Geeto67's Political Playground

[SpaceGhost]

I think the bigger news in South Africa is the redistribution of farmland owned by white South Africans.

[Geeto67]

It's the N word equivalent. If she said it once or 1000 times, does it make any difference at all?

 

It's not an exact 1:1 equivalent because the N word has very very limited social acceptance in the US based on context and the K word in SA, at least according to the South Africans speaking publicly about it, does not.

 

And yes it does make a difference, because each case is to be evaluated individually. In this case, the increasing aggressiveness and successive use makes it clear that she seeks exactly to do the thing that the law was put in place to prevent. Is she guilty after the first utterance...sure, but it still needs to be proven in court. Each successive use chips away at any defense she might have about making a mistake, or just being understandably upset. I like that the police were compassionate people in this case letting it slide the first couple of times, but there is a limit to their compassion as well and once it ran out and she was out of credibility for her defenses, then arrest away.

 

Free Speech as it is enumerated in the constitution is not an absolute. It has never been an absolute, and this goes back to when it was written into the constitution. This is the misunderstanding that most americans have about their constitution - that is some how granted unchecked absolute freedoms, but it never did and was never intended to. It just set up that any limitations on those items required more scrutiny (in the legal sense of the word) than any other law.

 

As I said before, they arrest people for far less in this country.

 

 

Least regulated hate speech laws or fantastic rights to freedom of speech? Has anyone ever been sentenced to jail/prison in the US for saying the N word? For 3 years? You believe this is how it should be? Ridiculous.

 

yes, people have been sentenced to jail/prison for saying racial slurs. Usually state laws tie those crimes to assault so even if there isn't a federal conviction for hate crime under federal statutes, the state gets them for assault. Usually it isn't in connection with a public protest, but as a couple in GA found out, when they enter someone's private property (during a child's birthday party) with their public protest flying confederate flags, racist slurs, and open carrying weapons - a 20 year prison sentence is the stupid prize they win for that stupid game.

[ShowHBK]

It's the N word equivalent. If she said it once or 1000 times, does it make any difference at all?

 

 

 

Least regulated hate speech laws or fantastic rights to freedom of speech? Has anyone ever been sentenced to jail/prison in the US for saying the N word? For 3 years? You believe this is how it should be? Ridiculous.

 

Sorry, But I wanted to chime in on this with a different perspective. I have been reading the last few posts referencing us losing freedoms and hate speech.

 

We live in a crazy ever evolving world these days. Many of the general population wants to live a "comfortable" life. We have our Phones and computers to keep us entertained with plenty of food on each street corner. Many people don't want to understand another person's point of view or where they come from because we live in the "it's all about me" era.

 

I interact with our countries youth on a day to day basis and many of the children that we are raising as a society see this shit and think "WOW, if they can get away with it, why can't I get away with it as well?". I had a very troubling discussion with a student the other day who believed that our President was the best president ever, when I asked him why he replied with "He is a man who gets things done no mater what. He tweets what he wants, says what he wants, and is a true business man through and though. I wanna be just like him someday." As troubling as that statement was, Many of the other students in the classroom agreed that our President was a great role model because he takes no consequences for his actions and sprays whatever he wants on social media.

 

Connecting the dots here, Many young people use social media for everything from Posts, BLOGS, and live streams they have the power to emulate the people around them. The respect for the people around us takes a back seat in our daily lives and we forget that as a society we should want to help others and understand their struggles rather then to push them aside. Isolation and Alienation is a real issue here...

 

To bring it full circle, and sorry for the long build up... But with references to the "N" word or gun and weapon control. I believe that we need to take a GOOD LONG LOOK at how we raise people and teach them in the growing process. A person with a good upbringing would understand how to properly handle a firearm and understand that the "N" word brings a lot of negative hate and pain to some people. I believe a lot of the problems we face these days are basically at the root of poor parenting and upbringing. In my field you are always told to never blame the parent for a child's poor effort and behavior which has always angered me. 9 times out of 10 there is a clear lack of parental involvement in the child life, which scares me more then you know.

 

All of this together makes for a generation of adults who want a "comfortable" life free from obligations and anything that offends them paired with a youth who has no clear direction in life, a future of crippling debt, and poor role models. THIS, to me, is why we have such a screwed up society (opinionated)

[CRed05]

I think the bigger news in South Africa is the redistribution of farmland owned by white South Africans.

 

It is the bigger news, but it all ties together.

[Geeto67]

I was surprised when I didn't see you bring up Trevor Noah.

 

First of all, in a similar video clip a few months ago, before Winnie Mandela died, he was praising her, just like how a bunch of uneducated fucking fools like Common did when she died last week. She was a horrific murderer, she killed her fellow black people (over 600 a month at some point). Don't ask me, ask Stompie. She was the one that made "necklacing" famous. A lot of things he says is simply untrue, and these are the people he praises. He's a funny comedian, I drove to Pittsburgh to go see him, but politically, he cannot be taken serious.

