independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Sun 22nd Jul 2018 8:53pm
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Politics & Religion > Left wing professor quits because of death threats.
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 3 of 3 <123
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #60 posted 01/01/18 12:26pm

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

Dasein said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

it need not be the same as to be bad. I did not equivocate them. I just said what he said is Race-based Hate Speech.

2elijah and Dasein lik3 to make up reasons to not just say "it is not as bad as when they do it..."

What is odd is how some just assume there were no consequences for reactions... who knows and if their bosses found out they may well be fired.

but I think the prof is trash and the school is better without him. If your food is poisoned why put poison in the drink too?


Please define "race-based hate speech" and then show how the professor is guilty of such.

is "white" a race designation?

does "Want" indicate a desire?

Geno means a people of a given classification?

Cide death of?

He seems to me to have said he desired that all white people be killed...

so how is that not hate?

And he said it... did he not?

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #61 posted 01/01/18 12:55pm

Dasein

OnlyNDaUsa said:

Dasein said:


Please define "race-based hate speech" and then show how the professor is guilty of such.

is "white" a race designation?

does "Want" indicate a desire?

Geno means a people of a given classification?

Cide death of?

He seems to me to have said he desired that all white people be killed...

so how is that not hate?

And he said it... did he not?


Did he mean it? Does he really want white people to die? Does he have actions that supplement
his words here? If so, then yes, his tweet about desiring white genocide is not only stupid, idiotic,
and ill-conceived but race based hate speech. However, if he says he was "joking," and provides
some clarification then that leaves enough room for me to at least pause and think about how to
contextualize his stupid, idiotic, and ill-conceived tweets beyond the aforementioned qualities.


  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #62 posted 01/01/18 2:03pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

Is there a context where wishing for genocide of a race is funny or in which it's an acceptable joke?

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #63 posted 01/01/18 6:28pm

Dasein

djThunderfunk said:

Is there a context where wishing for genocide of a race is funny or in which it's an acceptable joke?


In the hands of one who is arguing for the death of white men in power who purposefully
seek to marginalize and/or oppress minorities and is able to express that forcefully and per-
suasively yet doesn't literally wish death upon those white men but some sort of radical
restructuring of the power dynamic in the US, yes, wishing for that particular genocide can
be funny as again, I'm as irreverent as they come.

Yet, in the hands of one like this professor, it was, for the 80th time, stupid, idiotic, and cer-
tainly ill-conceived. I have no idea why this facet of my argument and Elijah's is not being
taken into consideration apart from the typical poor reading comprehension and critical
thinking that plagues this forum from Orgers who simply want to argue that Black people and
their compatriots must always condemn hate speech regardless of context.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #64 posted 01/01/18 8:13pm

djThunderfunk

avatar

comfort

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #65 posted 01/02/18 8:50am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

Race doesn't exist. White people invented it.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #66 posted 01/02/18 8:50am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

He was joking!!

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #67 posted 01/02/18 8:51am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

When Chris Rock jokes, "I love black people but hate Ni%$@#s," is that racist?

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #68 posted 01/02/18 8:56am

Dasein

2freaky4church1 said:

When Chris Rock jokes, "I love black people but hate Ni%$@#s," is that racist?


Or, we could ask is his joke race-based hate speech?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #69 posted 01/02/18 9:02am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

They say this in barbershops all the time.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #70 posted 01/02/18 9:52am

2elijah

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



FullLipsDotNose said:




OnlyNDaUsa said:





PARA 1) so 2 wrongs make a right? and he should not expect to get the same back at him? I agree they are all bad and they are ALL subject to consequences.

Para 2) seems like nonsense and excuse making



No, I'm not defending him, I'm just explaining why this happens and why it's not the same as white people chanting the same about people of colour.



If I lived in the US, I'd probably be racialised as white, so it's hard for me to decide whether his actions were wrong or not. I'm not the first target of white supermacists, therefore I don't have a need for exclamations of white genocide. At the same time, I agree with what 2elijah said - it only fuels alternative right-wingers and people who don't understand.



But I'm not afraid of him committing a genocide against me even if he really meant that.





it need not be the same as to be bad. I did not equivocate them. I just said what he said is Race-based Hate Speech.



