“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175684 Mar 10, 2014
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
"The following essay was originally published in the Hebrew journal 2005 and provoked an intense public debate. Its author, the renowned Israeli novelist A.B. Yehoshua, undertook a demanding task: to decipher the most disturbing riddle of Jewish history, to analyze and describe the quintessence of antisemitism in its various historical and cultural incarnations.Yehoshua’s thesis disputes the general intellectual consensus on antisemitism, which denies that there is any single or unique root to the phenomenon. He asserts that it is the unique structure of Jewish identity which has given birth to the venomous reaction of antisemitism—and he offers a way out of this impasse. Yehoshua’s position has outraged many but also given them much to think about. AZURE is proud to present an English translation of this essay, which embodies Zionist thought in its most daring form."
http://azure.org.il/article.php...
Whether or not you choose to read the essay is not important. What's important is a reasonably well educated Israeli was attempting to solve the mystery of anti-Semitsm as I attempted to address the mystery of racism by presenting a new idea (with documentation) that perhaps we have a subliminal inclination to be -------( fill in the blank with the adjectives of your choice) who look different to us.
Evidently that was too much for a few of you to bear and the dropping the "R" bomb or not quite sure if you should drop the "R" bomb proved to be a good way out from examining it with any objectivity and that's fine. I'm better informed for knowing who's open to new ideas without name calling and who isn't. It is particularly curious that "liberals" who claim to open to new ideas, were the first to accuse. I'll file that away for use at a later time.
Sooooooooo ... I read this post, and really, really, REALLY wanted to call bulls**t.

I can't, not in good conscience.

I went back and read the original post (#175282 Friday Feb 28) you made starting this, and it's entirely consistent with what you say above. I'll freely admit I didn't expect that.

To make sure I express that again to your satisfaction, I WAS WRONG. There may not be enough paragraphs to that admission, but don't be greedy, m'kay?.

If you'd said something even close to the above to my first reply to that post (rather than giving me a "Little Miss Smarty Pants retort"), I'd probably have dropped out of the conversation entirely.

I don't think my mind is closed. I'm certainly open to new ideas, and your link above is open in a new tab. That said, I'm not sure that the notion that racism is natural, or inherent, or genetic, really is a new idea. This is not the first time I've heard people try and justify racism, or argue that we're all a little racist, or invoke science in order to do that.

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#175685 Mar 10, 2014
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>**PORTIONS DELETED**
Bill Clinton >allegedly< said to Ted Kennedy when referring to Obama, "A few years ago, he'd be serving us drinks."
On your what's' funny scale of comments, was that:
A) Harmless?
B) Racist?
C) Kinda funny?
D) Borderline racist and not a damn bit funny?
E) Doesn't matter, He's Bill Clinton and can say anything he wants?
.. you forgot 'F'..

F: America has come a long way in fighting racial discrimination.

.. ya, that's my answer, F ..

.. you're digging a deeper hole. Perhaps it's time to rent a backhoe ??..

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175686 Mar 10, 2014
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Sure, sure. But that hardly means another left-leaning regime is an impossibility. My assertion was IF the left were really in charge, etc.
It isn't.
Where to start?

Stalin was not left-leaning. Stalin was a communist, and pretty far to the left in that realm. The only people who could accuse him of leaning left are Mao in his Cultural Revolution days, and Pol Pot.

Stalin was not American, he was Soviet. The left in the United States is not and never has been communist as a whole* or anywhere close to that. Talking about putting people in camps is pretty silly.

Wait ... you and Chris do live in the United States, right? Have I got Chris close to the wrong St. Petersburg in my mind?

(That could start the dog barking, but it can't be helped.)

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175687 Mar 10, 2014
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Consider yourself problematic. I have a problem trying to keep from laughing myself into a coma, after reading your posts.
Happy now?
"Problematic" is the understatement of the year (2013-to date). My list of flaws dwarfs
ALL of the threads' posters by an extremely wide margin.(Cellar dwellers are not usually
the salt of the earth). Proud of it? Hell yes!

