George Floyd

[Zello]

On 6/17/2020 at 1:45 PM, Arrows to Athens said:

They'll sort it out themselves. They don't need cops. Cops do nothing. Heck, the cops might even rob them, too!

 

[Clem Fandango]

Funny how anyone who advocates open air paddy wagons is terrified to do it to my face. Come and tell me IRL how "these kids won't sit down." Pussies.

 

lol this is all gibberish to non-Australians. Shows how f*cked our country is, our pigs are worse than American pigs.

 

One day more 'til Revolution
We will nip it in the butt
We'll be ready for these schoolboys
They will wet themselves with blood

Edited June 22, 2020 by Clem Fandango

[kobeni]

19 hours ago, Clem Fandango said:

Funny how anyone who advocates open air paddy wagons is terrified to do it to my face. Come and tell me IRL how "these kids won't sit down." Pussies.

 

lol this is all gibberish to non-Australians. Shows how f*cked our country is, our pigs are worse than American pigs.

 

One day more 'til Revolution
We will nip it in the butt
We'll be ready for these schoolboys
They will wet themselves with blood

Im Australian and I dont know what this means

[sivispacem]

The notion of "trained Marxists" is pretty funny. Like, who trains Marxists? It's very much a political ideology that late teens early twenties stumble into and usually grow out of by 25 save for a core group who remain committed for life.

Franky,  who really cares? In the grand scheme of things this new Red Scare/rerun of McCarthyism is f*cking stupid; the real "threat" people should be worrying about are white supremacists and the far-right, they're the ones shooting up Synagogues and lynching minorities. 

 

Also, that Daily Wail article has exactly nothing to do with his point.

[Tchuck]

12 hours ago, Lock n' Stock said:

I can see your point about it in regards to that. Clearly the police system needs a major reform, but I'm SURE there are ways and means of doing so without replacing it entirely.

Can you reform a cancer? Can you fix it into something better?

 

No. You can't. You need to remove it, so that you can heal. The police system is rotten to the core. It's been perfected that way. People in it don't want it to change. So you must replace it entirely.

Why are you so against replacing it? It would literally involved:

-create a brand new police force

-re-hire the good offiercs that did not have negative records

-done.

 

What is so horrible about that? So inconceivable?

 

12 hours ago, Lock n' Stock said:

And fair enough, major crime reports fell after proactive policing was reduced, but that was back in 2017. Fast forward to 2020 however, and you're getting sh*t like this...

Actually, it was in 2014-2015. 2020 is comparably a lot safer.

 

I also fail to see the connection between the article and my point. 

 

And also share the sentiment that "trained marxists" is a laughable notion.

[Halal Cyborg]

It all makes sense now...we have a hard left leaning Marxist for a moderator...notorious for not allowing anyone to have an opinion.

 

Its utterly pointless to post anything that isn’t hard left leaning Marxist views here as that’s the only acceptable view it seems...any attempt to post reasonable points will even be shot down with massive disrespect.

I thought most people grew out of communist/Marxist tendencies when they well...grew up 

[Awful Waffle]

1 hour ago, Halal Cyborg said:

we have a hard left leaning Marxist for a moderator...

yeah, I fu cking wish....

[Halal Cyborg]

12 minutes ago, Awful Waffle said:

yeah, I fu cking wish....

Of course it’s a view shared by many of you...this is the inherent bias here I guess...and I’m sure you guys vet any potential mods too and decide who to include based on your political preferences...it’s starting to make even more sense now 

[sivispacem]

2 hours ago, Halal Cyborg said:

They do have serious funding from George Soros etc 

This isn't actually true. It's misinformation spread by far-right hate groups and anti-semites which had been picked up and run with by a variety of right leaning gutter publications like ComDigiNews where the article you cite originates from.

 

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/communities-digital-news/?amp

 

Several Soros founded or partly-funded organisations have given money to groups associated with BLM but this has primarily been for supporting specific local projects to do with civil rights, political engagement or economic and social support. It's a far cry away from BLM as a movement being "funded" organisationally by Soros but I expect the nuance is lost on you.

