this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2024
1417 points (98.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

5793 readers
2750 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -5 points 6 days ago (3 children)

Would you say skin color is relevant in our daily lives just because some people think it is?

I also said nothing about excluding philosophy discussions. Please do not put words in my mouth.

[–] Mesa@programming.dev 8 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Would you say skin color is relevant in our daily lives just because some people think it is?

Yes. That was my point. Check your privilege. You don't have to be a flagrant racist to subconsciously make decisions and judgements based on race (and gender).

I'm not going to explain how inherent and human biases work. If you care to start making a difference, then it's up to you to understand that you're not perfect and learn how to start changing how you see and affect the world beyond your idealist rose-colored glasses.

I also said nothing about excluding philosophy discussions. Please do not put words in my mouth.

I don't have to.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world -2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I'm just going to ignore you implying I'm a racist and focus on the second part.

Saying "outside of a philosophy discussion" doesn't mean "we can't talk about philosophy," it means it is generally not relevant in terms of the way it is necessary to live our lives.

People make unnecessary things important to them all the time- skin color, religion, ethnicity, etc.

But if you just ignore those things as irrelevant, the only thing that changes is that some people are treated less like shit. Which is my point.

On the other hand, treating people like shit seems like something you're interested in, at least on a one-to-one level.

[–] Mesa@programming.dev 4 points 6 days ago (2 children)

You think you're perfect. You are not. No one is. I am not saying you are a racist. You are a human with human biases.

What you've just told me is that you have no interest in discovering and changing yourself to help make a difference. Not to be on any sort of moral high-ground, but I have a really tough time with people that have no desire to learn and improve.

What I'm going to ignore is your assertion that philosophy is not relevant to daily life. That is the stupidest claim in this thread, and it is at the very core of your (subconscious) bigotry. If you can't see that, then there is no next step.

[–] HeurtisticAlgorithm9@feddit.uk 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

I mean it kinda makes sense, someone who doesn't think that the process of thought is useful not thinking they could make any kind of error.

[–] Mesa@programming.dev 2 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

Yep. It's hard to point that out when my reasoning gets sucked into a circular black hole.

I'm done responding. People that can be helped can read this thread in the future and maybe realize something about themselves.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 3 points 6 days ago (1 children)

You think you’re perfect.

You know nothing about me or how far from the truth this is. You are miles closer to perfection than I will ever be.

What you’ve just told me is that you have no interest in discovering and changing yourself to help make a difference.

This is a lie.

I have a really tough time with people that have no desire to learn and improve.

I have a really tough time with liars who make assumptions about me and put words in my mouth, so I guess we are both having a really tough time.

What I’m going to ignore is your assertion that philosophy is not relevant to daily life.

And more lies.

But thank you for proving my point about you wanting to treat people like shit so well.

Also, I like how you say both "I am not saying you are a racist" and "your (subconscious) bigotry" as if those aren't total contradictions.

[–] macmacfire@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

And more lies.

If that's not what you were saying, then what were you saying?

Also, I like how you say both “I am not saying you are a racist” and “your (subconscious) bigotry” as if those aren’t total contradictions.

They are not. Subconscious bigotry or bias doesn't necessarily make one a bigot, as contradictory as that may sound. Whether they like to admit or not, everyone reacts differently to people who are noticeably different from them. There is no way to entirely avoid this, only to realize when it happens and not act according to it. Or in other words: "I don't care if you're racist! EVERYONE'S racist!"

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 5 days ago

I was saying that it is not relevant outside of a philosophical discussion. I'm not sure why this is so hard to understand. I never said philosophical discussions had no relevance.

Also, while you're asking questions, maybe you should ask the person I'm talking to who I am supposedly bigoted against.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 4 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (1 children)

It is somewhat relevant, though. For example, it's relevant for designing stuff so that everyone regardless of their phenotypical makeup is equally able to function in society. For example, if it didn't matter at all if a lot of people have no penises, we could have urinals everywhere, or conversely for the opposite, we would have no need for urologists. Or if it really didn't matter what colour someone's skin is, we wouldn't have to have differentiated medical care for people of different phenotypes, or we wouldn't need to think about calibrating sensors for different skin colours for detectors so that every device functions for everyone.

But I get your point, a lot of the reasons people think biological differences matter are all made up and mostly bullshit.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 0 points 6 days ago (1 children)

Okay, those are all fair points. I do think you could probably describe those things in terms that do not involve gender or race, but it would probably be with some difficulty.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 3 points 6 days ago

IMO, the whole topic is nothing but a political tool, and most people wouldn't care either way.

So there is this one playbook that the Russian-aligned right likes to play, which is: take an issue nobody but a very small minority of people care about, but it has to be something they can't just let go. For example, the rights of trans people in the US, but in Hungary it has been the existence of one particular university at one point.

Then start bombarding your base with misinformation about how this thing is bad for society and has to be opposed, and introduce legislation. Finally, watch the small minority protest continuously and very fiercely for the issue that is existential for them, and lay back while this issue occupies public discourse for months and years, precluding other serious issues being discussed as you can comfortably be in a majority position while doing whatever you want without public attention.

The insidiousness is that the issue is really existential for the people affected, so you can't tell them to let it go, and a lot of very loud people would demonize you for letting it go as well since it is existential for them.

So you have three options:

  • Take up the fight in the issue and let it be the deciding issue for elections, driving turnout for your opponent - see gay and trans rights
  • Try to take the opposite side and leave the minority group to fend for themselves, and lose them as voters - see funding the Gaza genocide
  • Be a stereotypical politician and change the topic each time it comes up, which will blunt the first effect, but you will still get some of the second - this is unfortunately usually the good choice

But to actually win, what you have to do is:

  • Use the tactic to your advantage and make your own attacks, keeping the topics on your talking points

Just off the top off my head, here are a few ideas the Dems could have done the same to the Reps, and I'm not a genius:

  • Declare the KKK to be a terrorist organization
  • Make it illegal to fly the Confederate flag on public buildings
  • Institute a federal ban on child marriages

I know each of these would rile up some small segment of the Republican base, but that's the point! You want to make them fiercely defend points that not all of them care about, as not all of them will turn out for all of these issues. You want the Mormons out in arms on the streets protesting the child marriage ban so you can be "tough on crime" and "crack down on the rioting Mormon paedophiles".