2elijah and Dasein lik3 to make up reasons to not just say "it is not as bad as when they do it..."

What is odd is how some just assume there were no consequences for reactions... who knows and if their bosses found out they may well be fired.

but I think the prof is trash and the school is better without him. If your food is poisoned why put poison in the drink too?


falloff What reasons did I make up? Did you not comprehend that I said the professor faced the consequences for his comments? Are you just angry because no one actually acted on his comments? So now you have no one to beat up on for it? Are the death threats against the professor not bad enough consequences for him to now deal with? You can’t put words in others’ mouths, that you want to hear, just to satisfy your agenda.

Again, the professor should have known that his comment would have been taken seriously and shouldn’t have said it, and he is now facing the consequences for what he said. Does he deserve death threats? Of course not, but at the same time, those making the death threats, how does their reason for those threats, differ from the reason they are threatening the professor for his comments? They claim he made a threat, yet they are doing that to him. You should know that in this country, they will face consequences for those threats, if caught by law enforcement. No sides being taken here.
[Edited 1/2/18 10:02am]
FEARLESS
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #71 posted 01/02/18 10:39am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

2elijah said:

OnlyNDaUsa said:

it need not be the same as to be bad. I did not equivocate them. I just said what he said is Race-based Hate Speech.

2elijah and Dasein lik3 to make up reasons to not just say "it is not as bad as when they do it..."

What is odd is how some just assume there were no consequences for reactions... who knows and if their bosses found out they may well be fired.

but I think the prof is trash and the school is better without him. If your food is poisoned why put poison in the drink too?

falloff What reasons did I make up?

your first post sure seems to go a long way to excuse his hatefull tweet


Did you not comprehend that I said the professor faced the consequences for his comments?


are you compelled to make personal swipes?


Are you just angry because no one actually acted on his comments?

oh please...

So now you have no one to beat up on for it?

do what?


Are the death threats against the professor not bad enough consequences for him to now deal with?

They are bad and are subject to the same kinds of consequences the prof faced


You can’t put words in others’ mouths, that you want to hear, just to satisfy your agenda.

Sure I can: But if you wish to make your position clear: was his tweet race-based hate speech?


Again, the professor should have known that his comment would have been taken seriously and shouldn’t have said it, and he is now facing the consequences for what he said.

Yep

Does he deserve death threats?

I would say No...but he knew he would get them so in a big way he brought it upon himself. I do wish the fools tha did react in kind would not have,


Of course not, but at the same time, those making the death threats, how does their reason for those threats, differ from the reason they are threatening the professor for his comments?

I am sure some were very much the same. I am sure some were race based. But the Prof started it and that is not even a rational issue to debate.


They claim he made a threat, yet they are doing that to him.

yep and if they would have just chilled out they could have still gotten him removed from his job


You should know that in this country, they will face consequences for those threats, if caught by law enforcement.

such statement's are rarely a crime.



No sides being taken here.


Cool.

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #72 posted 01/03/18 7:34am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

So, now hate speech exists?

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #73 posted 01/03/18 8:02am

djThunderfunk

avatar

2freaky4church1 said:

So, now hate speech exists?


Sure it exist. It always has. It's just that in a society where we have freedom of speech, it's irrelevent. We're free to hate and we're free to say hateful things. Some people believe we should take away the right to say hateful things. When those people turn around and say something hateful, they are exposed as hypocrites.

We were HERE, where were you?

4 those that knew the number and didn't call... fk all y'all!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #74 posted 01/03/18 9:23am

maplenpg

I find the whole episode interesting because what we end up doing is arguing over the language of the post and, in particular, the meaning of it. And this is where I think social media is dangerous - we cannot understand someone's post fully unless we are able to understand the context behind it (which reminds me of Horsefeathers' signature - I miss Horsefeathers).

In this case the professor was not calling for the murder of white people, but was reclaiming the term 'white genocide' which is a conspiracy theory used by white supremacists to claim that there is a deliberate ploy to destroy the white race, making it extinct. It is used by the alt-right in the states and Trump got into hot water for retweeting a tweet by tweeter WhiteGenocideTM. Given that he was a professor in politics and global studies, it is not unreasonable for Ciccariello-Maher to have been discussing this theory before his tweet, which was obviously meant for a much smaller audience that was reached.

