Louisiana Lawmaker Forced to Clarify There Was No ‘Good’ in Slavery

[Paradoxical]

Who is referring to what? You haven't posted any proof of anyone saying anything. So far you're the only one who's claimed blacks like free stuff and Republicans are smart because they work for their money.

Are you saying the Dems claim voter ID requirements are not tough on black people?

 

[Paradoxical]

No more stupid than yours.

Why aren't there many Blacks in the GOP?

Spoiler

Because Blacks aren't stupid.

Your side keeps telling them they are stupid and white peoples are the problem is my guess. Your racism works.

 

[Master Debator]

Are you saying the Dems claim voter ID requirements are not tough on black people?

It's very simple. All I'm asking you is if you can provide one single piece of evidence of a Democratic rep. saying they think black people are too dumb to get ID like you claimed.

Blacks are Dems for the free stuff. It is Democrats who keep giving that to them because they think blacks are dumb. So dumb they can’t get ID.

Remember later this was a snare you set and tripped over yourself trying to be smarter than you actually are.

 

[Ouroboros]

I see little difference in accusations of promoting witchcraft as I do in accusations of someone promoting slavery. What's the distinction you're making there?

Well I'm not sure anyone on the left is suggesting we ban Mississippi Burning but I do remember some religious folks getting upset over Harry Potter. I like to keep it simple and say if you're trying to cancel some activity someone else is doing that's cancel culture. I also think the term is silly. Some things should be canceled and everyone should have a right to denounce whatever, whether I agree with it or not. The only dangerous form of cancel culture is when the government starts locking people up for speech they don't like.

Nope, your definition is too simple and overlooks recent changes in society.

Your first sentence makes no sense, since it's not responsive to my post.

 

[Ouroboros]

Go back to the post where I said it was a lie. If you do not know what you write, maybe you should undertake less intellectually strenuous activities.

And I will continue to point out that you couldn't even identify the nature of the lie, which means that you are the one with his lyin' pants on fire.

 

[Master Debator]

Nope, your definition is too simple and overlooks recent changes in society.

Your first sentence makes no sense, since it's not responsive to my post.

My definition is simple in order to prevent my determination of what is and isn't cancel culture being affected by my personal biases as yours are.

What's the difference between Christians trying to cancel Harry Potter because they think it promotes witchcraft and liberals trying to cancel Tucker Carlson because they think he promotes racism?

 

[jaeger19]

Be a strong cowboy and let me disappear into the far horizon.

::: clip, clop, clip, clop :::

More like in "Boot Hill".

Here Lies:
Alizia Tyler
"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance.. Baffle them with BS".

 

[Paradoxical]

It's very simple. All I'm asking you is if you can provide one single piece of evidence of a Democratic rep. saying they think black people are too dumb to get ID like you claimed.

Remember later this was a snare you set and tripped over yourself trying to be smarter than you actually are.

Are they talking about white people not being able to get ID and being disadvantaged?

 

[Master Debator]

Are they talking about white people not being able to get ID and being disadvantaged?

Maybe if you posted something they actually said you could discern fact from your fiction.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

What's the difference between Christians trying to cancel Harry Potter because they think it promotes witchcraft and liberals trying to cancel Tucker Carlson because they think he promotes racism?

This would be an interesting one to explore. I have some ideas. I think I could shed light on how different people, with different world-views, conceive of these things. That would provide a starting point. Then, we could evaluate those worldviews.

 

[Master Debator]

This would be an interesting one to explore. I have some ideas. I think I could shed light on how different people, with different world-views, conceive of these things. That would provide a starting point. Then, we could evaluate those worldviews.

My question really wasn't about why people have different views but what the fundamental difference between the two is and why that poster thinks one is cancel culture but the other isn't. I'm sure he can answer for himself.

 

[prometeus]

And I will continue to point out that you couldn't even identify the nature of the lie, which means that you are the one with his lyin' pants on fire.

You are lying again.
It was a simple assertion that you made and I called it a lie, which it was. If you are unable to grasp such simple principles you should not undertake intellectual pursuits. Maybe something like cow tipping is your speed.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

what the fundamental difference between the two is

But there is the issue and question.

 

[Paradoxical]

Maybe if you posted something they actually said you could discern fact from your fiction.

Minorities amirite? they think minor can’t get an ID? Is that a fair statement? Did they mean pygmies?

 

[Master Debator]

Minorities amirite? they think minor can’t get an ID? Is that a fair statement? Did they mean pygmies?

Still your owns words and no one elses. You understand how that works right? The things you say are your words.

 

[Master Debator]

But there is the issue and question.

Let me ask you a question. You don't feel embarrassed that you claimed to have scientific evidence and instead just came here and wrote another essay full of supposition and then tried to pretend as if you presented proof? Did you write in invisible ink? We can clearly see you offered none.

 

[Paradoxical]

Still your owns words and no one elses. You understand how that works right? The things you say are your words.

We all know it wasn’t pygmies or white people do what does that leave?

 

[Master Debator]

We all know it wasn’t pygmies or white people do what does that leave?

We all know it wasn't pygmies or white people who what? Write better sentences.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Let me ask you a question.

I am in a particularly good mod today so, yes, I will entertain your question. I do demand however that it be a smart question. As this is after all *the smart kid's thread*.

You don't feel embarrassed that you claimed to have scientific evidence and instead just came here and wrote another essay full of supposition and then tried to pretend as if you presented proof? Did you write in invisible ink? We can clearly see you offered none.