 

4 hours ago, Halal Cyborg said:

It all makes sense now...we have a hard left leaning Marxist for a moderator...

This is probably not a fight you want to continue picking given your general lack of technical competence and proficiency in all things political, but for the record I'm about as far from Marxist or hard-left as you can get, given I'm a social democrat through and through.

 

But if you want to continue publicly making a fool of yourself by loudly and repeatedly proclaiming your ignorance then be my guest.

[Raavi]

2 hours ago, Halal Cyborg said:

Of course it’s a view shared by many of you...this is the inherent bias here I guess...and I’m sure you guys vet any potential mods too and decide who to include based on your political preferences...it’s starting to make even more sense now 

 

This is a ridiculous statement. This is a gaming forum, staff recruiting decisions are grounded in forum contribution and merit. Nobody cares about your political leanings, the notion that we have some kind of marxist litmus test is honestly too silly to dignify with any further comment. 

[Smith John]

The Jimmy kimmel affair the other day was pretty funny, tbh. 

[REVENGE777]

6 hours ago, sivispacem said:

In an actually civilised society it wouldn't have been possible to fire him in the first place.

In an ideal world we wouldn’t have to paint BLM on anything. But it’s instances like that why we do...

[Eutyphro]

 

On 6/23/2020 at 10:29 PM, sivispacem said:

The notion of "trained Marxists" is pretty funny. Like, who trains Marxists?

Universities.

 

On 6/23/2020 at 10:29 PM, sivispacem said:

The notion of "trained Marxists" is pretty funny. Like, who trains Marxists? It's very much a political ideology that late teens early twenties stumble into and usually grow out of by 25 save for a core group who remain committed for life.

Franky,  who really cares?

The fact that an incredibly powerful movement that is hijacking anti racism as an issue, and that is presented in the msm as a neutral anti racism movement, is actually radical and regressive matters. It matters a lot.

 

On 6/23/2020 at 10:29 PM, sivispacem said:

the real "threat" people should be worrying about are white supremacists and the far-right

You can worry about extremists on all sides. Worrying about one group of extremists doesn't exclude you from being able to worry about others that are more violent.

Edited June 26, 2020 by Eutyphro

[SinZer0s]

About what Lock n Stock said of not being able to discuss politics without people getting angry, I thought that was common knowledge already lol We don't discuss politics, religion and there was a third topic but I can't remember what it was. I'm lucky since even though my best friend supports BLM we've had chill discussions about the topic, all those times we discussed it we just talked about our views, found some stuff we agree with and then just came back to talking about random sh*t (maybe the fact that we're basically in the center leaning a little to the right helps) so yeah it was a nice experience, discussing this kind of stuff without being called a neo nazi (I'm half colombian half turkish ffs)

 

My point is: if you wanna keep your sanity just try to stay away from politics, most people lack the mental training required to stay calm when views and opinions are being questioned. (I'm gonna keep it real tho and also mention that politics bore me and that's why I don't really care about sh*t, everything is flawed and human greed makes things even worse so since we're destined for failure I just stay watching most of the time)

[sivispacem]

5 hours ago, Eutyphro said:

Universities.

Whilst left wing thinking of all creeds is definitely more prevalent in higher education, suggesting universities are training Marxists is a step or two beyond the realms of believability.

 

5 hours ago, Eutyphro said:

an incredibly powerful movement 

> An incredibly powerful movement

> Marxism

 

Methinks you massively overestimate the depth and breadth of ideological support for Marxism within the United States (read "basically nonexistent").

 

5 hours ago, Eutyphro said:

hijacking anti racism as an issue

It's not a "hijacking" of anything though. The ideological rhetoric and narratives surrounding BLM have been abundantly clear from the start. They're also not Marxist; broadly socialist yes, but that was an intentional decision to ensure the the movement was broadly amenable and despite the name not focused on a single issue. 

 

5 hours ago, Eutyphro said:

You can worry about extremists on all sides.

