorts of extremists who stormed the capitol. At a very superficial level, the storming of the Capitol was about fears of a fraudulent election, but in reality the motivations underpinning a lot of these people and movements are much deeper and significantly contributed to their actions that day.
Rather than take two totally separate concepts and try to connect them, I think you ought to consider underlying motivations in a more direct manner. Because there's a really obvious disconnect between your two levels of analysis. There's no line to connect fear of diminishing white majority (just assuming that is really a motivating factor for these people for the sake of argument) to believing that the very white leadership of the Democratic Party cheated in the election and stole the presidency. Now, if you wanted to say the fear is that Democrats will encourage non-non-histpanic white people to immigrate and propagate, and therefore they don't want Democrats in power, that's a connection, but it has nothing to do with stealing the election. If you want to make that connection, you almost have to make the argument that the people who stormed the capital didn't actually believe election fraud had taken place, they were just trying to steal power for themselves. At which point, you're trying to convince me that this group of rioters had the political savvy to hide their real intentions behind the accusations of cheating but also the delusions to believe they could storm the capital and actually change the processes of government in their favor by doing so. That sounds like a stretch to me.

Assume instead for a second that people dumb enough to storm the capital are also the type of people who would believe there was a large-scale conspiracy to steal the presidency for the Democrats. That's not a stretch, that's very straight-forward. Why might a group of people be so ready to believe that? Perhaps those same people think that Democrats are lying and cheating all the time. Why might they believe that? Because there is an endless torrent of lies about them told by exactly the people they believed to be stealing the election. Because it doesn't matter if you're Donald Trump or Mother Theresa, you will be called an evil racist in every context. These people weren't right in thinking the election was stolen, they were terribly wrong to storm the Capital Building, but their belief that the election was stolen isn't rooted in fear white replacement or resentment of non-white people, it's rooted in deep distrust and resentment for Democrats, who tell horrible lies about anyone who isn't a Democrat, and when confronted about the lies deflect and say "we don't have to listen to racists like you". And now you (plural) come in here and say "well, all their reasons are just cover for racism", you are being part of the problem. Just imagine for one moment that you're in their shoes, that you believe something to be true that has nothing to do with race, and when you bring it up to someone they say you're just being racist. Does that convince you even a little that you're wrong? No, of course not, all it does is convince you further that the person you were talking to has their head in the sand. Imagine telling someone that Hillary Clinton is leading a cabal of pedophiles, and their response to you is "well you just hate black people and Mexicans." There's no good guy in that imaginary discussion. Try to be the good guy.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,399
1,207
118
Country
United States of America
There's no line to connect fear of diminishing white majority (just assuming that is really a motivating factor for these people for the sake of argument) to believing that the very white leadership of the Democratic Party cheated in the election and stole the presidency.
Republicans every election say shit about voter fraud and Democrats stealing elections by busing in black people or whatever -> to justify, among other things, voter purges that target black and hispanic sounding names -> _________________________________ it's a line

Trump is rather boorishly racist -> Trump says the Democrats are going to cheat -> Trump loses and says the Democrats cheated -> __________________
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,800
315
88
Country
USA
Republicans every election say shit about voter fraud and Democrats stealing elections by busing in black people or whatever -> to justify, among other things, voter purges that target black and hispanic sounding names -> _________________________________ it's a line

Trump is rather boorishly racist -> Trump says the Democrats are going to cheat -> Trump loses and says the Democrats cheated -> __________________
a) Democrats do "bus in black people or whatever". They bus in voters, specifically targeting racial demographics they expect to vote for them. It's not Republicans fault that Democrats do race-based campaigning.
b) Every state regardless of party does voter purges. They don't target any demographic (other than "people who don't vote often" or "people who moved"). They are mandated by federal law, and Democrats pretending it's racist are so absolutely full of crap, you should be ashamed to have repeated it.
c) Your response to me saying Democrats deflect everything to people being racist is you deflecting and claiming people are racist.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,800
315
88
Country
USA
So you just admitted that there's a line. I've no further need to argue the point as you've just conceded it.
A line between what and what? Democrats targeting black populations as likely Democratic voters is the connection between alt-right fears of white replacement and qanon people storming the government on the basis of a stolen election?

