You can do sensationalism and flatten NYT reader’s PC sensibilities at the same time.
'Woman raped! How horrible! And all those people did nothing while she screamed for help! We really live in a society! Imagine being there while he ripped her clothes off! We have failed collectively! Here's a movie of the event so you can vicariously live it, just as it was! But of course we need to interrogate what we as a people have done that it came to this horrible, yet fascinating experience, that requires solutions only the left can provide !'
While your racist uncle’s yellow journalism would go for the trope of the beastly black man towering over the virginal white woman etc.
I think I showed that the specific paper at the time is unlikely to have been trying to cover up a black man committing murder
It seems to me you tried to use that article as evidence of racist reporting from a racist time, but it backfired.
You said:
An investigative article by The New York Times claimed a connection between the Fruit Stand Riot and militant bands of anti-white youth gangs "trained to maim and kill" and "roam the streets of Harlem attacking white people"
as if this was an obviously ridiculous theory, that could only be a racist figment of NYT journos imagination. But something similar to this actually happened.
To go on another tangent, you lifted this whole sentence from this wiki article. This sentence is sourced by wiki by the NYT article I provided – in the article however, those quotes ("trained to maim and kill" and "roam the streets of Harlem attacking white people" ) do not appear. They were possibly paraphrased from “trained in karate and judo fighting techniques” and “connection with two other murders of whites in the Harlem area” by a wiki editor to make the NYT article’s reporting about anti-white groups seem more ridiculous and racist.
I am saying the newspaper in the 60's was very different than today and given other headline and stories they wrote it's unlikely they decided to hide a black mans involvement
I disagree that they were not PC at the time. Look at what the SF mayor said about the zebra murders:
"DEATH ANGELS", a kind of reverse Ku Klux Klan, is based on the muddled aberrations clearly outside the mainstream of Islamic religions. In my opinion, it represents as much a potential threat to Blacks as to Whites. (Obvious Lie, that he tries to soften with “in my opinion”. As opposed to "in reality". And I suppose the KKK represents as much a potential threat to whites as to blacks) [...]
Special care must be taken by public officials and the police to prevent hate groups from converting a criminal investigation into a racial struggle. The inescapable fact of the matter is that most mass murderers of recent years - Manson, the Santa Cruz murderers, Corona, and Zodiac have been White (but they did not target black people). Murder knows no color (these murderers very much did know color) and must be fought without aggravating sensitive racial tensions.
This is the article you reference, in case anyone’s interested.
They are not the same thing. Kitty Genovese was ordinary black crime, out of lust and greed. The NYT article murders by contrast, like the zebra murders (in that same decade), were targeted killing of whites for ideological reasons by black muslims.
It’s actually eerie, because the NYT article presents a theory which can come across as a far-fetched conspiracy, but it was proven right by Zebra. How many of those murderous black muslim groups were there? If there were more, they probably disappeared into the statistic of ordinary black crime, which was then further transmogrified by the media into white society’s problems of ‘apathy’, ‘racism’, and ‘poverty ie insufficient welfare for blacks’ .
And so, by leftist alchemy, or scott's paranoid rant's multiple layers of lies, the murder of whites for racist reasons became white racism.
I don’t know if @Pasha is just being coy or if I’m more of a culture warrior than he is, but it seems to me that the real story is that the politically correct media, as usual, dishonestly presented a black man’s evil deed as a collective failure (in this case, apathy). This innovative lie immediately made it into textbooks.
You want to attack freedom, fine, there’s plenty of illiberal thinkers and arguments you can draw on, including, especially, here. But have the honesty to call your enemy freedom, not slavery.
It’s routine for the somewhat secular elites in those countries fight low-level civil wars against islamists, or at least for the batshit islamists to terrorize the "moderate" islamists. The house of islam has always been the house of war.
Iran and Russia have pretensions to negotiate with the West as if they were equals, but they don’t have the cards. Even as a lifelong western stan, I’m still amazed at how easily the highly reputed armies of anti-western powers crumble. The quick and absolute dismantling of Saddam’s "top 5" army was one thing, against a superpower-backed coalition. But this is just a few western planes and drones taking out a big chunk of a regional power’s air defense, missile launches, leadership and nuclear sites in one go. It's another complete wipeout for a woke, decadent army versus the 'high asabiyah' hard men.
People’s go-to strategy to increase motivation is to make their life suck. Nofap is effective at that, pure loss with no upside.
Not my thing. Wouldn’t wish it on my worse enemy. Nofap makes you horny, obviously, but what isn’t said enough is that it makes you lonely, tense, angry, too.
Dacia Logan. It’s a spacious station wagon I can comfortably sleep in. I like the idea of potentially driving away without organizing anything. Even though I could have had an old diesel for free, I splurged on a new one for 8700 euros 5 years ago. No climate control, no little electronic motors everywhere to roll down windows for you and spare you the the anguish of having to move a whole arm. 63 HP. Wish it had less, always a pleasure to hear the strenuous effort this minuscule 3 cylinder-engine brings to push this huge car along. Apparently only 10% of logans sold had this hardcore ‘access’ option, everybody else went with decadence. So it’s a collectible, value can only go up. Although I did install a radio and speakers, to my shame (that lawnmower engine provides enough melody).
She also demands a husband who is okay with her non-monogamous lifestyle. Most men can easily ignore past whoring. It’s current whoring they can’t abide. Makes for awkward breakfasts.
But usually then they're already married with kids, or they're monogamous, or they're very sexually submissive, or they're poor in a way I’m not financially prepared to support in a world where I want children.
She made millions from OF/prostitution, she has 122,000 substack readers, how many golden spoons could her children possibly need?