Really these conversations about the ideological views of BLM founders are little more than poisoning the well. Quite aside from that, worrying about Marxists is a complete waste of time and energy as the traction they can exert is so small as to constitute a rounding error. 

[Eutyphro]

On 6/26/2020 at 11:32 PM, sivispacem said:

Whilst left wing thinking of all creeds is definitely more prevalent in higher education, suggesting universities are training Marxists is a step or two beyond the realms of believability.

As far as I'm aware the "trained Marxist" epithet was what one of the BLM figures called themselves. It was not made up by some outside reactionary. As for Marxism in academia, in 2006 18% of American social scientists identified as Marxist http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.147.6141&rep=rep1&type=pdf

 

Since then orthodox Marxism has likely lost popularity, but universities generally seem to have gone further to the left. I agree with you the knowledge of Marx by the BLM founders is probably very small. But Marxism, especially in sociology, is still very powerful. It's not strange because Marx is one of the founders of sociology.

 

Quote

> An incredibly powerful movement

> Marxism

 

Methinks you massively overestimate the depth and breadth of ideological support for Marxism within the United States (read "basically nonexistent").

Richard Wolff is a quite well known American Marxist. I actually quite like Richard Wolff and think he's interesting. But yes, probably genuine Marxism is on the decline. Genuine Marxism is also quite innocent and cute compared to the far left identitarianism that it is replaced with. That stuff in my experience is way worse.
 

Quote

It's not a "hijacking" of anything though. The ideological rhetoric and narratives surrounding BLM have been abundantly clear from the start.

I understand that to achieve any social change a certain degree of radicalism, maybe even violence, is necessary, but we still have to criticize excesses and dangerous ways of thinking, and very regressive ways of thinking are at the core of the BLM movement. And as you said, they are quite open about what they believe, probably state it on their website.

 

When anti racism, which I think the large majority of people, probably over 90% of people, strongly sympathize with, is hijacked and equated with very far left regressive identitarianism, this is bad, and likely very divisive.
 

Quote

Really these conversations about the ideological views of BLM founders are little more than poisoning the well.

I don't agree. I think the origin of a movement matters. The core views of the movement also do not seem to have changed, so it is reasonable to investigate.

Edited July 13, 2020 by Eutyphro

[sivispacem]

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

As far as I'm aware the "trained Marxist" epithet was what one of the BLM figures called themselves. 

I know, I still think it's a bizarre turn of phrase though. You can see (well hear) from the context that it's slightly fumbled as a response.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

As for Marxism in academia, in 2006 18% of American social scientists identified as Marxist

The cited report is interesting, but it's worth noting that the demographic breakdown points to these views being more prevalent amongst older generations of academics (which makes sense given many of these will themselves have graduated during the sixties and seventies when such thought was much more prevalent than today).

 

I would also suggest that the political views of faculty members don't actually imprint that strongly on a substantial portion of students, unless things have changed drastically in the last ten to fifteen years. 

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

I understand that to achieve any social change a certain degree of radicalism, maybe even violence, is necessary, but we still have to criticize excesses and dangerous ways of thinking

You've just described Marxist thinking as "quite innocent", though. If the leaders of BLM are actual Marxists then this surely isn't that much of a problem?

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

is hijacked and equated with very far left regressive identitarianism

We seem to be veering wildly from the "does it matter that some of the BLM founder identify as Marxist" point here. Unless you're equating the foundation of the movement and its clear goals as described and expressed from the very beginning (and which most sane people are broadly agreeable towards) with "very far left regressive identarianism" despite those same co-founders explicitly stating within the same interview as that soundbite was lifted from that the aim for BLM to be egalitarian and broad in it's appeal and traction.

[Eutyphro]

1 hour ago, sivispacem said:

I would also suggest that the political views of faculty members don't actually imprint that strongly on a substantial portion of students,

In my experience it strongly depends on the faculty, but even in my country I've noticed that the curricula of the philosophy department have gone further left as well. In faculties such as postcolonial and gender studies they are training activists. That's obvious to see. It's not unlikely the founders of BLM followed such an education, and became acquainted with and inspired by some Marxist views. That's possible, though the views taught at such courses these days are not as centered around original Marxism that much at all. They probably even learn more about Freud than about Marx, even though Freud was kind of conservative and sexist and racist. But Freud influenced Lacan, and Lacan is important to feminists.