You've preemptively declared that you're not going to elaborate, because you know you've failed before I even responded.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
3,741
2,676
118
...At which point, you're trying to convince me that this group of rioters had the political savvy to hide their real intentions behind the accusations of cheating...
No. I don't think that a bunch of people stormed the Capitol building because they are racists, trying to pretend otherwise with the veneer of protesting a stolen election.

I think that part of the movement that so enthusiastically fell in behind Trump are a bunch of conservatives who are fearful of the future and distrustful of their elites, so have developed a strong anti-establishment streak. But there's a series of intertwining beliefs and attitudes that make these people up and got them to that point. One of those is, I think, basically racism. This is not the same as saying each individual is racist, or that racism is the primary motivation of anyone when they do stuff. But it is part of what feeds the wider movement.

At an extreme level it's outright white nationalism, but even at a moderate level it's a fundamental view of America as a majority white, Christian (Protestant), gun-ownning, capitalist country. All these foreigners come in, ill-educated, with other religions, culture, political views, etc. and bit by bit erode the soul of their country. Even the black population are not really quite American, not in the sense they understand: a poverty-stricken, drug-dealing, criminally-inclined underclass with an all but foreign "urban" culture and a distressing tendency to vote left-wing. Non-white people have grown in population share, occupied more positions of social, economic and political power, frequently espouse liberal-left views, and it feels to some whites - especially those inclined to conservatism - like the white-dominated America they grew up in and were comfortable with isn't really there anymore. It's a potent image when some heavily black population cities, late in the election count, overturn Trump's lead: oh, the symbolism. And that it's so much easier for those who believe black people are inferior to believe they would cheat. These non-whites, from their "shithole country" stock: corrupt, lazy, who even after white men created and gifted to them technology and civilisation, they'll still screw it up.

This strand of thinking really exists, and it has a lot of its expression amongst the Trump core. That's why 2016 he could go in with a flagrantly iffy history on race and openly rage against foreigners, and far from hurting him, it helped propel him. This strand is a view that ties in very naturally with a wider feeling of insecurity and national decline - loss of manufacturing, wage stagnation, inglorious, victory-free, military slog, the rise of China to challenge the USA, the general discomfort of change and unfamiliarity of the new, etc. All of these coalesce together to a Make America Great Again movement. Let's really not pretend race doesn't exist as part of it.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,800
315
88
Country
USA
This is not the same as saying each individual is racist, or that racism is the primary motivation of anyone when they do stuff. But it is part of what feeds the wider movement...
Let's really not pretend race doesn't exist as part of it.
First off, this aspect of discussion stemmed off of a post claiming "In the attack on the capital was about racism. That is the truth." I am not the absolutist here, nor are you.

But second off, I take offense at "feeds the wider movement". That's just a push toward guilt by association. I don't like the idea of taking a known aspect of a narrow group and applying it to a wider group incrementally. I resent "that racist is kind of conservative, associates with other conservatives, some of whom are Republicans, Republicans are racist" in the same way I was very vocal during last years BLM protests to be clear that rioters weren't the same set of people as the protesters, Antifa isn't BLM, and none of them are synonymous with the Democratic Party.

If the wider movement isn't doing anything racist, don't assign that motivation based on the worst aspects of a subset of a tangentially related set of people.
 

ObsidianJones

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 29, 2020
962
1,133
98
Country
United States
I'm curious. The media right now is all about how evil and racist white people are, and the last attack on the capital (which killed a police officer) was an single act done by a black man. And Interestingly enough the moment the race of the man came out, the media went silent.