On a side note, you may wanna have a reality check-up, because my attempted humor is nowhere near "coma"-inducing, even if over-exaggerating.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175688 Mar 10, 2014
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. you forgot 'F'..
F: America has come a long way in fighting racial discrimination.
.. ya, that's my answer, F ..
.. you're digging a deeper hole. Perhaps it's time to rent a backhoe ??..
This from one who worships at the altar of the ambulance chaser, AKA worthless troll.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175689 Mar 10, 2014
Lyndi wrote:
<quoted text>
Bill Clinton >allegedly< said to Ted Kennedy when referring to Obama, "A few years ago, he'd be serving us drinks."
On your what's' funny scale of comments, was that:
A) Harmless?
B) Racist?
C) Kinda funny?
D) Borderline racist and not a damn bit funny?
E) Doesn't matter, He's Bill Clinton and can say anything he wants?
My answers are a), c), and the first half of d).

Some people would consider it b) or d).

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175690 Mar 10, 2014
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
"Problematic" is the understatement of the year (2013-to date). My list of flaws dwarfs
ALL of the threads' posters by an extremely wide margin.(Cellar dwellers are not usually
the salt of the earth). Proud of it? Hell yes!
On a side note, you may wanna have a reality check-up, because my attempted humor is nowhere near "coma"-inducing, even if over-exaggerating.
Uhhhhh ... don't be so sure of that last sentence.

I'm just sayin'...

“MEET ROSEMARY-She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#175691 Mar 10, 2014
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
This from one who worships at the altar of the ambulance chaser, AKA worthless troll.
.. you have it turned around ..

.. without women, there is no life, no birthing. That makes the woman a powerful goddess and forces men to worship at their altars ..

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#175692 Mar 10, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Where to start?
Stalin was not left-leaning. Stalin was a communist, and pretty far to the left in that realm.The only people who could accuse him of leaning left are Mao in his Cultural Revolution days, and Pol Pot.
My point - if the left was REALLY in charge in the US, as it was in other countries, under the aforementioned individuals, American dissenters would have been round up and put into camps, or exterminated by now.

It isn't. Some of us labor under the impression that it is. They know who they are.
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Stalin was not American, he was Soviet. The left in the United States is not and never has been communist as a whole* or anywhere close to that. Talking about putting people in camps is pretty silly.
Tell it to the Japanese Americans, Willie. Ask them how 'silly' their perceptions of that likelihood might be.
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Wait ... you and Chris do live in the United States, right? Have I got Chris close to the wrong St. Petersburg in my mind?
(That could start the dog barking, but it can't be helped.)
Yes, we do live in the US. Last I checked, anyway - but they could just be telling us that, so we'll stay here.

*grin*

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175693 Mar 10, 2014
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>Tell it to the Japanese Americans, Willie. Ask them how 'silly' their perceptions of that likelihood might be.
Not so fast.

As despicable (and unnecessary) as the Japanese interment was, it does not compare to the use of camps by the leftist and rightest regimes in power at the time it occurred (or later).

The camps were not run with no regard for the survival of those interred. They were not forced labor camps. The camps ended when (or shortly after) the war did. The Japanese were not prohibited from going back to where they were taken - or anywhere else, for that matter - when the war ended. Japanese who fought in Europe in WWII were not interred after their release from captivity just because they'd been captured.

The people who raised their voices against the camps - and there were far too few - did not end up interred (or disappeared) themselves.

You're talking about something that happened in a very different time - something that was 5 parts racism (gee - in 1942, imagine that) and 1 part barely justifiable wartime necessity.

If there had been serious talk of interring Muslims, or foreign born Muslims, after 9/11 - you might have a valid point here. Yes, there were some fools who babbled about it, but they were not in a position to be taken seriously.

Not saying they (like Muslim extremists) themselves don't bear watching ... but this ain't 1942.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#175694 Mar 10, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Not so fast.
As despicable (and unnecessary) as the Japanese interment was, it does not compare to the use of camps by the leftist and rightest regimes in power at the time it occurred (or later).
The camps were not run with no regard for the survival of those interred. They were not forced labor camps. The camps ended when (or shortly after) the war did. The Japanese were not prohibited from going back to where they were taken - or anywhere else, for that matter - when the war ended. Japanese who fought in Europe in WWII were not interred after their release from captivity just because they'd been captured.
The people who raised their voices against the camps - and there were far too few - did not end up interred (or disappeared) themselves.
You're talking about something that happened in a very different time - something that was 5 parts racism (gee - in 1942, imagine that) and 1 part barely justifiable wartime necessity.
If there had been serious talk of interring Muslims, or foreign born Muslims, after 9/11 - you might have a valid point here. Yes, there were some fools who babbled about it, but they were not in a position to be taken seriously.
Not saying they (like Muslim extremists) themselves don't bear watching ... but this ain't 1942.
If you visit Los Angeles, do not miss the Japanese American National Museum, in Little Tokyo. You may have a change of heart, and I guarantee you will not leave with dry eyes.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175695 Mar 10, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you visit Los Angeles, do not miss the Japanese American National Museum, in Little Tokyo.
. You may have a change of heart, and I guarantee you will not leave with dry eyes.
I would love to see that ... but I doubt I'd have a change of heart.