 

Now it may be true that the word Kaffir hasn't been used like the N word here by the black community, at least not to the same extent. I've heard with my own ears one black man referring to another as a kaffir, similarly to how nigga would be used here.

 

I have no opinion of Winnie Mandela, because I don't know enough about SA history. Almost every figure in history is complex. There is no single historical figure who is purely good, or purely evil. All legacys are tainted.

 

As far as Trevor Noah, he is SA, and you are SA. He is entitled to his opinion as you are to yours. When it comes to both of you expressing them I value both your experiences. In this case, there is a conflict between those viewpoints, and I kinda lean toward his view because you are saying they are exactly the same word, and he is saying there is a slight cultural difference, because our cultures are different - which from my experience tends to be true more often than false.

 

 

Does that make any difference though? The words both are derogatory to black people, and there are black Americans who are against using the N word AT ALL.

 

Context always makes the difference. Otherwise rap music would be hate speech for it's overuse of racial slurs.

 

You can find the footage of her "hate speech" on YouTube. I'd find it for you but YouTube is blocked where I'm at . She set up a table saying that Allah is a gay god, in response to a Vice piece saying that Jesus is gay. The offended Christians didn't make the scene the Muslims did when she did that.

 

I guess I already went there.

 

Did you though? you are complaining that the UK had no right to block a journalist from entering their borders because they are a journalist. I don't agree, the UK has every right to block who comes into their country subject to their existing immigration laws. That doesn't sound like a discussion about whether she actually qualifies as a journalist or whether her actions, in full context and not isolated, qualify as protected speech under the laws of the UK or not.

 

In this particular case she is not advocating for the inclusiveness of LGBT in Islam, she was looking to incite trouble. The context here is that she was being intentionally inflammatory, disingenuous, and fishing for physical confrontation, sounds like activity more consistent with hate speech than protest.

 

I don't know English law well enough, but I suspect like many other countries that visitors to the country do not enjoy the same rights and protections as citizens. And honestly if she wants to push the issue, she can enter the UK illegally and they will give her a day in court (with the according penalties). However, it is completely understandable that they would choose not to spend the tax payer money on the proceedings and just lock her out of the country at the border, because...well...she has no guaranteed right to be in the UK because she is not a citizen.

[CRed05]

Sorry, But I wanted to chime in on this...

 

If I understand correctly, you're saying that this is a bad example to our kids. That this isn't how you should behave?

 

I agree 100%, 200% when it comes to the President. He is a role model to kids and his behavior is shameful. This lady in SA, she's just an average person, a real estate agent who is trying to report break-ins to the police.

 

Now let me tell you what it's like to deal with the police, or any government or state ran in SA. It's a frustrating nightmare! I personally dealt with it a couple years ago when I took my grandfather to a public hospital there. I went OFF on the workers, I don't think I have ever been as livid as I was that moment. My g-pa is deathly ill, I want someone to go out and bring him into this small town hospital (not busy at all), but it's like talking to a wall. 10 people just standing around me, doing nothing, who I guess are supposed to be nurses (male and female), but because of Black Economic Empowerment, I guarantee that half of them weren't qualified to be there. Now I never thought about calling them racial slurs, but I'm sure I let out a couple of F bombs.

 

I'd love to see a black American be in that lady's situation. He might even start calling them N words too

 

Bottom line, these are just words by a frustrated real estate agent.

[ShowHBK]

If I understand correctly, you're saying that this is a bad example to our kids. That this isn't how you should behave?

 

 

Basically I am saying we need to lead by example. I think that adults need to be held more accountable for their actions to lead a more positive impact on our youth. Many of our problems could be solved far more rationally then we currently deal with them.

 

*sigh*

 

So is the world.

[greg1647545532]

Not to be a dick (I'm about to be a dick), but that's like saying, "The problem in the world is that people do bad things. We just need to get people to stop doing bad things and everything will get better."

 

There's literally nobody in the world who doesn't know that good parenting is an important facet of society. Your observation that kids with good parents do better on average than kids with bad parents is not groundbreaking or particularly useful. The rub, as they say, is how society can encourage good parenting, and considering 99% of it goes on in private, it's a tough not to crack. Also considering that we can't even agree on whether or not smacking the shit out of your kids is a good thing or a bad thing, I'm not sure how you even pick a direction.

[Geeto67]

If I understand correctly, you're saying that this is a bad example to our kids. That this isn't how you should behave?

 

I agree 100%, 200% when it comes to the President. He is a role model to kids and his behavior is shameful. This lady in SA, she's just an average person, a real estate agent who is trying to report break-ins to the police.