As for to what extent the thought that identitarian left wing activists adhere to can be called "Marxist", is a question that is open to debate. I think barely any Marxist category of thought remains in their thought. Maybe they like historical materialism. Maybe they are inspired by Marx's intention to liberate the proletariat from bourgeois oppression. It seems likely to me they'd sympathize with that. But the American version of postmodernist thought doesn't look like Marx at all. The French postmodernists were all inspired by Marx though.
 

Quote

unless things have changed drastically in the last ten to fifteen years. 

It is well known that they have. Jonathan Haidt claims there's been a drastic increase in radicalism on campuses since about 2012.
 

Quote

You've just described Marxist thinking as "quite innocent", though.

It seems innocent next to American pomo. Marxism is dangerous, and people inspired by Marxism have killed millions in the 20th century, but in my experience American postmodernism is even more deranged as a way of thought. I don't think American pomo will lead to millions of deaths, or anything near that, but I think it is a quite harmful worldview.
 

Quote

Unless you're equating the foundation of the movement and its clear goals as described and expressed from the very beginning (and which most sane people are broadly agreeable towards) with "very far left regressive identarianism" despite those same co-founders explicitly stating within the same interview as that soundbite was lifted from that the aim for BLM to be egalitarian and broad in it's appeal and traction.

Mussolini also wanted to be broad in his appeal, but that doesn't make him moderate. The ideology of 'critical race theory' is not moderate, but is incredibly radical, and you would find this out if you would study it, and its effects on American campuses. Note how it calls itself critical theory, which is the thought of the Frankfurter School, which is explicitly Marxist. From my experience it looks more like the thought of Foucault and Derrida though, both of which were inspired of Marx, but systematically deviated from Marxism in their terminology.

Edited June 27, 2020 by Eutyphro

[sivispacem]

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

In my experience it strongly depends on the faculty, but even in my country I've noticed that the curricula of the philosophy department have gone further left as well. 

Aside from the likes of Nietzsche, Hayek and Schmitt there's not much of a philosophical discourse associated with mainstream right wing thinking. Even Popper, who vocally criticised Socialism, did so from the perspective of social liberalism which is itself a primarily left-wing school of thought.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

In faculties such as postcolonial and gender studies 

These are hardly new phenomena, though. Gender studies was mainstream by the time I was 18 and was a second year module for a philosophy BA at my undergraduate university. And we had a department of African Studies back in 2006 which was primarily concerned with British Post-Colonialism and ironically sat directly below the War Studies department.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

As for to what extent the thought that identitarian left wing activists adhere to can be called "Marxist", is a question that is open to debate

I don't disagree but I would counter that barely any of this tranche of people would self identify as Marxist. Most of them identify as broadly socialist or small-l liberal. 

 

If there's one thing Marxists like to do it's argue incessantly about the minutiae of particular interpretations of Marxist thought, usually above and beyond all else and to th detriment of actually getting anything done. If somebody is loudly promoting direct action rather than bickering bitterly with fellow lefties about inane and barely comprehendible specificities then they're probably not a Marxist. This is why I can totally believe that sizeable minority of social studies professors consider themselves Marxist.bi can scarcely think of a better exemplification of inaction and infighting; they've literally made a career out of it.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

It is well known that they have. Jonathan Haidt claims there's been a drastic increase in radicalism on campuses since about 2012.

I know Haidt loves to beat this drum but I don't think there's a great deal of empirical evidence supporting his assertions. He also loves to draw analogies with the college crises of the sixties which in isolation saw some pretty disgusting events but were also instrumental in the wider civil rights movement.