That said, the misunderstood meaning of a post is frequently being used to excuse posts that never should have been made in the first place, and it is for this reason that I don't think the professor should get a pass - the tweet should clearly never have been written.In Britain, Toby Young has just been given a prominent position on the board of a university regulator and is now making excuses for vile tweets that he has previously sent, claiming a mis-understanding of meaning and that he is being criticised for being a Tory. I simply cannot see how his excuses for his (now removed) comments add up (I could make a whole new thread about this but won't), at least Ciccariello-Maher stands by what he said.


Another case in the British press is where a chef claimed she 'spiked' a vegan's meal and then claimed that by 'spiked' she didn't mean she had put something in her dinner, again excuses because of the backlash that she recieved.


In short, it is the backlash driving the consequence and we will all make judgments on whether we believe the backlash is justified or not. I just think we should be wary about claiming we definitely know the true meaning of someone else's words, unless we are the very person who put those words together in the first place.

[Edited 1/3/18 9:25am]

It never ceases to amaze me how cruel humans can be against fellow humans and animals, especially when in the pursuit of money and power.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #75 posted 01/03/18 9:42am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

djThunderfunk said:

2freaky4church1 said:

So, now hate speech exists?


Sure it exist. It always has. It's just that in a society where we have freedom of speech, it's irrelevent. We're free to hate and we're free to say hateful things. Some people believe we should take away the right to say hateful things. When those people turn around and say something hateful, they are exposed as hypocrites.

yup and now we see how some go loony tunes trying to excuse it

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #76 posted 01/03/18 9:46am

OnlyNDaUsa

avatar

maplenpg said:

I find the whole episode interesting because what we end up doing is arguing over the language of the post and, in particular, the meaning of it. And this is where I think social media is dangerous - we cannot understand someone's post fully unless we are able to understand the context behind it (which reminds me of Horsefeathers' signature - I miss Horsefeathers).

In this case the professor was not calling for the murder of white people, but was reclaiming the term 'white genocide' which is a conspiracy theory used by white supremacists to claim that there is a deliberate ploy to destroy the white race, making it extinct. It is used by the alt-right in the states and Trump got into hot water for retweeting a tweet by tweeter WhiteGenocideTM. Given that he was a professor in politics and global studies, it is not unreasonable for Ciccariello-Maher to have been discussing this theory before his tweet, which was obviously meant for a much smaller audience that was reached.

That said, the misunderstood meaning of a post is frequently being used to excuse posts that never should have been made in the first place, and it is for this reason that I don't think the professor should get a pass - the tweet should clearly never have been written.In Britain, Toby Young has just been given a prominent position on the board of a university regulator and is now making excuses for vile tweets that he has previously sent, claiming a mis-understanding of meaning and that he is being criticised for being a Tory. I simply cannot see how his excuses for his (now removed) comments add up (I could make a whole new thread about this but won't), at least Ciccariello-Maher stands by what he said.


Another case in the British press is where a chef claimed she 'spiked' a vegan's meal and then claimed that by 'spiked' she didn't mean she had put something in her dinner, again excuses because of the backlash that she recieved.


In short, it is the backlash driving the consequence and we will all make judgments on whether we believe the backlash is justified or not. I just think we should be wary about claiming we definitely know the true meaning of someone else's words, unless we are the very person who put those words together in the first place.

[Edited 1/3/18 9:25am]

first, why are there links in your post? and second: I do not believe for one second that if it was the other way around there anyone even trying to see it from that person's point of view would be called a racist sympathizer.

Anyone for banning the AR15 must be on the side of the criminal as once banned only criminals will have them.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #77 posted 01/03/18 10:24am

maplenpg

OnlyNDaUsa said:

maplenpg said:

I find the whole episode interesting because what we end up doing is arguing over the language of the post and, in particular, the meaning of it. And this is where I think social media is dangerous - we cannot understand someone's post fully unless we are able to understand the context behind it (which reminds me of Horsefeathers' signature - I miss Horsefeathers).