 

Well at least we agree on something. Although in the context of the digital age it's hard not to make a case that outside of your own home there isn't an expectation to be on your best behavior because you don't know who is filming.

 

Everything is a lesson though - and honestly, with the right guidance he can certainly be a role model of how not to act, and how actions have consequences.

 

Now let me tell you what it's like to deal with the police, or any government or state ran in SA. It's a frustrating nightmare! I personally dealt with it a couple years ago when I took my grandfather to a public hospital there. I went OFF on the workers, I don't think I have ever been as livid as I was that moment. My g-pa is deathly ill, I want someone to go out and bring him into this small town hospital (not busy at all), but it's like talking to a wall. 10 people just standing around me, doing nothing, who I guess are supposed to be nurses (male and female), but because of Black Economic Empowerment, I guarantee that half of them weren't qualified to be there. Now I never thought about calling them racial slurs, but I'm sure I let out a couple of F bombs.

 

Being frustrated is not an excuse for bigotry. That is part of the message the SA government is sending with these laws and making an example of this woman. you can yell and scream and throw a public tantrum all you like as long as it doesn't cross this very clear line in the sand. While this is no bigtory without hate, there can certainly be hate without bigtory. I hate peanut butter, I ain't about to call someone the n word because they serve me a PBandJ.

 

I'd love to see a black American be in that lady's situation. He might even start calling them N words too

 

I'd also love to other scenarios where you completely change the context. I'm just not going to be expecting that the outcome is the same and outraged when it isn't because...as I said before context matters, and that includes cultural context.

 

Bottom line, these are just BIGOTED words by a frustrated real estate agent.

 

Fixed it for you. being dismissive of the racial part of it misses the point entirely.

 

For some reason your statement reminds me of that court scene in the movie Blow where Johnny Depp says:

 

"what did I really do? I crossed an imaginary line with a bunch of plants."

 

And the Judge says:

"Unfortunately for you, the line you crossed was real and the plants you brought with you were illegal, so your bail is twenty thousand dollars."

 

you are trying to trivialize the laws of the country like some great injustice is being done to someone who is clearly a bigot. Why? The SA government is trying to get change through legislation. You don't like the method, change the law, you don't like the people who are in power, vote new people in power, but don't make excuses for bigots and think you have some moral high ground.

[CRed05]

I have no opinion of Winnie Mandela, because I don't know enough about SA history. Almost every figure in history is complex. There is no single historical figure who is purely good, or purely evil. All legacys are tainted.

 

Keyword being "almost". She want to jail AFTER apartheid. Even Nelson had to separate him from her. She's garbage.

 

As far as Trevor Noah, he is SA, and you are SA. He is entitled to his opinion as you are to yours. When it comes to both of you expressing them I value both your experiences. In this case, there is a conflict between those viewpoints, and I kinda lean toward his view because you are saying they are exactly the same word, and he is saying there is a slight cultural difference, because our cultures are different - which from my experience tends to be true more often than false.

 

Trevor and is almost exactly 3 months older than me to the day, and we were both born in Jo'burg, probably within less than 25 miles of each other, but we saw SA through completely different lenses. Now I try to go back and find out the truth, where he seems to go off whatever he was told by those around him and whatever seems to pull liberal heartstrings (which is connected to their wallet).

 

Now Kaffir and ^^^^^^ are are the same in the sense that it's the top level, be-all, end-all of racial slurs towards black people. The literal meaning of the words are different. ^^^^^^ just means black (in latin?), and kaffir is an arabic word for someone who is a non-believer. Culturally in SA, it kind of carries the meaning of incompetence or lack of intelligence. But in my experience, it's a word that my generation, or even my parent's generation never really said. My grandparent would use it, but similarly to how older Americans used the word negro.

 

 

Context always makes the difference. Otherwise rap music would be hate speech for it's overuse of racial slurs.

 

Ah ha! That's the key. But you some black Americans disagree with that. One person that comes to mind (if memory serves me right) is Robin Quivers, and Jay-Z actually mentions it in his interview with Letterman on Netflix.

 

 

 

Did you though? you are complaining that the UK had no right to block a journalist from entering their borders because they are a journalist. I don't agree, the UK has every right to block who comes into their country subject to their existing immigration laws. That doesn't sound like a discussion about whether she actually qualifies as a journalist or whether her actions, in full context and not isolated, qualify as protected speech under the laws of the UK or not.

 

In this particular case she is not advocating for the inclusiveness of LGBT in Islam, she was looking to incite trouble. The context here is that she was being intentionally inflammatory, disingenuous, and fishing for physical confrontation, sounds like activity more consistent with hate speech than protest.