 

Personally I don't have much of an issue with student pressure preventing universities from giving platforms to far right extremists and white nationalists, the same way I was actively supportive of deplatforming Islamic extremists when it was all the rage to let salafists come speak (read recruit) at faculties.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

Marxism is dangerous, and people inspired by Marxism have killed millions in the 20th century

And yet we don't bat an eyelid at the thought of teaching Nietzsche, Heidegger and Schmitt despite the three being responsible for the majority of underlying thought behind Nazism.

 

There exists a distinction between "inspiration" and direct action. I'm not sure you could realistically infer that Marxism as a political philosophy is any more accountable for the actions of Stalin than existential nihilism or ontological hermeneutics could be blamed for the actions of Hitler.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

I don't think American pomo will lead to millions of deaths

I don't recall directly or indirectly discussing postmodernism though.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

Mussolini also wanted to be broad in his appeal, but that doesn't make him moderate.

Putting the clear false analogy aside, fascist demagogues promote support through factionalism which is completely the inverse of "broadening appeal". Breadth of appeal has little to do with how widespread support for a particular ideological position or tenet is, instead being much more focused on the scope of appeal across different social strata.

 

Also, Critical Race Theory is not widely espoused at all within academia. It's taught in, what, maybe two dozen faculties in the US and a handful outside of it? Creationism has more academic traction.

[Eutyphro]

8 hours ago, sivispacem said:

there's not much of a philosophical discourse associated with mainstream right wing thinking.

It is true that left wing modes of thought are generally inherently superior for the purpose of social critique. Therefore I'm not surprised by a left wing bias in much of academia, and in philosophy, but in recent years it felt as though it became an echo chamber where conservative arguments were becoming taboo. I thought this was problematic, because dogmatism and philosophy are each others opposites.
 

Quote

These are hardly new phenomena, though. Gender studies was mainstream by the time I was 18 and was a second year module for a philosophy BA at my undergraduate university. And we had a department of African Studies back in 2006 which was primarily concerned with British Post-Colonialism and ironically sat directly below the War Studies department.

Nobody said they were new.
 

Quote

 don't disagree but I would counter that barely any of this tranche of people would self identify as Marxist. Most of them identify as broadly socialist or small-l liberal. 

There actually isn't any current left wing mode of thought that hasn't been influenced by Marx. Probably all anarchists have been as well. You could write a study of intellectual history to find out what has influenced American leftist idpol. It's an interesting topic. I think what you'd find out is that Derrida and Foucault have been most influential to its peculiarities.
 

Quote

I know Haidt loves to beat this drum but I don't think there's a great deal of empirical evidence supporting his assertions.

What happened at Evergreen college is quite convincing evidence. There are many such incidents.
 

Quote

He also loves to draw analogies with the college crises of the sixties which in isolation saw some pretty disgusting events but were also instrumental in the wider civil rights movement.

And yet we can criticize the Black Panthers, and still support the civil rights movement. That is what I've been arguing, that it is important to criticize the excesses.
 

Quote

Personally I don't have much of an issue with student pressure preventing universities from giving platforms to far right extremists and white nationalists

If that were the case then I'd be supportive of it as well, but they violently oppose mainstream conservatives speaking quite generally these days, because it interferes with their safespace.
 

Quote

And yet we don't bat an eyelid at the thought of teaching Nietzsche, Heidegger and Schmitt despite the three being responsible for the majority of underlying thought behind Nazism.

Heidegger is almost completely apolitical. We can discuss to what extent his thought is fascist. It's an interesting topic. I consider Heidegger a romantic thinker, and considering romanticism is historically the line of thought that through the Counterenlightenment eventually led to fascism, I can see the connection. Heidegger had no effect on Nazi ideology though, and the Nazis didn't like him at all. I also don't think Schmitt influenced Nazi thought much, but Nietzsche probably did. But the idea that Nietzche is responsible for the majority of Nazi thought is false.

By the way, I do not oppose teaching Marxism by pointing out it is dangerous, and inspired the murder of millions. I think teaching Marxism is actually important.
 

Quote

I don't recall directly or indirectly discussing postmodernism though.

It is what influenced their brand of leftist identitarianism.
 

Quote

Also, Critical Race Theory is not widely espoused at all within academia.

