Privilege and Responsibility

[TheLeviathan]

 

Hmm ... are you responsible for your privilege? Not in that you have it. But yes, in how you view it and how you are aware of it, and how you take it granted or use it (not saying you do, just saying that generally) and how you pass that ideology down to your children ... maybe? (And no, I'm not trying to tell you how to parent, here. Just offering my thoughts.) But I think you said this by saying you are responsible for how you react; I think all of what I said is part of how you react to it. Are you responsible for ignorance? That's a more difficult one. How does one know of their own ignorance unless they are made aware? I guess if you are going to approach life without thinking beyond your own boundaries, maybe then to some extent you are responsible for your own ignorance. Maybe by having these discussions, as openly and as honestly as we each can, we are acknowledging to some degree our own ignorance and are trying to over come it? Am I now acting too ... self-righteous in my thoughts? As I said before ... I question myself ... a lot. I do try and think about what I say and do, particularly if I get a response to something I've said or done that is ... less than favorable. I will initially react with ... well ... denial, maybe, push back, certainly ... but then I do go and think about what caused that particular exchange ... why it hurt or offended me, why it made me angry, why I reacted as I did. But am I responsible for others ignorance beyond myself? Maybe we should be, to some extent, by taking on 'teachable moments' rather than leaving the more difficult task to others?

 

These questions and thoughts are very similar to my own.  Self reflection is a tricky thing, even trickier when the subject matter has the potential to be offensive or when it deals with politics or other emotionally charged areas of our life.  Or when it threatens to shatter our self-image.

 

Even trickier still when you're trying to help someone else untangle their own thoughts on such matters.  You're asking someone to de-construct their own sense of self.  It's no small thing.  

[KirbyDome89]

 

I'm not letting you get away with this.

A MAGA hat has been a decisive symbol from the moment it was manufactured. That hat has political symbolism that cannot be disputed. It stood for Trump, which in turn, stood for racists, womanizers, xenophobics, and facists. That extreme demographic is who was supporting Trump, and continues to do so to this day.

Comparing women or girls whom decide to wear short skirts with MAGA hat wearers is truly a demonstrative act. One is a choice to support an unpopular agenda, the other is clothes. How dare you equate the acts of scum rapists to those with a left wing ideology.

You're wrong. I'm disgusted by it.

Hop down from the soapbox and calm yourself. It isn't a comparison of the left to rapists.

 

Your response perfectly highlights what I was talking about. The hats are certainly demonstrative, but not necessarily in support of all the pejoratives you listed above. For some reason though, we can just shrug and claim "they knew what they were getting themselves into when they put them on," as if that somehow justifies the response. That's no different than the way in which those attacking marginalized groups rationalize their actions. Seriously...

 

Try aiming that disgust at those for whom nuance doesn't exist. 

[PseudoSABR]

I don't understand why my "I hate women" shirt didn't go over well at the feminist convention.  They should have given me the benefit of the doubt and taken the time to get to know me.

[TheLeviathan]

Well, that analogy isn't apt at all and its purpose is to do what?  Justify a completely unacceptable initial reaction?

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

I truly believe there is a destructive symbolism with the MAGA logo. I don't think it is the Confederate flag. I don't think everyone that wears it is evil. I do think some that wear it are extreme toxic individuals that find a happy place in MAGA.

 

I missed this, it's a good post.  I think that's a fair observation and one i share. 

 

Now that we know more about what happened, do you think the rationale being floated here by some posters (and it's not unique, it's out on the left right now), that the initial reaction (death threats among a host of other pretty unacceptable responses) is still justified simply because of the hats?  That the hats themselves warrant the initial response, regardless of whether their actions were mostly banal or not?

[ashbury]

It's been a while since I've visited DC. But I have to think that it's completely common to see out-of-towners with apparel that expresses a point of view.

 

How is a MAGA hat different from wearing pink cat ears, for example? Or a hippie-freak tie-dye shirt with a big peace sign emblazoned? Or a two-years out-of-date "I'm With Her" t-shirt with the red -> arrow, or some older hopey-changey Obama memorabilia?

 

I imagine those folks get accosted in DC on an irregular basis too. It's not right to demonize people, but as a practical matter you can't pretend to be surprised if someone turns what's essentially a passive-aggressive message into something less passive and makes an issue of it.