 

I don't know English law well enough, but I suspect like many other countries that visitors to the country do not enjoy the same rights and protections as citizens. And honestly if she wants to push the issue, she can enter the UK illegally and they will give her a day in court (with the according penalties). However, it is completely understandable that they would choose not to spend the tax payer money on the proceedings and just lock her out of the country at the border, because...well...she has no guaranteed right to be in the UK because she is not a citizen.

 

Well remember, Lauren is Canadian, a commonwealth country. In her passport it probably says that the Queen allows her to come into the UK. They still have the right to block anyone, if it's legal. She will be taking them to court and I believe she has a pretty strong case. I guess we shall see.

[Geeto67]

Not to interrupt this lively discussion but I feel like this should be in here somewhere:

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/11/us/politics/paul-ryan-speaker.html

 

Speaker Paul D. Ryan announced Wednesday that he will not seek re-election in November, ending a brief stint atop the House and signaling the peril that the Republican majority faces in the midterm elections.

 

Mr. Ryan said he had considered the effect his retirement would have on other lawmakers seeking re-election, but said his decision to retire was not based on signs of a growing Democratic wave.

 

“If we do our job, as we are, we are going to be fine as a majority,” he said.

 

Back in his Southeastern Wisconsin district, Mr. Ryan was facing a spirited challenge from two Democrats, Randy Bryce, better known by his Twitter handle, “Iron Stache,” and a schoolteacher, Cathy Myers. On his right flank, an avowed anti-Semite, Paul Nehlen, was making another run at the Republican nomination — and earning a national following among white supremacists.

 

oh and I highlighted that last part for the people who keep saying we shouldn't be so concerned about white supremacists.

[CRed05]

For some reason your statement reminds me of that court scene in the movie Blow where Johnny Depp says:

 

"what did I really do? I crossed an imaginary line with a bunch of plants."

 

And the Judge says:

"Unfortunately for you, the line you crossed was real and the plants you brought with you were illegal, so your bail is twenty thousand dollars."

 

you are trying to trivialize the laws of the country like some great injustice is being done to someone who is clearly a bigot. Why? The SA government is trying to get change through legislation. You don't like the method, change the law, you don't like the people who are in power, vote new people in power, but don't make excuses for bigots and think you have some moral high ground.

 

Exactly. The problem is white people are the minority, far more so than what blacks are in the US. The difference is, in the US we try to lift up the minority, but in SA the minority gets shit on. Laws favor the majority and that is wrong and there is nothing voting can change. Black people will get voted into power simply because they are black like the majority.

 

Where is the outrage over all the white murders? The government changed the laws to not include race when it comes to crimes being committed so that they can hide the facts. You complain about the dickey amendment, this is that to the extreme.

 

Whatever, white people will continue to flee the country and contribute to, how the Australian Home Affairs minister said, "civilized countries", if they don't get slaughtered, and South Africa will end up just like in Zim, and then the'll want to flee to Europe. Trevor Noah actually makes a joke about how white South Africans have been saying "that's it, I'm moving to Australia", now black people are saying the same thing.

[ShowHBK]

Not to be a dick (I'm about to be a dick), but that's like saying, "The problem in the world is that people do bad things. We just need to get people to stop doing bad things and everything will get better."

 

There's literally nobody in the world who doesn't know that good parenting is an important facet of society. Your observation that kids with good parents do better on average than kids with bad parents is not groundbreaking or particularly useful. The rub, as they say, is how society can encourage good parenting, and considering 99% of it goes on in private, it's a tough not to crack. Also considering that we can't even agree on whether or not smacking the shit out of your kids is a good thing or a bad thing, I'm not sure how you even pick a direction.

 

Eh, it is very useful to understand that good parenting is important in this discussion. The cycle repeats itself over and over if something does not change. Bad up bringing leads to bad youth, bad youth leads to poor adult skills, poor adult skills puts you on the 5:00 news where some guy draws a poor sketch of your face and your pixelated face is shown on some 1970's style security footage because no one has good cameras in 2018... *fart*

 

To be fair, I'm not currently a parent and I could not tell you if smacking your child is good or bad... But I can say that I was spanked, smacked, and disciplined when I was little and looking back on it... I deserved what I got for back talking to my parents and trying to do things my way. Kids in schools know they can't be touched so they beg for a teacher to hit them, call them a B*tch to their face, and receive no consequences. It really is sad when you witness it happen.