In this case the professor was not calling for the murder of white people, but was reclaiming the term 'white genocide' which is a conspiracy theory used by white supremacists to claim that there is a deliberate ploy to destroy the white race, making it extinct. It is used by the alt-right in the states and Trump got into hot water for retweeting a tweet by tweeter WhiteGenocideTM. Given that he was a professor in politics and global studies, it is not unreasonable for Ciccariello-Maher to have been discussing this theory before his tweet, which was obviously meant for a much smaller audience that was reached.

That said, the misunderstood meaning of a post is frequently being used to excuse posts that never should have been made in the first place, and it is for this reason that I don't think the professor should get a pass - the tweet should clearly never have been written.In Britain, Toby Young has just been given a prominent position on the board of a university regulator and is now making excuses for vile tweets that he has previously sent, claiming a mis-understanding of meaning and that he is being criticised for being a Tory. I simply cannot see how his excuses for his (now removed) comments add up (I could make a whole new thread about this but won't), at least Ciccariello-Maher stands by what he said.


Another case in the British press is where a chef claimed she 'spiked' a vegan's meal and then claimed that by 'spiked' she didn't mean she had put something in her dinner, again excuses because of the backlash that she recieved.


In short, it is the backlash driving the consequence and we will all make judgments on whether we believe the backlash is justified or not. I just think we should be wary about claiming we definitely know the true meaning of someone else's words, unless we are the very person who put those words together in the first place.

[Edited 1/3/18 9:25am]

first, why are there links in your post? and second: I do not believe for one second that if it was the other way around there anyone even trying to see it from that person's point of view would be called a racist sympathizer.

1. Because I didn't think it was too irrational for many of you US orgers to have never heard of Toby Young or the story of the vegan chef - the other links just back up what I'm saying.

2. I didn't say they would.

It never ceases to amaze me how cruel humans can be against fellow humans and animals, especially when in the pursuit of money and power.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #78 posted 01/03/18 12:47pm

deebee

avatar

maplenpg said:

I find the whole episode interesting because what we end up doing is arguing over the language of the post and, in particular, the meaning of it. And this is where I think social media is dangerous - we cannot understand someone's post fully unless we are able to understand the context behind it (which reminds me of Horsefeathers' signature - I miss Horsefeathers).

In this case the professor was not calling for the murder of white people, but was reclaiming the term 'white genocide' which is a conspiracy theory used by white supremacists to claim that there is a deliberate ploy to destroy the white race, making it extinct. It is used by the alt-right in the states and Trump got into hot water for retweeting a tweet by tweeter WhiteGenocideTM. Given that he was a professor in politics and global studies, it is not unreasonable for Ciccariello-Maher to have been discussing this theory before his tweet, which was obviously meant for a much smaller audience that was reached.

That said, the misunderstood meaning of a post is frequently being used to excuse posts that never should have been made in the first place, and it is for this reason that I don't think the professor should get a pass - the tweet should clearly never have been written.In Britain, Toby Young has just been given a prominent position on the board of a university regulator and is now making excuses for vile tweets that he has previously sent, claiming a mis-understanding of meaning and that he is being criticised for being a Tory. I simply cannot see how his excuses for his (now removed) comments add up (I could make a whole new thread about this but won't), at least Ciccariello-Maher stands by what he said.


Another case in the British press is where a chef claimed she 'spiked' a vegan's meal and then claimed that by 'spiked' she didn't mean she had put something in her dinner, again excuses because of the backlash that she recieved.


In short, it is the backlash driving the consequence and we will all make judgments on whether we believe the backlash is justified or not. I just think we should be wary about claiming we definitely know the true meaning of someone else's words, unless we are the very person who put those words together in the first place.

[Edited 1/3/18 9:25am]

I agree with this. It's asking for trouble to send out such a message, whose intended, satirical meaning relies on a reference people may or may not 'get', on a public forum. This and a few of his other tweets are a little reckless, given his position, and how predictable it was that they were going to get siezed upon by squealing hordes of calculatedly 'triggered' right-wingers.