It's actually incredibly influential. It is also influencing the study of law.

Edited June 27, 2020 by Eutyphro

[sivispacem]

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

Heidegger had no effect on Nazi ideology though, and the Nazis didn't like him at all.

I'm currently a bit pressed for time, and will pick up the rest of the post when I get a chance, but Heidegger was highly influential in Nazi theory. Most notably, his concepts of shared history, as well as biology, as a determining factor of human identity was instrumental in legitimising Nazi racial politics and eugenics, effectively doing the groundwork for the likes of Rosenberg. He was also a major academic and philosophical proponent of strategies such as Blood and Soil.

 

1 hour ago, Eutyphro said:

I also don't think Schmitt influenced Nazi thought much

Schmitt was also highly influential, especially given his role in almost directly overseeing Preußenschlag which effectively ended federalism in Germany. In fact he went as far as to personally promote his views as the ideological foundation for Nazism.

[Ivan1997GTA]

I don't know if you heard, but voice actors in certain TV shows like the Simpsons, Family Guy and Big Mouth are being recast for voicing black characters, like Dr. Hibbert, Carl and Cleveland Brown.

 

Personally, I didn't have a problem with Harry Shearer, Hank Azaria and Mike Henry voicing these characters. The main problem is that this is just like the Apu controversy that happened a few years back. Some people find it racist that white actors are voicing black characters, but how come no one batted an eye when black actors, like Cree Summer and Phil LaMarr, voiced white characters such as Penny Gadget and Samurai Jack? (Jack is technically Asian, but you get the point. Again, I have no problem with Cree Summer or Phil LaMarr voicing these characters) IMO, I think it's stupid that these recasts are being forced on those shows all because of some PC BS. I think that these actors should just ignore the protests and keep on voicing the characters.

 

To quote Cleveland Brown: "That's nasty." Fingers crossed that South Park doesn't go the same route. Let's just hope those "recasts" are only temporary and the actors like Harry Shearer and Hank Azaria go back to voicing the characters that they've voiced practically since the start of the shows.

Edited July 1, 2020 by Ivan1997GTA

[Eutyphro]

18 hours ago, sivispacem said:

I'm currently a bit pressed for time, and will pick up the rest of the post when I get a chance, but Heidegger was highly influential in Nazi theory. Most notably, his concepts of shared history, as well as biology, as a determining factor of human identity was instrumental in legitimising Nazi racial politics and eugenics, effectively doing the groundwork for the likes of Rosenberg. He was also a major academic and philosophical proponent of strategies such as Blood and Soil.

I think you probably read some secondary work making a bunch of bad claims. That's oke. It happens. If you would've read Heidegger you'd know biology is rather irrelevant to what he does. History is relevant to the extent that it is the historical narrative of philosophy, where he paints a picture of how metaphysics has obscured dasein, being there. Heidegger is a very abstract existentialist philosopher who is very hard to read, but his importance in the history of philosophy is undeniable. His thought in no way can be foundational to any political line of thought. For that it is far too abstract and apolitical. I tried to look up references for your claims and what I found was some racist nationalist claims Heidegger has made that though abhorrent to us, were mainstream in his time. Heidegger has a shady relationship with the Nazis. He made grave moral errors in this respect. This is indubitable. But him being foundational to their ideology. I really think that's a false view.
 

Quote

[Schmitt] In fact he went as far as to personally promote his views as the ideological foundation for Nazism.

I think this was more opportunism than him being foundational.

This is very off topic though, and should continue in some philosophy D&D back alley or whatever.

Edited June 28, 2020 by Eutyphro

[Lonely-Martin]

Yeah, I knew those shows would be doomed once Disney got hold of them, lol. I had more hope for Family Guy because of its humour being a bit older, but The Simpsons was always gonna be a sitting duck even before current issues of late once Disney got involved.

 

Anyway, reading of those changes really makes me fear for the future of GTA to be honest. Can R* create a new GTA that's gonna be so full of stereotypes like the series has been so full of and enjoyed mocking without being seen as a bad thing anymore? It's long had those criticisms and surely that'll only grow further if a new one came out and is more of the same.