 

I was in an Inner city school downtown during my Student Teaching at a middle school (6-8 Grade only) and I was told of gang activity in the school before hand, that kids "thought" they were in the bloods or something like that. Two kids got in a fight in my classroom about 5 feet from me and I knew I was not allowed to intervene. I had to stand there while the public safety officer was fetched by another student who walked as slow as she could down the hallway. I can't leave the room myself because I can't leave the other students unattended. So here I am, Watching two 7th grade students beat the shit out of each other, bust their heads open over a stupid argument, and nearly have to go to the hospital. All the while two of their friends are taunting me (the adult) saying "Come on you little bitch ass teacher, stop them! You like what you see, don't you?". a whole 5 minutes passed before the safety officer came, who could give two flying fucks about the kids or their safety, and by that time they had already tired themselves out. He pulls them outside, cleans off the blood, and told them that was wrong and they need to "behave". WTF!?!

 

It has reached a point far beyond the obvious "bad parenting breeds bad children". Believe me when I say, many public schools in Columbus are like this. We need to take a good HARD look at our education system and the types of individuals it breeds. Honestly... I feel like this is VERY relevant... But to each their own. If you disagree, no worries

[Geeto67]

Keyword being "almost". She want to jail AFTER apartheid. Even Nelson had to separate him from her. She's garbage.

 

Sure.

 

 

Trevor and is almost exactly 3 months older than me to the day, and we were both born in Jo'burg, probably within less than 25 miles of each other, but we saw SA through completely different lenses. Now I try to go back and find out the truth, where he seems to go off whatever he was told by those around him and whatever seems to pull liberal heartstrings (which is connected to their wallet).

 

I was with you up until the highlighted part. Seriously man, you even recognize that he and you viewed your life in that country through different lenses and then immediately turn around and negate his view point because it is different than your own without a hint of irony. That's a lot of assumption that your comments can't support, nor should they. Seeing things from different lenses is just going to lead to different viewpoints.

 

Let's not forget that he is himself a public figure and an entertainer (not a journalist by the way), so his stories are structured to fit the humor of his audience, but then again his audience is his audience because of his viewpoint and life experience so its not like he is omitting much or being deceptive.

 

Now Kaffir and ^^^^^^ are are the same in the sense that it's the top level, be-all, end-all of racial slurs towards black people. The literal meaning of the words are different. ^^^^^^ just means black (in latin?), and kaffir is an arabic word for someone who is a non-believer. Culturally in SA, it kind of carries the meaning of incompetence or lack of intelligence. But in my experience, it's a word that my generation, or even my parent's generation never really said. My grandparent would use it, but similarly to how older Americans used the word negro.

 

yes. culturally they are different.

 

 

Ah ha! That's the key. But you some black Americans disagree with that. One person that comes to mind (if memory serves me right) is Robin Quivers, and Jay-Z actually mentions it in his interview with Letterman on Netflix.

 

No shortage of opinions in this world and from all viewpoints. I can't speak for Robin Quivers, I can only speak for me. I can be understanding of Jay-Z's opinion because he has to live with it and I don't but I don't automatically adopt his position because we have similar views on other things. Speak for you, let the others speak for themselves. Bringing them up in a conversation about what you and I believe is just static without a point. Pointing out that the commonality of an extremist position that exists on both sides of the aisle isn't news, and it certainly isn't advancing your point.

 

 

 

 

Well remember, Lauren is Canadian, a commonwealth country. In her passport it probably says that the Queen allows her to come into the UK. They still have the right to block anyone, if it's legal. She will be taking them to court and I believe she has a pretty strong case. I guess we shall see.

 

Preferential right to entry subject to the immigration laws of that country. Remember, we are also talking about a country that historically deported its citizens rather than lock them up so there is probably some precedent for blocking commonwealth citizens as well.

 

They claim her entry was blocked because of "not conducive to the public good", which is a pretty broad catch all charge. I think her case is pretty shitty because they don't have to prove the underlying charge as to whether her material was hate speech or not, they just have to look at the result and whether she was seeking a similar result this time around.

[greg1647545532]

Of course it's relevant, it's just barely a starting point. Do you know how many bad parents I see at my kids' school? Hardly any, because I live in fucking Upper Arlington where there's a whole lot of two parent families, because the divorce rate is low, because people have money and money troubles are a major factor in divorce. Kids want for nothing here, never worry about crime, and generally get the intervention they need as soon as possible, because our schools can afford it. So let's just cure poverty and parenting will get better, easy as pie. That's an undoubtedly true fact, right? Curing poverty would greatly improve parenting.

 

I guess my issue is that blaming the parents is often used as a way to dodge responsibility. Maybe we should end the war on drugs and soften the war on crime so more of these inner city kids might actually grow up with fathers, but that would require a personal sacrifice or for people to actually lift a finger to help those outside of their immediate community. It's much easier to blame bad parenting and call it a day.

[Geeto67]

Exactly. The problem is white people are the minority, far more so than what blacks are in the US. The difference is, in the US we try to lift up the minority, but in SA the minority gets shit on. Laws favor the majority and that is wrong and there is nothing voting can change. Black people will get voted into power simply because they are black like the majority.