I have to say, though, by this stage, I don't think any opacity of the tweet's meaning is what's keeping the tiki torches burning for this guy. The 'affronted' right-wingers understand it just as surely as you or I do, particularly after its clarification, but it would seem there's been a determined effort to turn this into some minor victory in the 'culture war' and to attempt to claim a public scalp. For this reason, I would tend to support him against any witch hunt manoeuvres (e.g. if his uni had bowed to pressure and sacked him or launched disciplinary action or some such), but out of principle more than any love for this kind of shtick.

That said, had I a Twitter account, I'd be leading hourly calls for Toby Young to be set upon mercilessly with sticks today - so who am I to complain? lol

[Edited 1/3/18 12:50pm]

"Not everything that is faced can be changed; but nothing can be changed until it is faced." - James Baldwin
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #79 posted 01/03/18 1:50pm

2elijah

avatar

OnlyNDaUsa said:



2elijah said:


OnlyNDaUsa said:




it need not be the same as to be bad. I did not equivocate them. I just said what he said is Race-based Hate Speech.



2elijah and Dasein lik3 to make up reasons to not just say "it is not as bad as when they do it..."

What is odd is how some just assume there were no consequences for reactions... who knows and if their bosses found out they may well be fired.

but I think the prof is trash and the school is better without him. If your food is poisoned why put poison in the drink too?



falloff What reasons did I make up?

your first post sure seems to go a long way to excuse his hatefull tweet


Did you not comprehend that I said the professor faced the consequences for his comments?


are you compelled to make personal swipes?


Are you just angry because no one actually acted on his comments?

oh please...

So now you have no one to beat up on for it?

do what?


Are the death threats against the professor not bad enough consequences for him to now deal with?

They are bad and are subject to the same kinds of consequences the prof faced


You can’t put words in others’ mouths, that you want to hear, just to satisfy your agenda.

Sure I can: But if you wish to make your position clear: was his tweet race-based hate speech?


Again, the professor should have known that his comment would have been taken seriously and shouldn’t have said it, and he is now facing the consequences for what he said.

Yep

Does he deserve death threats?

I would say No...but he knew he would get them so in a big way he brought it upon himself. I do wish the fools tha did react in kind would not have,


Of course not, but at the same time, those making the death threats, how does their reason for those threats, differ from the reason they are threatening the professor for his comments?

I am sure some were very much the same. I am sure some were race based. But the Prof started it and that is not even a rational issue to debate.


They claim he made a threat, yet they are doing that to him.

yep and if they would have just chilled out they could have still gotten him removed from his job


You should know that in this country, they will face consequences for those threats, if caught by law enforcement.

such statement's are rarely a crime.



No sides being taken here.


Cool.

You want it to be hate speech to justify your opinion about the professor’s comments. Then you lump 2 Black American orgers’ views together and make false accusations of our views, based on your stereotyped views of who we are, and how you think we should view this situation. Not hard to figure out where your mindset is with this topic.

As I stated, the professor should have known his enemies were not going to accept his comments as mockery about white genocide, as he stated it was, and it backfired on him. His attackers used it against him. Yet in reality, the professor is right that white genocide doesn’t exist in America. Even if he said it that way, I guarantee he still would have received the same, type threats. Why? Because it is common knowledge, that many in America, don’t like to accept the hard truths and facts about race issues in America. Many rather embrace generational, racial ignorance as their truths.
[Edited 1/5/18 5:44am]
FEARLESS
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #80 posted 01/03/18 2:08pm

2elijah

avatar

maplenpg said:

I find the whole episode interesting because what we end up doing is arguing over the language of the post and, in particular, the meaning of it. And this is where I think social media is dangerous - we cannot understand someone's post fully unless we are able to understand the context behind it (which reminds me of Horsefeathers' signature - I miss Horsefeathers).

In this case the professor was not calling for the murder of white people, but was reclaiming the term 'white genocide' which is a conspiracy theory used by white supremacists to claim that there is a deliberate ploy to destroy the white race, making it extinct. It is used by the alt-right in the states and Trump got into hot water for retweeting a tweet by tweeter WhiteGenocideTM. Given that he was a professor in politics and global studies, it is not unreasonable for Ciccariello-Maher to have been discussing this theory before his tweet, which was obviously meant for a much smaller audience that was reached.

