Fuck being honest and fuck morales.

"

Boem wrote:

Thats why, for example, i usually judge people on action not words. Words can be used to hide, but you cannot hide the action or decisions you take.

Careful with this.

You can easily donate time and money to causes, for example, or try to show intent, but words, emails, phone calls, in private or even not in private can express the truth. Rich racists and bigots do this all the time. Actions dont always tell the story.

Maya Angelou had it right.

"When people show you who they are, believe them."

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"When people show you who they are, believe them."

So she said exactly what you quoted me saying, i don't get it.

Not sure what your even implying with your statement.

If we push it to the extreme, your telling me a white nationalist "can" support a charity to help non-whites in order to hide his racism.

In which case, i would question his motivations of proclaiming adherence to white nationalism, because he is obviously, very very bad at it.

Peace,

-Boem-

"

Boem wrote:

the square had absolutely no meaning or value.
Peace,

-Boem-

I miss good ol' Elder

Squigs, poop, watchers, and all. :(

"

Boem wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"When people show you who they are, believe them."

So she said exactly what you quoted me saying, i don't get it.

Not sure what your even implying with your statement.

If we push it to the extreme, your telling me a white nationalist "can" support a charity to help non-whites in order to hide his racism.

In which case, i would question his motivations of proclaiming adherence to white nationalism, because he is obviously, very very bad at it.

Peace,

-Boem-

It wasnt hard to follow.

You basically said actions speak louder than words. I pointed out that logic is flawed if actions set a narrative counter to actual beliefs.

A wealthy racist donating money to the NAACP or other minority organizations is exactly why your premise doesnt always work. (Which happens all the time, see Donald Sterling as an example)

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"When people show you who they are, believe them."

So she said exactly what you quoted me saying, i don't get it.

Not sure what your even implying with your statement.

If we push it to the extreme, your telling me a white nationalist "can" support a charity to help non-whites in order to hide his racism.

In which case, i would question his motivations of proclaiming adherence to white nationalism, because he is obviously, very very bad at it.

Peace,

-Boem-

It wasnt hard to follow.

You basically said actions speak louder than words. I pointed out that logic is flawed if actions set a narrative counter to actual beliefs.

A wealthy racist donating money to the NAACP or other minority organizations is exactly why your premise doesnt always work. (Which happens all the time, see Donald Sterling as an example)

Im not versatile enough in english to properly express my opinion on this. But I think too that is not that simple and even if actions can speak louder than words its all on the sobjective point of view of who is judging said actions/words. Good and bad, right or wrong is all subjective and heavly influenced by the society we live and what the majority see as good or bad. Same with beliefs and actions, sometimes ur actions dont correspond to ur believes even though ur intentions do.

Thing is, we dont even truly know ourselves so we cant know others by what they said or do. A racist can hide behind a donation to a minority or maybe he felt guilty and wanted to genuinely help. I dont buy it sure, but again its my point of view.

"

Johny_Snow wrote:

This is what the internet is for. Anonymity turns us into what we really are.

Actually it doesn't. You are every decision you make, including every act of self-control you perform. You aren't not being your 'true self' when you choose not to speak up, or exercise tact - that was still your decision, and reflects what you really are.

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"

Boem wrote:

"

DarthSki44 wrote:

"When people show you who they are, believe them."

So she said exactly what you quoted me saying, i don't get it.

Not sure what your even implying with your statement.

If we push it to the extreme, your telling me a white nationalist "can" support a charity to help non-whites in order to hide his racism.

In which case, i would question his motivations of proclaiming adherence to white nationalism, because he is obviously, very very bad at it.

Peace,

-Boem-

It wasnt hard to follow.

You basically said actions speak louder than words. I pointed out that logic is flawed if actions set a narrative counter to actual beliefs.

A wealthy racist donating money to the NAACP or other minority organizations is exactly why your premise doesnt always work. (Which happens all the time, see Donald Sterling as an example)

As far as i can find out he was convicted of racism for what i consider "locker talk" or a private conversation being secretly taped.

The question is if he acted like a racist, for example did he exclude black people from his team.

People have all kinds of prejudices and i dont really care about that all to much(personally), i find it distastefull but thats where my opinion or condemnation ends.

Considering his wealth and influence, if he actually acted on his "locker talk" the damage would have been considerably larger.

By the same token i can condemn every person voicing the opinion of "white privilege" as racist, since they are demonstrating(quite publicly in some cases) a prejudice based on racial traiths.

And im not even going to go into what kind of "locker talk" people with that ideology have in a private sphere.

I would have to know more about the man before condemning him as a "full blown racist" or just a guy with some prejudices displeased at somebody who happened to be black.

I'm reminded of old soldiers from america talking about japanese people with less then savoury derogatory therms. Were they racists, or did they experience a horrible war with japan where many of their friends perished in horrible conditions.
Or combatands in europe who still talk with slurs about germans etc

I think their words and sentiments are justified, while i would condemn acting uppon them fully and luckely they rarely do.

Compasion and empathy also means you dont transfer the current moral code to a person twice your age and condemn them based on those standards even if they are distastefull since time progressed.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : perhaps its also worth mentioning that i don't consider people to be "static" in time.
If a person performed a racist act, i will condemn it and him, but im not going to pretend that he cannot change.

^

Research and extensive reporting on Donald Sterling is readily available. If you are interested. (He has quite the history before the event that cost him the Clippers)

Also dont fall for the old trope that personal experience bias excuses racism. I was mugged by a black man, so all blacks are bad, or my mom suffered domestic abuse at the hands of a latino, so all latino men are like this, or my Grandfather fought in the Pacific, so all Japanese are scum.

Those are absurd conclusions, and equally absurd to just accept them.

You think fighting in the trenches during world war II is a form of "personal experience bias"?

They were quite literally fighting against "all the germans" and "all the japanese".

I think you lack common sense or empathy if you don't think thats not going to devolve in some lasting effects on how they perceive that group.
Most do not btw, which i consider a kind of miracle but some do and i can understand why that would be the case even if i dissaprove of it personally.

I also don't particularly think they would act on it if confronted with somebody of that group, i see it more like an anger towards the mental image or residu of those events.

Peace,

-Boem-

edit : they are absurd conclusions "to us, now, in this time" would be far more appropriate given our recent history.
Your making a very weird conclusion with a total lack of empathy towards history and the past.

It's extremely simple to condemn the morality of the past with our current model of it, totally ignoring the context of the time and how it formed our current model. One mistake at a time over a large period.

People will, without fail, look back on us as immoral monkeys for mistakes we currently have no awareness we are making.

"

Boem wrote:

You think fighting in the trenches during world war II is a form of "personal experience bias"?

They were quite literally fighting against "all the germans" and "all the japanese".

I think you lack common sense or empathy if you don't think thats not going to devolve in some lasting effects on how they perceive that group.
Most do not btw, which i consider a kind of miracle but some do and i can understand why that would be the case even if i dissaprove of it personally.

I also don't particularly think they would act on it if confronted with somebody of that group, i see it more like an anger towards the mental image or residu of those events.

Peace,

-Boem-

My Grandfather was extremely racist towards Japanese after his Pacific Tour in WWII.

Was his war-time experience horrific? Yes. Does that excuse a lifetime of racism towards an entire subset of people that have nothing to do with the war. Gimme a break. Not a chance.

Understanding and Accepting are very different.

There are countless stories of soldiers on both sides forgiving and forming relationships (including our countries) many in public settings at Pearl Harbor events.