 

In one's own native environment, such "flair" (I'm referencing Office Space with that) is almost invisible. Outside that environment, it's like picking a fight without realizing it.

 

MAGA hats kind of enrage me, but I expect pink ears enrage a segment of folks too. It's not right to jump to conclusions based on stuff like that, but we do.

 

It's not unique to the left. Google any likely combination of terms and you'll find rightists doing the same. Check out this random hit I found today: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tr9zlUIo3DI . (Slightly NSFW language.) It didn't happen to go viral - probably others do, just not viral in the circles I frequent.

 

The biggest question for me is why this Covington instance went so very viral. It did so before the major news media picked up on it, so I don't chalk it up to Librul Media Bias. Though, once it became viral, it was news in its own right. But the fact that it was so ubiquitous among my Facebook connections suggests to me that there was some skillful orchestration going on.

 

I didn't engage much on the subject of the Covington kids when it first came out, mostly because so massively many of my Facebook friends were doing so that my opinion would have been redundant. I fell for the simple narrative. What I see now is kids getting experience that normally they learn from ("go to DC and you'll run into all kinds of people some of whom carry an agenda, so pull in your horns on your own agenda just a bit, and just walk away if that's not enough"), which now they don't receive the benefit of because they got demonized nationwide and had to get defensive.

[Badsmerf]

Hop down from the soapbox and calm yourself. It isn't a comparison of the left to rapists.

 

Your response perfectly highlights what I was talking about. The hats are certainly demonstrative, but not necessarily in support of all the pejoratives you listed above. For some reason though, we can just shrug and claim "they knew what they were getting themselves into when they put them on," as if that somehow justifies the response. That's no different than the way in which those attacking marginalized groups rationalize their actions. Seriously...

 

Try aiming that disgust at those for whom nuance doesn't exist.

 

Would you feel different if they were wearing a confederate flag hat? I think some have the same reaction to both, and some consider them both anti American. Obviously, MAGA doesn't hold the same weight as a confederate flag, and not all those that wear it are malicious. I don't see MAGA as a healthy conservative message, and my guess is most republicans don't either, they just don't have another choice right now.

 

However, the problem lies in the group that is malicious. Whether the individual is our is not, choosing to wear it IS making a choice to align yourself with decisiveness. It would be like showing up at a swingers party and being upset when someone assumed you would sleep with them.

[PseudoSABR]

 

 do you think the rationale being floated here by some posters (and it's not unique, it's out on the left right now), that the initial reaction (death threats among a host of other pretty unacceptable responses) is still justified simply because of the hats?  That the hats themselves warrant the initial response, regardless of whether their actions were mostly banal or not?

Who the heck ever said anything close to that death threats were justified by the hats?  You are the best strawman-knocker-downer I know.

 

I did say that if you wear MAGA hats to a public demonstration, it's fair to expect some criticism.  I don't think any poster here has gone beyond that.  The kids didn't deserve death threats, but they deserved scrutiny if not criticism.  

[TheLeviathan]

 

Who the heck ever said anything close to that death threats were justified by the hats?  You are the best strawman-knocker-downer I know.

 

I did say that if you wear MAGA hats to a public demonstration, it's fair to expect some criticism.  I don't think any poster here has gone beyond that.  The kids didn't deserve death threats, but they dserved scrutiny if not criticism.  

 

You have spent several pages minimizing the initial reaction and that included death treats.  It was vitriolic doxxing.  Enough so that the school closed down.  And that's scraping the surface and putting it mildly.  

 

That has been the central criticism from us moderates (really, we're mostly liberal as today's spectrum dictates) who are trying to rise above tribalism.  The scope and nastiness of the initial reaction is the problem and you, unfortunately, have spent several posts hedging and minimizing that.   (I can cite posts, but start with 94)

 

Essentially, you keep moving the goal posts.  It's nice to hear you are now critical of the scope of the initial reaction, you might have saved some confusion in the conversation had you been less interested in defending that reaction.

[PseudoSABR]

 

You have spent several pages minimizing the initial reaction and that included death treats.  It was vitriolic doxxing.  Enough so that the school closed down.  And that's scraping the surface and putting it mildly.  

No.  I have not.  I uttered not a single word condoning doxxing or death threats, and framed the initial reaction as an "overreaction" repeatedly.  (That you would take my posts as such seems awfully disingenuous--see my first post in the conversation at #26).    Where there was disagreement is why that overeaction happened (sloppy liberals v. the cultural climate created by MAGA troopers) or who was to blame. The whole point of the spiderman meme was that both tribes are pointing at each other's confirmation bias (I guess the self-criticism went over your head, given your (irony) response).   