 

Where is the outrage over all the white murders? The government changed the laws to not include race when it comes to crimes being committed so that they can hide the facts. You complain about the dickey amendment, this is that to the extreme.

 

Whatever, white people will continue to flee the country and contribute to, how the Australian Home Affairs minister said, "civilized countries", if they don't get slaughtered, and South Africa will end up just like in Zim, and then the'll want to flee to Europe. Trevor Noah actually makes a joke about how white South Africans have been saying "that's it, I'm moving to Australia", now black people are saying the same thing.

 

This is about Money and power. Technically White people are the minority in the US if you group together all the other racial minorities and counted them as one entity. Who there are more of and who there are less of plays a role but it is overrated in the larger context compared to how much it gets talked about. It's an indicator for injustice, not a solution.

 

These struggles always come down to who controls the wealth of a nation and who controls the government of that nation. In the US the laws were written specifically along a racial line and to keep perpetuating the wealth and power of that race. A lot of those laws still haven't been repealed, and other systems have been built out of them and that's how we end up with institutionalized racism. SA is going through the same thing - only more recent because Apartheid ended in the 90's and not the 1960's. If you want to talk about majority, you could easily say white people held the majority in SA until the end of Apartheid because black people weren't conferred real and full citizenship in the country. This isn't about numbers of people, it's about wealth, about who the laws were written in favor of, about prevailing attitudes that support bigotry, and about how to effect change in that environment.

[CRed05]

I was with you up until the highlighted part. Seriously man, you even recognize that he and you viewed your life in that country through different lenses and then immediately turn around and negate his view point because it is different than your own without a hint of irony. That's a lot of assumption that your comments can't support, nor should they. Seeing things from different lenses is just going to lead to different viewpoints.

 

He uses "alternative facts" to backup his viewpoints. I hate to even bring the H word up, but you would probably also immediately throw someone's opinion in the trash and wipe their viewpoint with your ass if they went on about how Hitler was an amazing political activist that did a lot of good things for his people.

 

Let's not forget that he is himself a public figure and an entertainer (not a journalist by the way), so his stories are structured to fit the humor of his audience, but then again his audience is his audience because of his viewpoint and life experience so its not like he is omitting much or being deceptive.

 

You brought him up. Like I said in an earlier post, I like his comedy, but he cannot be taken seriously politically because he doesn't restate the facts, but his personal agenda.

 

The clip you were referring to starts out with him going something along the lines of "a racist person...spoiler alert, she's white". Sounds a little racist to me. Could you imagine a black guy going to jail for robbery and the white tv show host going "spoiler alert, he's black"?

[CRed05]

SA is going through the same thing - only more recent because Apartheid ended in the 90's and not the 1960's. If you want to talk about majority, you could easily say white people held the majority in SA until the end of Apartheid because black people weren't conferred real and full citizenship in the country. This isn't about numbers of people, it's about wealth, about who the laws were written in favor of, about prevailing attitudes that support bigotry, and about how to effect change in that environment.

 

That's right, they weren't considered citizens of SA. Instead, they were given their own lands to create their own country (10 of them) to which they were citizens of. See Bantustan

 

Not good enough, they wanted what the Europeans brought and created. You say the UK has the right to let whoever into their country, so did SA, but they gave them passes so that they can come and work in SA. Sounds crazy right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_workers_in_Israel

[CRed05]

[Geeto67]

He uses "alternative facts" to backup his viewpoints. I hate to even bring the H word up, but you would probably also immediately throw someone's opinion in the trash and wipe their viewpoint with your ass if they went on about how Hitler was an amazing political activist that did a lot of good things for his people.

 

Again context is important and I don't know enough about context to defend him on this front.

 

 

You brought him up. Like I said in an earlier post, I like his comedy, but he cannot be taken seriously politically because he doesn't restate the facts, but his personal agenda.

 

He's a comedian with a comedy show that talks about news. I don't think anybody in this conversation is putting journalism or seriously political commentary over comedy in this context. In that clip however, the section I was referencing related to his personal experience and was used to give context to his comedy. I can't knock his personal experience because it belongs to him, and I kinda have to take his word for it because he is speaking on a cultural experience from first hand knowledge. And it jives with what I know first hand from other cultures I have been immersed in. I'm not saying he's instantly credible on the whole based on that one comment - he's a comedian doing a show, he's pretty much not credible based on format - but in this one instance where he was relating a personal experience I happen to believe him.

 

The clip you were referring to starts out with him going something along the lines of "a racist person...spoiler alert, she's white". Sounds a little racist to me. Could you imagine a black guy going to jail for robbery and the white tv show host going "spoiler alert, he's black"?