That said, the misunderstood meaning of a post is frequently being used to excuse posts that never should have been made in the first place, and it is for this reason that I don't think the professor should get a pass - the tweet should clearly never have been written.In Britain, Toby Young has just been given a prominent position on the board of a university regulator and is now making excuses for vile tweets that he has previously sent, claiming a mis-understanding of meaning and that he is being criticised for being a Tory. I simply cannot see how his excuses for his (now removed) comments add up (I could make a whole new thread about this but won't), at least Ciccariello-Maher stands by what he said.



Another case in the British press is where a chef claimed she 'spiked' a vegan's meal and then claimed that by 'spiked' she didn't mean she had put something in her dinner, again excuses because of the backlash that she recieved.



In short, it is the backlash driving the consequence and we will all make judgments on whether we believe the backlash is justified or not. I just think we should be wary about claiming we definitely know the true meaning of someone else's words, unless we are the very person who put those words together in the first place.

[Edited 1/3/18 9:25am]


I agree with bolded part. That’s exactly what I meant when I stated that his comments would not have been taken as mocking the false claims of white genocide in America, but instead was taken/accused of making hate speech by those who don’t like the fact that the professor exposes the truth that white genocide just doesn’t exist in America. Especially by those making false claims of white genocide. Yet the fact is, there is no non-white racial group in power in America denying/taking/stealing the human or civil rights of White Americans, nor are there any laws written by non-Whites barring them access to opportunities or riding in masses on horses, vehicles committing mass murder against White Americans.

I think where this nonsense is coming, is the changing demographics of America, that some Whites fear, and use that as their basis for claiming White genocide is happening. Also, how some elected officials, some in media use, (example: some FOX cable news) etc., promote that type of fear to their audience.
[Edited 1/3/18 14:10pm]
FEARLESS
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #81 posted 01/03/18 11:59pm

maplenpg

2elijah said:

maplenpg said:

I find the whole episode interesting because what we end up doing is arguing over the language of the post and, in particular, the meaning of it. And this is where I think social media is dangerous - we cannot understand someone's post fully unless we are able to understand the context behind it (which reminds me of Horsefeathers' signature - I miss Horsefeathers).

In this case the professor was not calling for the murder of white people, but was reclaiming the term 'white genocide' which is a conspiracy theory used by white supremacists to claim that there is a deliberate ploy to destroy the white race, making it extinct. It is used by the alt-right in the states and Trump got into hot water for retweeting a tweet by tweeter WhiteGenocideTM. Given that he was a professor in politics and global studies, it is not unreasonable for Ciccariello-Maher to have been discussing this theory before his tweet, which was obviously meant for a much smaller audience that was reached.

That said, the misunderstood meaning of a post is frequently being used to excuse posts that never should have been made in the first place, and it is for this reason that I don't think the professor should get a pass - the tweet should clearly never have been written.In Britain, Toby Young has just been given a prominent position on the board of a university regulator and is now making excuses for vile tweets that he has previously sent, claiming a mis-understanding of meaning and that he is being criticised for being a Tory. I simply cannot see how his excuses for his (now removed) comments add up (I could make a whole new thread about this but won't), at least Ciccariello-Maher stands by what he said.



Another case in the British press is where a chef claimed she 'spiked' a vegan's meal and then claimed that by 'spiked' she didn't mean she had put something in her dinner, again excuses because of the backlash that she recieved.



In short, it is the backlash driving the consequence and we will all make judgments on whether we believe the backlash is justified or not. I just think we should be wary about claiming we definitely know the true meaning of someone else's words, unless we are the very person who put those words together in the first place.

[Edited 1/3/18 9:25am]


I agree with bolded part. That’s exactly what I meant when I stated that his comments would not have been taken as mocking the false claims of white genocide in America, but instead was taken/accused of making hate speech by those who don’t like the fact that the professor exposes the truth that white genocide just doesn’t exist in America. Especially by those making false claims of white genocide. Yet the fact is, there is no non-white racial group in power in America denying/taking/stealing the human or civil rights of White Americans, nor are there any laws written by non-Whites barring them access to opportunities or riding in masses on horses, vehicles committing mass murder against White Americans.