 

It's one thing to disagree.  But it's just sloppy, if not malicious, to misconstrue, other poster's arguments; especially about something like death threats.  That kind hyperbole isn't helpful; and typically moralizing is rarely helpful. 

[TheLeviathan]

However, I hardly blame liberals for the environment that allows for them to prejudge a smug-MAGA wearing teenager for standing face-to-face with an elder Native American  Maybe there's a bunch of people in twitter-verse who should be eating crow

 

 

Apparently they were just "prejudging"  Oooo....and it's only "maybe" that there are people out there that went too far.

 

1.The early narrative lacked context (from which people overreacted/made assumptions), but it wasn't entirely wrong.   2.  This isn't the case of people getting inflamed by a total non-truth, like Pizzagate or something, but rather that people lacked context and overreated to what was still problematic behavior. Indeed, in my mind, the reaction to the overreation is totally overblown.  3. .They should have given me the benefit of the doubt and taken the time to get to know me.

 

 

(I've had to combine quotes due to Brock's tyranny) 

 

1. At any point you were welcome to understand the context of the discussion and not make statements like this.  It's clearly minimizing and shifting the goal posts.

 

2. If there was an achievement for "Whataboutism" or "Hedging" you unlocked the ever loving hell out of that sucker.

 

3. This mighty fine analogy?  Well, at least all we denied them was the benefit of the doubt.  Could've gotten crazy you know.  Woofta....good thing that didn't happen!

 

I haven't misconstrued anything.  You know full well what the criticism was about and you posted stuff like this.  You tried to shift the goalposts of the discussion and now you're looking for pity for it.  You want to see how to say what you think you said?  Read Brock's posts.  You liked them plenty, but maybe you should go back and read the difference between his disagreements and yours.  They are significant. 

 

Mea culpa if you need to, but stop the pity party.  Any confusions are as a result of your attempt to hedge any criticisms of the left.  I don't see why you are so committed to that because, as I've said, my criticisms apply TO ME also.  I'm criticizing MY reaction as much as many others.  I screwed up and I admit my fault.  I'm hoping others will be willing to see that because I don't like see the entire political spectrum abandon truth like the right has.

 

Maybe you already have.  I implore you to come back from the brink if so.  I'll say it again: I screwed up reacting to this and so did a lot of people.  I own that.  And i still think MAGA hats are for turds.  (Especially male turds protesting a woman's right to make choices over her body) The two aren't mutually exclusive.

[PseudoSABR]

You're right! I was totally condoning death threats!   

 

(And of course I agree that we should acknowledge our own biases.  But I don't see much virtue in how you go about moralizing.) 

[biggentleben]

I cannot see positive coming from continuing this conversation.

[KirbyDome89]

 

Would you feel different if they were wearing a confederate flag hat? I think some have the same reaction to both, and some consider them both anti American. Obviously, MAGA doesn't hold the same weight as a confederate flag, and not all those that wear it are malicious. I don't see MAGA as a healthy conservative message, and my guess is most republicans don't either, they just don't have another choice right now.

However, the problem lies in the group that is malicious. Whether the individual is our is not, choosing to wear it IS making a choice to align yourself with decisiveness. It would be like showing up at a swingers party and being upset when someone assumed you would sleep with them.

In regards to the reaction, no, I wouldn't feel any differently. My quarrel has always been with s***storm that followed the twitter post. The MAGA hat just happens to be what's propping up the rationalization of that reaction in this instance. I don't believe that espousing a political viewpoint entitles those who disagree to threaten physical harm or death.

 

In your analogy I absolutely agree. The issue is that everybody agrees on the rules of a swingers party. That isn't the case with what's considered "malicious." If the argument is that wearing the hat invites political discourse then I'm right there with you. 

[Doomtints]

It's interesting that the "let them eat cake" president convinced those who he would cause the most harm to vote for him. Is it because he was a celebrity they saw on television? Did his myth overcome his mouth?

 

It's amazing to me that a country built on revolution has decided to stop thinking.

 

The least privileged people in our country willingly gave up any chance of getting ahead so that someone could enrich himself and his family. It's dumbfounding.

 

Sure, there was a lot of propaganda but for propaganda to work it has to be tapping into something already there.