 

I think you are struggling with the context here. It would be in-appropriate in any serious news source regardless as to who is saying it, which is kind of why it works in a comedy context. It's funny because it is so glaringly in-appropriate. John Stewart made the same kind of comments all the time and he's white, and it got the same laugh. Outside the context of a comedy show, yeah it's not cool.

 

 

That's right, they weren't considered citizens of SA. Instead, they were given their own lands to create their own country (10 of them) to which they were citizens of. See Bantustan

 

Not good enough, they wanted what the Europeans brought and created. You say the UK has the right to let whoever into their country, so did SA, but they gave them passes so that they can come and work in SA. Sounds crazy right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_workers_in_Israel

 

Your explanation is segregation? really? separate but equal isn't equal. They didn't want a separate nation (with no indigenous people to colonize) after their culture and land were exploited by colonialism. The Europeans didn't bring and create anything without taking from the people they colonized and enslaved, and then just giving them a nation isn't going to make up for it when the European (re: white) settlers still get to keep all the land and the wealth.

 

I'm guessing you aren't ok with this, right? I mean, you do understand that when they asked for citizenship and opportunity in their own country the solution wasn't to just give them other land and say "go be citizens over there", do you?

[CRed05]

I think you are struggling with the context here.

 

I don't think so. I'm all for total comedic freedom, just like I am for total freedom of speech. I'm also for equality, what applies to one, needs to apply to the other.

 

What ShowHBK was saying, about how we need to be careful what we show our children...does this not apply in this case? Young people are watching the daily show, taking it as truth, when he's up there spreading misinformation, because he knows that maybe 1% of his audience even knows who Winnie is, and maybe 5% even know what Apartheid was, so he will go uncontested and another generation's head is filled with bullshit. Just like how Mark Zuckerberg is being drilled by Congress (and rightfully so) for allowing misinformation to be spread with personal information that he sold. Zuckerberg's mistake was it was right-wing bullshit, but Noah's left wing bullshit is ok.

[CRed05]

Your explanation is segregation? really? separate but equal isn't equal. They didn't want a separate nation (with no indigenous people to colonize) after their culture and land were exploited by colonialism. The Europeans didn't bring and create anything without taking from the people they colonized and enslaved, and then just giving them a nation isn't going to make up for it when the European (re: white) settlers still get to keep all the land and the wealth.

 

I'm guessing you aren't ok with this, right? I mean, you do understand that when they asked for citizenship and opportunity in their own country the solution wasn't to just give them other land and say "go be citizens over there", do you?

 

Fucking please! You're regurgitating bullshit that you heard somewhere without knowing dick. The Bantu's (Zulu, Xhosa...basically all blacks in South Africa) moved down into Southern Africa at the same time as the Europeans (Boers trying to get the fuck out of English rule) were moving from Cape Town up north. They first met at the Fish River, and through wars and deals, that's how South African land was distributed. White Africans have been in Southern Africa just as long, and some parts longer than black Africans. The true natives to Southern Africa are the Khoi and the San (Khoisan).

 

The history is way more complex than that. The old "colonials came in and stole land idea" is nothing but horseshit. The Zulus almost completely wiped out all other competing tribes, making Southern African even less populated.

 

If you read about how the Zulus slaughtered the Boers and their black workers who came peacefully to discuss a land treaty, you might also start to understand things differently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet_Retief_Delegation_massacre

[Geeto67]

I don't think so. I'm all for total comedic freedom, just like I am for total freedom of speech. I'm also for equality, what applies to one, needs to apply to the other.

 

I think you have to define "total" for me, because as I understand it "total" does not exist and is not an attainable goal. There is always going to be some legislative adjustment that puts the priority of equality over the priority of free speech when they intersect.

 

What ShowHBK was saying, about how we need to be careful what we show our children...does this not apply in this case? Young people are watching the daily show, taking it as truth, when he's up there spreading misinformation, because he knows that maybe 1% of his audience even knows who Winnie is, and maybe 5% even know what Apartheid was, so he will go uncontested and another generation's head is filled with bullshit. Just like how Mark Zuckerberg is being drilled by Congress (and rightfully so) for allowing misinformation to be spread with personal information that he sold. Zuckerberg's mistake was it was right-wing bullshit, but Noah's left wing bullshit is ok.

 

I don't think the answer is censorship. It's the "taking it as truth" part I have a problem with - not the young kids watching it part. The solution is education, spend more money on it so children understand the context, have an interest, and ask questions. Elect officials who support education spending.

 

I don't think you can make the comparison between Facebook and the Daily show here. Zuckerberg is being drilled by congress because he released private data to a company that posed a national security risk. While I am all for being over inclusive as to what constitutes as a national security risk, it's a far stretch to call the "the Daily Show" based on the subject matter of jokes.