See, nothing in what I said should be viewed as excusing or used to excuse the wholesale interment of the Japanese. All you have to do is compare the way we interred Japanese vs Germans and Italians, and the racism behind the decision is clear to a one-eyed man half blind in his good eye. I know fully well that the interment was just another example of a long pattern of discrimination against Asians of all persuasions.

My point to SKL was that I think it highly unlikely that what happened in 1942 to the Japanese would happen today. It's not impossible, of course, but a whole lot would have to change before that could occur - and contrary to the cries of gloom and despair from one side or the other (depending on who won the last presidential election), nothing like that is even on the horizon.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175696 Mar 10, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Uhhhhh ... don't be so sure of that last sentence.
I'm just sayin'...
I'm sure. Laughing oneself into a coma, and being bored into a coma are 2 different species of animal. But I do appreciate the play on words. Good one.

Since: Sep 10

San Francisco, CA

#175697 Mar 10, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I would love to see that ... but I doubt I'd have a change of heart.
See, nothing in what I said should be viewed as excusing or used to excuse the wholesale interment of the Japanese. All you have to do is compare the way we interred Japanese vs Germans and Italians, and the racism behind the decision is clear to a one-eyed man half blind in his good eye. I know fully well that the interment was just another example of a long pattern of discrimination against Asians of all persuasions.
My point to SKL was that I think it highly unlikely that what happened in 1942 to the Japanese would happen today. It's not impossible, of course, but a whole lot would have to change before that could occur - and contrary to the cries of gloom and despair from one side or the other (depending on who won the last presidential election), nothing like that is even on the horizon.
Agreed.

My only point is that we should be careful not minimize the suffering.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175698 Mar 10, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
If you visit Los Angeles, do not miss the Japanese American National Museum, in Little Tokyo. You may have a change of heart, and I guarantee you will not leave with dry eyes.
Although it's not very well known, we have one of the finest Pioneer Villages, and an
attached museum, in southern california. In all yer worldly travels, we are only about two
and a half hours north.

Why not take a break from your "hectic" schedule and bring yourself up here. I'd be most honored to show you around. Oh and please come alone. I'd like to ensure that YOU are
the center of attention.

We'll have coffee & breakfast at Buck Owens' Crystal Palace, followed by a virtual tour you'll never forget.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#175699 Mar 10, 2014
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed.
My only point is that we should be careful not minimize the suffering.
Dammit, where is that EDIT feature when ya need it huh?

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#175700 Mar 10, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Not so fast.
As despicable (and unnecessary) as the Japanese interment was, it does not compare to the use of camps by the leftist and rightest regimes in power at the time it occurred (or later).
Not saying they (like Muslim extremists) themselves don't bear watching ... but this ain't 1942.
No, it ain't.

In 1942, we weren't staring down the engines of any-sob-with-a-commercial-jetl iner-and-a-grudge.

As despicable and unnecessary as the Japanese interment was, IT HAPPENED.

It could, and might, happen again. If you don't believe this, why are you trying so hard to pretend otherwise?

The use of camps, regardless of the 'humanity of treatment' offered therein, is the use of camps.

Nice try though.

“2016 No Clinton No Bush!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#175702 Mar 11, 2014
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>No, it ain't.
In 1942, we weren't staring down the engines of any-sob-with-a-commercial-jetl iner-and-a-grudge.
As despicable and unnecessary as the Japanese interment was, IT HAPPENED.
It could, and might, happen again. If you don't believe this, why are you trying so hard to pretend otherwise?
The use of camps, regardless of the 'humanity of treatment' offered therein, is the use of camps.
Nice try though.
No, in 1942 we weren't staring down the engines of any-sob-with-a-commercial-jetl iner-and-a-grudge.