[Doomtints]

 

In regards to the reaction, no, I wouldn't feel any differently. My quarrel has always been with s***storm that followed the twitter post. The MAGA hat just happens to be what's propping up the rationalization of that reaction in this instance. I don't believe that espousing a political viewpoint entitles those who disagree to threaten physical harm or death.

 

In your analogy I absolutely agree. The issue is that everybody agrees on the rules of a swingers party. That isn't the case with what's considered "malicious." If the argument is that wearing the hat invites political discourse then I'm right there with you. 

 

For some context:

 

- There are stands all around the white house now selling MAGA hats. The kids were tourists who stopped to buy some hats I am sure, they probably don't go around wearing those hats all the time. This doesn't mean they are not MAGAts, of course, I'm simply saying the hats don't matter.

 

- CNN put out pieces blaming this on a Twitter user, but it was actually CNN who blew the story up. That same twitter user has been active for years. I know who it is, and no it's not a fake person ... it's just someone who is addicted to Twitter and is very passionately anti-Trump (as are many Twitter users -- in some ways the "resistance" only exists on Twitter which effectively means the resistance barely exists at all).

 

- The context of there being an earlier confrontation not caught on the original video is not particularly relevant to what we see in the video. You see a man trying to defuse something and an ignorant teenager regardless of any earlier confrontation between other people. Being "ignorant" and being a teenager go together, mind you.

[TheLeviathan]

 

It's interesting that the "let them eat cake" president convinced those who he would cause the most harm to vote for him. Is it because he was a celebrity they saw on television? Did his myth overcome his mouth?

 

It's amazing to me that a country built on revolution has decided to stop thinking.

 

The least privileged people in our country willingly gave up any chance of getting ahead so that someone could enrich himself and his family. It's dumbfounding.

 

Sure, there was a lot of propaganda but for propaganda to work it has to be tapping into something already there.

 

These are good questions, but the sense of the word "privilege" you're using here doesn't seem to fit.  At least I don't think many of the least privileged people in our country voted for Trump?  Unless you are referring to women, but it seems to me you are referring to lower income whites....am I wrong on that?

[biggentleben]

 

The MAGA hat just happens to be what's propping up the rationalization of that reaction in this instance. I don't believe that espousing a political viewpoint entitles those who disagree to threaten physical harm or death.

 

In this thread, multiple have referred to the MAGA hat as a trigger to those who are of different races and/or nationalities due to abuse received by those wearing those hats. Assuming that any issue with those hats IN THIS CASE has to do with political leanings is disingenuous. 

[KirbyDome89]

 

- The context of there being an earlier confrontation not caught on the original video is not particularly relevant to what we see in the video. You see a man trying to defuse something and an ignorant teenager regardless of any earlier confrontation between other people. Being "ignorant" and being a teenager go together, mind you.

It's absolutely relevant, the entire altercation is reframed by the earlier parts that were purposely edited out. 

[KirbyDome89]

 

In this thread, multiple have referred to the MAGA hat as a trigger to those who are of different races and/or nationalities due to abuse received by those wearing those hats. Assuming that any issue with those hats IN THIS CASE has to do with political leanings is disingenuous. 

How is that in any way a defense of the reaction? 

 

Rather than address the point I made you've decided to sling mud....

[Craig Arko]

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/2019/01/21/opinion-impossible-teach-inclusiveness-exclusive-system/2636068002/

[PseudoSABR]

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opinion/2019/01/21/opinion-impossible-teach-inclusiveness-exclusive-system/2636068002/

 

You cannot teach inclusiveness in a system that is designed to be exclusive. The best way to teach inclusiveness and justice is by going through life side by side with people who look, talk, think and believe differently than you do.

This. 

 

I do think that the Left can be guilty of framing their issues with exclusivity in terms like racism/sexism/other-kinds-of-bigotry.   But the issue of exclusivity is a real one.  When a person wants for their own kids what they will not grant to society's children at large, fissures are planted in society that create class divide. 

[biggentleben]

 

How is that in any way a defense of the reaction? 

 

Rather than address the point I made you've decided to sling mud....

 

Yikes...

 

That was not a defense of the initial response. It was a defense of why people attending the rally and even the Black Israelites would be immediately triggered and on guard by that hat.

 

No mud was slung, but if that's what you need to say to feel better, go ahead. This whole issue is really exhausting my faith in many people.