I wish women would stop framing their greed/hypergamy as just safeguarding the interests of children. It's about as subtle as the man who claims to like big tits because his future children’s nutrition is always on his mind.
Or recently they mistakenly were causing inflation by increasing their interest rate which was supposed to fight inflation, until they finally realized that and cut the interest rate which cut the inflation proportionally?
Do you think lowering your target interest rate lowers inflation? Like erdogan?
Or does it mean you endorse milei's policies, the austerity poster boy?
People disagree with him because of partisan considerations, and they downvote him because they disagree with him. They shouldn't be doing that, they're already in the wrong. But using those illegitimate downvotes to argue he's wrong is even worse, because it encourages them. Now they will think that by clicking harder they can win the argument.
That seems to be the driving fear, although we've never seen it happen in a productive democracy.
Also, why is weimar germany or argentina quote-unquote unproductive?
In the real world, regular people seem to hate inflation so much that we almost always err on the other side: too much unemployment from taxes being too high.
I thought the 70s stagflation had put to rest the silly notion that high inflation equals low unemployment.
What will inevitably happen is that some lefty will use this bullshit to do what they always do and spend with abandon until collapse. It will not be like greece, who was bailed out by the nordic german taxpayer (while being decried as evil austerites), more like venezuela. Oh, how surprised they will all be, that the infinite money machine did not, in fact, work.
If women don’t talk about it, and they usually don’t (you being an exception), then I don’t think you can pin the blame on men. Plenty of doctors are women, and besides, you can’t expect much from doctors. They have fixed categories they put people in, so they don’t have to think. Tell them a pregnant woman vomits often, nobody panics because it’s all part of the plan. But say that some undefined adult vomits often, well then everyone loses their minds.
As to why pro-choice feminists aren’t publicizing it, my guesses are:
-
they prefer to highlight damage they can attribute to men, rather than nature.
-
they don’t want to be limited to physical damage, they want the right to abort for any reason, including mere convenience.
I think it’s because the only ones who know, have nothing to gain and a lot to lose by publicizing that information. First they don’t want to admit to themselves that they may have made a costly mistake, when it’s too late anyway. And even if they somehow avoid the psychological sunk cost trap, they realize the husband and children would only be sad to hear it. So the next time the subject comes up, they just mumble something about not wanting to have to buy a bigger car.
Generally, I think there’s way less people who say they regret having children, than there really should be. You’re already at disneyworld, you drove 8 hours for this, paid 400 dollars, might as well pretend everything is great.
Nobody said anything about the extinction of the species
I was exaggerating for comic effect. I just think you’re very very wrong on men’s willingness to get kicked in the balls for their children.
I didn't say it was stupid. It's no different than doing judo or boxing.
I don't think that being punched in the face is uniquely valuable as a teaching lesson, though.
I mean, look at your position ITT. Because you lack this formative experience of pain, you find the pain of labour to be unbearable, so you think it cannot be expected of anyone, thereby.... dooming humanity to extinction. No big deal, but in case you think saving humanity is valuable, then I recommend a punch in the face.
no you sound weird, haha. Is your background hyper-liberal urbanite or something? Mine is middle class liberal, small town in western europe.
There's this quip that modern college kids' main problem is that they have never been hit in the face. Although I grant that it does sound pretty stupid to punch each other for seemingly no good reason.
why would one knowingly subject oneself to pain?
Testing your limits, overcoming obstacles, preparing yourself for future fights and challenges, I guess. And in the moment there's the thrill in knowing the stakes are higher than usual. You can play a game for a pack of chewing gum, but it feels more important to play for the right to not get punched.
You never experienced any, partly self-inflicted, pain at all? As juveniles me and my friends used to put on a headband so we couldn't see, and just punch each other in the dark. Just a way to inflict and endure pain, fight for fun, without malice. You never did anything like that?
Have you ever seen jackass? I know men who would endure multiple kicks in the balls for bragging rights and a beer.
Interesting perspective.
Everybody attaches their hobby horse to this problem: “it’s modernity, it’s lack of religion, urbanization, female education, not-enough state support, the wrong kind of state support, the housing crisis, devalued motherhood, it’s feminism, it’s not enough feminism...”. Men accuse omen and women accuse men, rightists accuse leftists and vice versa and so on and so forth.
You: “Women just dislike the pain and physical damage”. Everyone: “D’oh!”.
In my defense, I thought the problem was pretty much relegated to the past outside of some minor exceptions, but yeah if I look around irl the physical and psychological issues associated with pregnancy are still very common.
I guess we increase the painkillers/meds and supercharge the research into artificial wombs. Drip in, and baby out, asap.
It seems pretty clear to me that Lana's personal problems have nothing to do with Trump, or the culture war in general.
I don't think politics has much to do with it.
You’re a mainstream liberal. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but you tend to either be blind to wokeness because it’s like water to fish for you, or ignore it because it’s politically inconvenient to have such illiberal and unpopular allies.
Shunning used to be something cults did, but wokeness mainstreamed it as part of its attacks on free speech.
Yeah, in practice they just go in and talk and talk about themselves without pushback, creating a 'history of me', the end result being that they 'learn' that the original source of all their problems is that their parents/siblings have screwed them over in childhood and there’s nothing they can do. It’s incredible, what garden-variety therapy accomplishes. They blow up their small, real problems to gigantic proportions, convince themselves they cannot be resolved, and also destroy their relationships with their closest family members.
- Prev
- Next
Maybe. It’s fair to say there is some inferential distance between us. Anyway, my contention was not that the NYT will outright refuse to report on every black crime or report a black perp as a white perp, but that they are desperate for any mitigating circumstances and alternative narratives they can spin concerning black crime. To the point of concocting a story about 38 people doing nothing when a rape-murder was in progress.
More options
Context Copy link