In 1942 we were staring down full blown first rate military powers across both oceans with army and air forces roughly the equivalent of Portugal, a small and mostly outdated Navy only marginally better. By the time the war finally came home to us there was an established pattern of aiding the aggressor by ethnic minorities in occupied countries (Poland, Czechoslovakia, Norway, France, Holland, China and others

Combine that with the racism with which Asians were viewed, and you ended up with the interment camps. We used a wholesale approach to the Japanese simply because they weren't white.

This ain't 1942. Yes, there's still plenty of racism out there, but it's not as ingrained as it was. One of the things that argue against it happening here again is the fact that it happened then - that there would be sufficient voices raised up against such an idea to prevent it in part because of the knowledge of how wrong that was.

I say again - nothing I say should be used to justify or validate the camps.. It was wrong in every way. At the same time, I agree with Catcher that one should not minimize the suffering. That is what demolishes the 'a camp is a camp' idea.

I know full well that the Japanese suffered, but to compare the interment of Japanese Americans with the Soviet Gulag and its "iron curtain" subsidiaries, with the German concentration camp system even excluding the extermination camp, with the interment of American and Dutch and UK civilians by the Japanese, IS to minimize their suffering.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#175703 Mar 11, 2014
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Racism is a belief system, not a physical attribute. So, if by subjective you mean different people will regard the same thing (a joke, for instance) differently - the answer is of course it is.

As to whether it can ever be properly defined ... I think it can be as properly defined as anything else that's subjective.

--

I am neither a geneticist or a neuroscientist, but I don't think much of the conclusions or implications based on the scientific evidence she produced. I did try and read the actual study about people's neurological reaction to images of people of different races, but aside from the overview all I found were mentions of the study. While curious, I'm not curious enough to pay for it.

I can understand why some people would find those studies reassuring, however.

--

As to whether Lyndi's a racist? Been wondering about that for a while, almost as long as she's been in the thread. That's based on her own posts and nothing else, certainly not the fact that she's a conservative.

Here's the thing - I don't think a person with a "lick 'a sense" would try and start what purports to be a conversation about race in America with 'maybe we need to discuss whether there is any validity or justification for racism', unless they've got an agenda - or something they want to get off their chest.

That agenda could be something as simple as baiting the liberals in this thread, mind you, nothing sinister. Then again ... who knows?

It's all subjective, right?
If I’m reading this correctly, you believe Racism is subjective and, as with all things subjective, cannot be defined? In other words Racism, like pornography, is hard to define but >I< know it when I see it?

Really?
Ok
--
The study seems legit and I’m guessing that it will reveal an increase or decrease in brain activity given certain visual stimuli. I think we will all agree that as we develop physically we simply further that process if in fact the process begins at birth. We further it nonetheless.

I’m guessing few will bother to pay for it.
We already >know< what racism is and isn’t.
Funny how that works…for some people.

--

I’m not seeing any racism in her post.
For that matter, no one has to date successfully pointed it out, imo.

By framing the discussion the way she did, she qualified you and others who read it.
Her “not having a lick of sense”(your words) hardly makes her a racist does it?

Had you taken “the bait” you would have been able to hear her out and made a better judgment of her beliefs…no?

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#175704 Mar 11, 2014
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
New ideas? Where?
"We're just born that way" is the touchstone of those inclined to choose racism over embracing diversity. It's pretty freakin far from being a new idea.

You've just found yourself confirmation for your bias.
Pfft.
Isn't citing reputable confirmation a good thing?
Especially with repeatable, testable and verifiable evidence to support it?
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
Pfft.
Ouch!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 2 min hojo 567,970
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 3 min Hidingfromyou 795,164
I want to be a sex slave to elder woman (May '13) 18 min phil 19
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 40 min RADEKT 267,400
Homosexuals are servants and human children of ... 57 min doug 11
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 1 hr Just Think 120,695
There is Everything Wrong with Abortion (Nov '07) 1 hr Grunt56 221,537
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr AntiqueAnnie 607,179
Dubai massage Body To Body full service 0559... (Mar '14) 23 hr Rashes 177
More from around the web