[Doomtints]

 

It's absolutely relevant, the entire altercation is reframed by the earlier parts that were purposely edited out. 

 

Its not relevant because one of the parties in question had nothing to do with what happened earlier.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Its not relevant because one of the parties in question had nothing to do with what happened earlier.

 

How so?

[KirbyDome89]

 

Yikes...

 

That was not a defense of the initial response. It was a defense of why people attending the rally and even the Black Israelites would be immediately triggered and on guard by that hat.

 

No mud was slung, but if that's what you need to say to feel better, go ahead. This whole issue is really exhausting my faith in many people.

So we're defending the Black Israelites now....yikes is right....

 

It's clear you're most interested in holding up a particular side here. "If that's what makes you feel better, go ahead," but spare the rest of us the moral grandstanding....  

 

[PseudoSABR]

 

So we're defending the Black Israelites now....yikes is right....

 

It's clear you're most interested in holding up a particular side here. "If that's what makes you feel better, go ahead," but spare the rest of us the moral grandstanding....  

He didn't defend the Black Israelites, he said they could have been triggered by the MAGA hats.  

 

Context helps us understand why people act like they do, but it doesn't give them a pass for how they actually act.  

[TheLeviathan]

The video shows they were yelling obscenities at the Native American group prior to the MAGA kids even arriving.  

 

They also had a standing label of hate group and a reputation for this behavior long before this incident.  They don't appear to need "triggers".

[LaBombo]

 

He didn't defend the Black Israelites, he said they could have been triggered by the MAGA hats.  

 

Context helps us understand why people act like they do, but it doesn't give them a pass for how they actually act.  

 

Although it's clearly not 'giving them a pass", even just the use of the word "triggered" seems to transfer blame for the onset of the initial confrontation, as if B.I. were just a bunch of cool guys hanging out and minding their own business until their hand was forced by boys wearing hats.

 

In point of fact, the idea that the B.I.s needed a "trigger" at all is a non-starter . The B.I.s apparently brought every ounce of their hatred and bigotry with them to the Memorial, since they had already 'shared' it with random passersby that day well before the boys even arrived.

 

So in this case, the MAGA hats don't even explain the "why" of the B.I. group. The hats just explain the "who" with respect to their choice of targets.

 

Given the not only offensive but sometimes violent nature of the B.I. group's bigoted, homophobic hate speech, it seems to me like the "why" of their behavior is better left to a forensic psychologist.

 

And it's unfortunate that Mr. Phillips, by his own account, had no problem with the B.I.s showering the boys with verbal bile, and only chose to intervene when the boys finally started to rebuke them. He dismissed the B.I. torrent of hate speech as them "saying what they had to say".

[PseudoSABR]

 

Although it's clearly not 'giving them a pass", even just the use of the word "triggered" seems to transfer blame for the onset of the initial confrontation, as if B.I. were just a bunch of cool guys hanging out and minding their own business until their hand was forced by boys wearing hats.

 

In point of fact, the idea that the B.I.s needed a "trigger" at all is a non-starter . The B.I.s apparently brought every ounce of their hatred and bigotry with them to the Memorial, since they had already 'shared' it with random passersby that day well before the boys even arrived.

 

So in this case, the MAGA hats don't even explain the "why" of the B.I. group. The hats just explain the "who" with respect to their choice of targets.

 

Given the not only offensive but sometimes violent nature of the B.I. group's bigoted, homophobic hate speech, it seems to me like the "why" of their behavior is better left to a forensic psychologist.

 

And it's unfortunate that Mr. Phillips, by his own account, had no problem with the B.I.s showering the boys with verbal bile, and only chose to intervene when the boys finally started to rebuke them. He dismissed the B.I. torrent of hate speech as them "saying what they had to say".

I should let Ben speak for himself.  But it was pretty clear he was trying to convey that MAGA hats trigger all kinds of groups generally.  I don't think he meant that as a defense of Black Isarealists but rather that the choice to wear a MAGA hat is an incendiary one.

 

And, look, the Black Isarealites totally suck, and I think everyone agree on that (or nearly everyone reasonable).  But they are not a manifestation of a larger cultural movement--which is why the MAGA kids become the focus of the story.  I can see how people believe that's unfair to the individual kids.  However bad the Black Isarealites are, wearing a MAGA hat isn't an innocent/peace-making choice.