 

More importantly, will T2 allow it with all the shareholders etc. considering they switched both GTA:O and RDRO off for 2 hours to pay their tribute to the BLM cause, so it's clearly something they support. Not that I'm criticising their support, just curious of the nature of their games in future. Are they gonna be worried about what it contains more now than ever?

 

It could even be a reason why GTA:O is to become a standalone title so as to shake off the link to GTA V's story which is taboo for some themes/storylines. GTA:O is already quite watered down compared to story mode like having had some of the talk radio edited out of that station (a part about being violent to women). The online counterpart feels very teen friendly compared to the more adult story so much more and as it's so popular with the kids with flying bikes and such while making such a fortune, I can only foresee it becoming more and more for the younger players and the more taboo themes and stereotype mocking reduced further which to me, feels like the franchise will lose that edge I've always enjoyed.

 

Playing this franchise has never encouraged me to look down on or disrespect any of what it mocks, nor beat beat hookers and steal cars much like Family Guy took the piss out of when Peter lost his memory in one episode. It's just funny entertainment.

 

I mean, here in the UK they had to rename Bully to Canis Canem Edit already because we can't have a game called Bully, over here, lol. In today's climate a new GTA is ripe for the picking. Honestly surprised it hasn't been targeted already to be fair with how many stereotypes this game mocks which leaves me wondering if online/story to be split is at least in part because of this all really.

[kobeni]

6 hours ago, Lonely-Martin said:

It could even be a reason why GTA:O is to become a standalone title so as to shake off the link to GTA V's story which is taboo for some themes/storylines. GTA:O is already quite watered down compared to story mode like having had some of the talk radio edited out of that station (a part about being violent to women). The online counterpart feels very teen friendly compared to the more adult story so much more and as it's so popular with the kids with flying bikes and such while making such a fortune, I can only foresee it becoming more and more for the younger players and the more taboo themes and stereotype mocking reduced further which to me, feels like the franchise will lose that edge I've always enjoyed.

I'm looking forward to the day when Rockstar Games gets bought out by Epic Games and turns GTA into a family-friendly Fortnite-like video game with victory dances and sh*t

Edited June 29, 2020 by DownInTheHole

[KADENZA]

‘The racial segregation in every metropolitan area in this country was created by racially explicit government policy, designed to create racial boundaries.’

 

Segregation expert Richard Rothstein has spent his life debunking the American myth that White and Black people live separately by choice.

 

In US news and current events today, Richard Rothstein, The Color of Law author, continues his lifelong mission to debunk the myth of de facto segregation and explain how modern day segregation is enforced by US law and policy. Insidious tactics like redlining have contributed to modern day segregation, and it leads to modern school segregation, modern housing segregation and housing discrimination, and so much more. De jure discrimination didn't end with the passage of the Civil Rights Act, it simply became more insidious and baked into the housing, lending and education systems that have prevented Black Americans from earning and keeping wealth. Modern segregation is no less immoral and unjust than explicit segregation, and the entire system needs an overhaul if we are ever to reach true equality and assert that Black lives matter.

 

 

All I want to say is that I'm not surprised at all.

[kobeni]

3 hours ago, Lock n' Stock said:

Well CHAZ spawned from the Floyd protests, so I do think it's relevant somewhat.

 

Not that it matters anymore. Seattle police cleared them all out.

Well aint that a relief

[sivispacem]

On 6/27/2020 at 8:21 PM, Eutyphro said:

Nobody said they were new.

If these faculties have been operating for years, when did they start "training Marxists"?

Indeed, it appears you're again conflating "leftist identitarianism", in your words, with Marxism.

 

On 6/27/2020 at 8:21 PM, Eutyphro said:

What happened at Evergreen college is quite convincing evidence.

Which "what happened"? Are you referring to the threats made to Bret Weinstein over his opposition to changes to the Day of Absence? 

The vast majority of disruptive activity which happened in relation to Evergreen and this incident was conducted by the far right, and we're talking an extremely small (under 3,000 student) public liberal arts college which is hardly representative of wider US academia as a whole.