My dear child, my somewhat poor, disadvantaged mentally suffering, yet appreciated child, please listen to the following:

Sociology as a topic is one that involves interpretation of cultural events, so too does *social psychology*, and these are not the sciences you seek. If they are they are soft sciences. And yet those who engage in this interpretive work have very important roles to play. And those who are very good at what they do, if they are good at it, rely on skills of perception that are not in a scientific category.

Who do you rely on to make interpretive statements to help you get a grasp on *what is going on*? Someone, anyone? Who?

In order for there to be *interpretation* there has to be someone who *looks* and *muses* and *thinks*. You will admit, and I will certainly agree, that what is interpreted depends totally on the one who does the interpretation. Pretty basic stuff really but important to get it out there.

I did not claim to have *scientific evidence* and it is your folly to imagine that in such subjective territory that even 'science' exists. I suggested the discipline of Media Studies as being interesting, potentially valid for its *interpretive* analysis, and that film and novel play key roles in culture, certainly American culture.

And I did say, and I still believe, that the film 12 Years A Slave is an important *text* that can be read. True it is that this is subjective territory.

Now, I use the term 'hysteria' and 'hysterical' to categorize, in a very general sense, a portion of what is going on around us. This is, obviously, a term of some exaggeration. But I suggest it is useful if it is carefully applied.

As an example of this hysteria I submit this. I suggest -- many many people became aware -- that the reaction to Donald Trump's win sent many people careening toward a strange psychological edge. And there Trump Derangement Syndrome was, it seems to all appearances, ignominiously birthed.

2. an uncontrollable emotional outburst, as from fear or grief, often characterized by irrationality, laughter, weeping,etc.

I suggest that these *feelings*, these hysterical feelings (I say with some exaggeration and yet not veering out of the realm of the real), got worse as time went on. When the pandemic hit -- understandably perhaps -- things careened into la-la-land. Flipped city. The looney bin got racing wheels . . .

collective hysteria​

the spontaneous outbreak of atypical thoughts, feelings, or actions in a group or social aggregate. Manifestations may include psychogenic illness, collective hallucinations, and bizarre actions. Instances of epidemic manias and panics, such as choreomania in the Middle Ages, tulipmania in 17th-century Holland, and radio listeners’ reactions to the Orson Welles broadcast based on H. G. Wells’s War of the Worlds in 1938, have been attributed to collective hysteria. Also called group hysteria; epidemic hysteria; mass hysteria.

These are not *scientific observations*. They are observations that tens of millions of people share. We are perhaps not entirely certain how to characterize them. And yet we notice that they exist.

I would not say that such 'hysteria' is solely the possession, or affliction, of Left-Wing nut jobs (ooops, that is a bit subjective! may it be stricken from the record) but Good Lord it sure seems to have a certain purchase on them.

 

[Alizia Tyler]

Write better sentences

From far far out West . . .

::: clip, clop, clip, clop :::

 

[Paradoxical]

We all know it wasn't pygmies or white people who what? Write better sentences.

That the Democrats think are too stupid to get an ID.

PS. You are very bad at this debate game. Every one here knows it is black people that the elitists think are too dumb to get an ID and are somehow Disenfranchised if they can’t vote 24/7 or find their polling place.

 

[Ouroboros]

My definition is simple in order to prevent my determination of what is and isn't cancel culture being affected by my personal biases as yours are.

What's the difference between Christians trying to cancel Harry Potter because they think it promotes witchcraft and liberals trying to cancel Tucker Carlson because they think he promotes racism?

Possibly you dropped my comparison between the Harry Potter reaction and the Mississippi Burning reaction because you simply don’t remember (or choose not to remember) the latter. In any case, in the same spirit of disinterest, I ignore your comparison and repeat that what both reactions have in common is not whether the protesters could keep the respective franchises from making money— the fact that both had already made money was what drew the attacks from Right and Left respectively. Both protesters sought to control future narratives with their rhetoric.

Oscar So White did not promote a narrative as such; her facile argument was that Hollywood needed more POC representation, period. Possibly she assumed that more diversity in casting movies would eventuate in more movies being made about POC concerns. But that wasn’t her argument; it was just “too many white people,” and Hollywood liberals fell over themselves to virtue signal so they wouldn’t get on any future blacklists. There’s no intellectual rhetoric there; just a hectoring demand which characterizes the “hysteria” that I believe AT first referenced.

That’s why your oversimple definition of cancel culture won’t fly; it’s not taking into account the difference between, say, your average liberal film reviewer and a cancel-happy demagogue.

 

[Ouroboros]

You are lying again.
It was a simple assertion that you made and I called it a lie, which it was. If you are unable to grasp such simple principles you should not undertake intellectual pursuits. Maybe something like cow tipping is your speed.

Consider yourself tipped, then, albeit by your own driveling posts.

 

[Ouroboros]

Still your owns words and no one elses. You understand how that works right? The things you say are your words.

Given your record here you’re in no position to complain about someone else drawing conclusions. I mean, you can do it, but not without increasing evidence of hypocrisy.

 

[Master Debator]

That the Democrats think are too stupid to get an ID.

Nope. Again, still just you.

PS. You are very bad at this debate game. Every one here knows it is black people that the elitists think are too dumb to get an ID and are somehow Disenfranchised if they can’t vote 24/7 or find their polling place.

We might know that if you were at all capable of posting evidence of them doing so but you haven't so we don't. That's how debate works buddy.