 

But again...you call Trevor Noah's stuff bullshit, but most times he speaks from his cultural experience and not from history. It's bullshit to you because you had a different view, not because it is patently untrue. He is willing to place the positive things she did for the movement in SA ahead of the negatives and you are more willing to put the negatives forward over the positives. We want the whole picture and diverse viewpoints and to be honest when it comes to historical figures like Winnie Mandela we get that - plenty of books written from both sides of it and plenty of people who condemn and praise in their own mediums. If you are so concerned about kids getting the whole picture, support advancing those sources rather than seeking to remove the other ones.

[Geeto67]

Fucking please! You're regurgitating bullshit that you heard somewhere without knowing dick. The Bantu's (Zulu, Xhosa...basically all blacks in South Africa) moved down into Southern Africa at the same time as the Europeans (Boers trying to get the fuck out of English rule) were moving from Cape Town up north. They first met at the Fish River, and through wars and deals, that's how South African land was distributed. White Africans have been in Southern Africa just as long, and some parts longer than black Africans. The true natives to Southern Africa are the Khoi and the San (Khoisan).

 

The history is way more complex than that. The old "colonials came in and stole land idea" is nothing but horseshit. The Zulus almost completely wiped out all other competing tribes, making Southern African even less populated.

 

If you read about how the Zulus slaughtered the Boers and their black workers who came peacefully to discuss a land treaty, you might also start to understand things differently. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piet_Retief_Delegation_massacre

 

On a far enough timeline back we are all colonizers and pilgrims. And History is always going to be complex. Still, at some point it stopped being about Afrikaners and English and became Black and White. If you look at the US, we went through the same things and honestly, most black people aren't indigenous to this country either.

 

but ok, the indigenous people thing is murky, so let's just focus that the European Colonizers made slaves out of the Bantu's (primarily the xhosa), and then when slavery was abolished they instituted a system of indentured servitude. Then came the legislation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natives_Land_Act,_1913) that limited the amount of land black people could hold in SA (similar as to how the US shoved the First Nation people on to reservations), they took away the rights to vote (the General Pass Regulations Act), The instituted residential segregation, etc...I mean all the same stuff the US was doing to the black population here in America in the 1800's except we are talking about the 1900's (pre 1948).

 

History is very complex in this area, but honestly you are making a case for permissible racism at the end of the day. Sure it was bloddier and way more recent than what happened in the US, but there are some parallels that draw to the Civil war (Boer wars), Jim Crow (Apartheid), and the Civil rights movement (the Anti-Apartheid movement). History has borne out again and again the subjugation and segregation of people along racial lines doesn't end well and isn't generally the right thing to do.

[CRed05]

I think you have to define "total" for me, because as I understand it "total" does not exist and is not an attainable goal. There is always going to be some legislative adjustment that puts the priority of equality over the priority of free speech when they intersect.

 

Total but limited to slander is how I feel about it. You can call me whatever the hell you want and tell all the dead baby jokes you want without getting arrested. That's freedom, and that's how a healthy society should function.

 

 

I don't think the answer is censorship. It's the "taking it as truth" part I have a problem with - not the young kids watching it part. The solution is education, spend more money on it so children understand the context, have an interest, and ask questions. Elect officials who support education spending.

 

Throwing someone in jail because what they said is censorship. With censorship, education about it cannot happen. How does the whole abstinence vs sexual education work to prevent teen pregnancies?

 

I don't think you can make the comparison between Facebook and the Daily show here. Zuckerberg is being drilled by congress because he released private data to a company that posed a national security risk. While I am all for being over inclusive as to what constitutes as a national security risk, it's a far stretch to call the "the Daily Show" based on the subject matter of jokes.

 

It's propaganda. The same thing Cambridge Analytica used to swing the election. Doesn't matter how small and insignificant The Daily Show's influence is...what's that saying about the mustard seed? It might be tiny but grows into a big ass tree or someshit.

 

But again...you call Trevor Noah's stuff bullshit, but most times he speaks from his cultural experience and not from history. It's bullshit to you because you had a different view, not because it is patently untrue. He is willing to place the positive things she did for the movement in SA ahead of the negatives and you are more willing to put the negatives forward over the positives. We want the whole picture and diverse viewpoints and to be honest when it comes to historical figures like Winnie Mandela we get that - plenty of books written from both sides of it and plenty of people who condemn and praise in their own mediums. If you are so concerned about kids getting the whole picture, support advancing those sources rather than seeking to remove the other ones.

 

Yeah nah, I'd like to read these history books about her on any positive influence she had on the nation's history, besides a warm place for Madiba to put is "spear". When I say history books, I mean factual history, not someone feelings or ideologies.