 

On 6/27/2020 at 8:21 PM, Eutyphro said:

And yet we can criticize the Black Panthers

This doesn't really constitute a coherent counter-argument given that the Black Panthers were a black nationalist urban guerilla movement.

Their influence in the wider civil rights movement is also debatable, whereas as that of the campus movements is not so much.

 

On 6/27/2020 at 8:21 PM, Eutyphro said:

but they violently oppose mainstream conservatives speaking quite generally these days

We've discussed this before on a different thread; this is actually nowhere near as widespread as you seem to claim.

The total number of widely reported incidents about a dozen, maybe twenty, across the last decade; there are over five thousand higher education institutions in the US, so the numbers we're talking here are absolutely miniscule.

 

On 6/27/2020 at 8:21 PM, Eutyphro said:

It is what influenced their brand of leftist identitarianism.

Still don't see the relevance to the specific statements about BLM leaders self-identifying as Marxist.

[Evil empire]

The way the american "justice" treated the affair shows a lot about its motivations. Initially Derek Chauvin was only charged for involuntary manslaughter while its crime partners weren't bothered at all. It's only when the news of the assassiantion became public that the "justice" decided to charge Chauvin for murder and arrest its crime partners as well, that is to say the privileges their status of strategic crime partners for the dictators give them.

 

Before it murdered George Floyd Derek Chauvin had been denunced something like 18 times for various abuses of power and when it worked as a securith agent in a discothec derek Chauvin was known to be particularly agressive against the Black peopel, that is to say those who match the least the nazi definition of the aryan race.

 

When a dictator makes a coup d'État or a purge it is always notably helped by the police and of course the more the cops can commit crimes unpunishedly the more the state can rely on them to oppress people.

Democracy is based on the separation of powers which is THE thing the politicians never talk about which perfectly makes sense if we assume they dream to become dictators.

Except if I'm wrong no politician didn't offer any law to automatically convict to death any cop found guilty of murder which would be the only equitable penalty since that heap of privileged doesn't risk any judicial fault. The politicians' behavior is not surprisong if we assume they want to freed the criminal cops when the popular pressure falls so the other neo-nazi/psychopath cops know they can commit the same crimes without any risk.

[Eutyphro]

1 hour ago, sivispacem said:

If these faculties have been operating for years, when did they start "training Marxists"?

Indeed, it appears you're again conflating "leftist identitarianism", in your words, with Marxism.

Since our discussion I became more interested in the ideological roots of critical race theory, and found out it had a stronger connection to Marxism than I thought, for instance through this man: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frantz_Fanon

 

They are a bit obscure about their roots it seems, because they mainly want to credit black thinkers as their founders. I think their social constructionism is Americanized postmodernism, but there is more explicit Marxist influence than I was aware of. As I pointed out earlier, critical theory is also just fundamentally Marxist. But critical race theory does not seem as geared towards the type of economism based on historical materialist Marxism. I think the Marxist terminology largely disappeared, and what is left over looks more like postmodernism.
 

Quote

Which "what happened"? Are you referring to the threats made to Bret Weinstein over his opposition to changes to the Day of Absence? 

The vast majority of disruptive activity which happened in relation to Evergreen and this incident was conducted by the far right, and we're talking an extremely small (under 3,000 student) public liberal arts college which is hardly representative of wider US academia as a whole.

I heard about the death threats by the far right at Evergreen. That happened, but that was after leftist radicals took over the campus and bullied the dean into submission. It's important to note that I have never downplayed terror or intimidation by the far right.

 

But yeah, there's been this:
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/11/the-new-intolerance-of-student-activism-at-yale/414810/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/03/middlebury-free-speech-violence/518667/
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/07/18/claremont-mckenna-suspends-5-students-blocking-speech
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/uc-berkeley-speech-ben-shapiro-leads-tightened-security-n801231

There's a lot of incidents, and outrage over mainstream conservatives on campuses. None of these figures are 'alt-right'.

Edited July 2, 2020 by Eutyphro