Just saying maybe the problems are just american problems and don't have much, if anything, to do with race.
I popped my head in after my self imposed exile to see if I could come back to full time posting. I'm glad I did. This convinced me I'm not going to for a long time.

It might be unfair to express my opinions and then scoot. I'll admit it. But I'm fundamentally broken at this time and I do need some distance.

However... if you can really not see how backwards this statement is, we've lost more than I ever believed.

The tragic car ramming death was six days ago today. I feel it as much as I feel the death of the officer during One Six. However, do you know what has happened between that time and this?

Back to back mass shootings.





The media didn't 'fall silent' because there was a black guy at the head of a tragedy. Other tragedies occurred. There was more to report.

To ignore what else happened to say "But getting back to the black guy who finally did something terrible at the capitol" is beyond my comprehension. News didn't die when that unhinged lunatic attacked people who had nothing to do with his problems. There were other things to make the public aware of.

The fact that you're focusing on the race of these stories and how we're not speaking in more length about the black guy who attacked the capitol instead of the weeks of tragedies we've suffered... that speaks more about your attuned perception than it does of the media's reporting.

Lurking powers are now activated. This is all too much for me now.
 

Dwarvenhobble

Is on the Gin
May 26, 2020
2,720
251
88
Country
United Kingdom
I have had someone tell me "If God had wanted the Indians to keep the country, He would have given them guns".
I mean the US did that indirectly. They didn't do well even with them in the end (even with better guns than the standard military ones at the time even)
 

Buyetyen

Elite Member
May 11, 2020
1,629
885
118
Country
USA
I have had someone tell me "If God had wanted the Indians to keep the country, He would have given them guns".
Which speaks to a real historical ignorance because the Native populations adopted firearms into their culture almost overnight. Lakota warriors could shoot from horseback, whereas most settlers had only ever hunted small game if that. Had it not been for smallpox, there's a chance the Lakota nation would have held onto their territory.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
3,741
2,676
118
Which speaks to a real historical ignorance because the Native populations adopted firearms into their culture almost overnight. Lakota warriors could shoot from horseback, whereas most settlers had only ever hunted small game if that. Had it not been for smallpox, there's a chance the Lakota nation would have held onto their territory.
The Lakota were stuffed from the get-go.

The native Americans did not have agriculture to achieve mass population density, which would always leave them unable to compete demographically. The parts of the world that were colonised and retained their indigenous character did so because European settlers could never hope to outpopulate the natives. However, when Columbus crossed the Atlantic, France probably had a higher population than North America (not including Mexico). Smallpox, other diseases and massacres did their damage, but fundamentally there just weren't enough native Americans in the first place. They'd have "lost" under pretty much any circumstance: if the UK could conquer India or Spain the Aztecs, then someone - Spain, France, UK - would have conquered North America. A European army could generally expect to defeat a non-European army several times its size more often than not.

If there had been I guess around five times as many native Americans, the USA and Canada would have become more of a synthesis of native American and European, as the European colonisers would have been forced to accept substantial concessions. With maybe ten times as many, North America would have remained essentially native American, with a white middle-upper class minority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Satinavian

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
2,943
1,673
118
Which speaks to a real historical ignorance because the Native populations adopted firearms into their culture almost overnight. Lakota warriors could shoot from horseback, whereas most settlers had only ever hunted small game if that. Had it not been for smallpox, there's a chance the Lakota nation would have held onto their territory.
I think it's more an example of a prevalent mindset among the religious that "all things come from gawhd" including the inventions and creations of human ingenuity. EVERYTHING is from gawhd, and thus that means that gawhd planned for europeans to have guns, and not native americans. I've actually heard them say shit like this, regarding things like medical breakthroughs that conquered natural plagues and diseases. Shit like "Well gawhd gave you that brain to think up the cure for small pox, so that means that actually gawhd cured small pox! so it's always gawhd!" It's fucking ridiculous.

That sounds more like what the gun comment was getting at to me. Basically divine providence/right BS
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cicada 5