I think where this nonsense is coming, is the changing demographics of America, that some Whites fear, and use that as their basis for claiming White genocide is happening. Also, how some elected officials, some in media use, (example: some FOX cable news) etc., promote that type of fear to their audience.
[Edited 1/3/18 14:10pm]

Yup. And the ridiculous thing is, as you rightly state, that white Americans have nothing to fear but their own paranoia.
It never ceases to amaze me how cruel humans can be against fellow humans and animals, especially when in the pursuit of money and power.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #82 posted 01/04/18 12:13am

maplenpg

deebee said:[quote]



maplenpg said:


I find the whole episode interesting because what we end up doing is arguing over the language of the post and, in particular, the meaning of it. And this is where I think social media is dangerous - we cannot understand someone's post fully unless we are able to understand the context behind it (which reminds me of Horsefeathers' signature - I miss Horsefeathers).

In this case the professor was not calling for the murder of white people, but was reclaiming the term 'white genocide' which is a conspiracy theory used by white supremacists to claim that there is a deliberate ploy to destroy the white race, making it extinct. It is used by the alt-right in the states and Trump got into hot water for retweeting a tweet by tweeter WhiteGenocideTM. Given that he was a professor in politics and global studies, it is not unreasonable for Ciccariello-Maher to have been discussing this theory before his tweet, which was obviously meant for a much smaller audience that was reached.

That said, the misunderstood meaning of a post is frequently being used to excuse posts that never should have been made in the first place, and it is for this reason that I don't think the professor should get a pass - the tweet should clearly never have been written.In Britain, Toby Young has just been given a prominent position on the board of a university regulator and is now making excuses for vile tweets that he has previously sent, claiming a mis-understanding of meaning and that he is being criticised for being a Tory. I simply cannot see how his excuses for his (now removed) comments add up (I could make a whole new thread about this but won't), at least Ciccariello-Maher stands by what he said.



Another case in the British press is where a chef claimed she 'spiked' a vegan's meal and then claimed that by 'spiked' she didn't mean she had put something in her dinner, again excuses because of the backlash that she recieved.



In short, it is the backlash driving the consequence and we will all make judgments on whether we believe the backlash is justified or not. I just think we should be wary about claiming we definitely know the true meaning of someone else's words, unless we are the very person who put those words together in the first place.


[Edited 1/3/18 9:25am]



I agree with this. It's asking for trouble to send out such a message, whose intended, satirical meaning relies on a reference people may or may not 'get', on a public forum. This and a few of his other tweets are a little reckless, given his position, and how predictable it was that they were going to get siezed upon by squealing hordes of calculatedly 'triggered' right-wingers.

I have to say, though, by this stage, I don't think any opacity of the tweet's meaning is what's keeping the tiki torches burning for this guy. The 'affronted' right-wingers understand it just as surely as you or I do, particularly after its clarification, but it would seem there's been a determined effort to turn this into some minor victory in the 'culture war' and to attempt to claim a public scalp. For this reason, I would tend to support him against any witch hunt manoeuvres (e.g. if his uni had bowed to pressure and sacked him or launched disciplinary action or some such), but out of principle more than any love for this kind of shtick.

That said, had I a Twitter account, I'd be leading hourly calls for Toby Young to be set upon mercilessly with sticks today - so who am I to complain? lol

[Edited 1/3/18 12:50pm]
Thanks Deebee. I was most happy when I heard the chef who spiked the vegan's meal had resigned last night - vegans can be quite militant so she picked the wrong group to mess with. I'd also love Toby Young to be forced out before he starts (Twitter users really are being merciless), but I do wonder if trial by social media users is a dangerous path that seems to be being used more and more frequently to decide right from wrong, especially when people are forging their own meaning from the words of others, and then twisting them to suit their own agenda.

It never ceases to amaze me how cruel humans can be against fellow humans and animals, especially when in the pursuit of money and power.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #83 posted 01/04/18 8:15am

2freaky4church
1

avatar

The fucking guy is white? He was mocking the right who say that there is actual white genocide. That's the joke. Jesus. PC snowflake bs.

"My motherfucker's so cool sheep count him."
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 3 of 3 <123
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Politics & Religion > Left wing professor quits because of death threats.