• @Cryophilia
    link
    01 year ago

    in as many words

    Words in your head, maybe.

    Again. Therapy.

    even the obvious bigot we’re all bickering about would loudly insist he’s against slavery and racism

    And he would obviously be lying. Racism is fairly easy to identify. For most people. Not you, of course. You see racism behind every tree, apparently.

    If you say the sky is blue because of light from the sun

    To make a better analogy, it’s like if someone said “the sky is blue because we can only see blue light!” The answer would be “no, but there’s a bit of truth there. The atmosphere scatters blue light more than other wavelengths, and human eyes are more attuned to blue than other colors”. Why does this matter? Because he drew the wrong conclusion from a tidbit of accurate information.

    Especially since the idiot claiming we can’t see red light isn’t actually part of the conversation. Nor are any other Red Lighters. We’re just discussing something he said.

    Seeking a calmly reasoned explanation when a senator beats someone half to death with a walking-stick

    Are you a time traveller?

    …is this “Preston Brooks” in the room with us right now?

    Therapy.

    • @mindbleach
      link
      11 year ago

      The Cornerstone Speech is in black and white, in history books and this conversation. Abusive troll. Referring to it is not even a matter of your grand claims to be a nuance understander. It’s basic reading comprehension. I am describing the aggressively obvious for-its-own-sake bigotry of the goddamn Confederacy - the central fucking topic of this post.

      “the sky is blue because we can only see blue light!” The answer would be “no, but there’s a bit of truth there.”

      … no, that’d be running interference for morons. Insisting “he’s not entirely wrong!” when the only sane aspect of someone’s worldview is that the sky is blue is the biggest motte-to-bailey ratio I’ve ever heard.

      Thank you for making crystal clear why this thread is a trainwreck. You’re twisting complete nonsense claims by obvious idiot liars into an out-of-context interpretation of a few words they kinda said.

      In the case of the OG Facebook dolt, he didn’t say “the civil war about more than slavery,” he said “the civil war WASN’T ABOUT SLAVERY, UNTIL blah blah blah.” Bog-standard Lost Cause propaganda. Picking a few words from that and going yeah-but is exactly the sort of dissembling excuse that overt racists like his dumb ass will do all the fucking time.

      If you can’t spot the problem when third parties do it for him, you’re why it’s a problem.

      • @Cryophilia
        link
        01 year ago

        the civil war WASN’T ABOUT SLAVERY, UNTIL blah blah blah

        I feel a bit sorry for you now. It’s got to be difficult arguing against knowledge, because sometimes you’re required to show that you’re right. And that’s very hard to do if you refuse to learn history for fear of it somehow corrupting you into racism.

        • @mindbleach
          link
          21 year ago

          Other subthread: ‘we’re not directly talking about the civil war, are we?’

          This subthread: ‘tut tut, disagreeing with obvious racists about the civil war.’

          You are a fraud and a liar. You are not good at trolling.

    • @mindbleach
      link
      11 year ago

      Also:

      Are you a time traveller?

      We are talking about the Civil War.

      • @Cryophilia
        link
        11 year ago

        And you’re reacting as if it just happened.

        We’re like 4 steps removed from the person who even said the quote in OP.

        You can chill, you’re not about to fight off a horde of Copperheads. This is a left-leaning internet forum. There are no Klansmen here. You’re not on a crusade. Chill the fuck out. We are on the internet.

        Being frothing at the mouth outraged because something happened a hundred and fifty years ago is not healthy. It’s a fixation.

        • @mindbleach
          link
          11 year ago

          No, troll, I’m using it as shorthand for how fucked-up the society we’re discussing was, around the time we’re discussing.

          It is part of a direct response to a question you asked - a question you asked as smugly as possible. Like you cannot imagine systemic violence and outright war over ideology alone, and that makes me ignorant.

          We’re discussing how people are lying about the war. Misleading defenses of outright lies are still basically just lies. That’s why lying racists themselves will make exactly the same defenses, when pressed. They are not married to the original lies. All they care about is finding some excuse to minimize the horrific evil that you have scoffed at.

          We’re still directly talking about the civil war… as proven by your immediate follow-up comment, condescending like I missed the exact details I’ve been addressing the whole time.

          All vitriol in this exchange has been about your shitty behavior. Including this: you treated contemporary reference to the south’s cultural stereotypes, by name, as a sign of mental illness. Fuck right off if you think any properly enforced leftist space would tolerate that shit.

          • @Cryophilia
            link
            01 year ago

            We’re discussing

            We’re still directly talking about

            the society we’re discussing

            It’s just exhausting how you keep saying this. No, we’re not. We’re trying to discuss historical facts and the glossing over of them, but you keep trying to pivot the discussion to a “racism bad, yes or no?” conversation.

            Nuance is not racism. Last time I’ll say it.

            • @mindbleach
              link
              21 year ago

              Declaring “the civil war wasn’t about slavery,” verbatim, in any context, is not nuance - it is a lie. It is an indefensible oversimplification at best, and racist garbage which you have acknowledged as racist garbage at worst.

              The thread is about some asshole telling this and other lies. It is that worst-case racist garbage.

              The conversation you barged into involves some dingus who was trying to eke technicalities about those lies, as if anyone involved is unfamiliar with the premise being viciously misrepresented through those lies.

              Your contribution has been to escalate and deny and make this personal, while declaring that you’re only carrying a torch for nuuuaaance, whilst struggling with dead simple context and being insufferably smug about how badly you missed it.

              Fuck off and good riddance.

              • @Cryophilia
                link
                01 year ago

                It’s hard not to be insufferably smug when talking with someone who disagrees with the idea of knowledge as a concept.

                • @mindbleach
                  link
                  21 year ago

                  ‘Why you hate knowledge?,’ asks bad troll.

                  How’s blocking work on lemmy?