Jump to content
Rubin Farr

How does the World view America these days?

Recommended Posts

regarding Dayton Ohio

Quote

Yamiche Alcindor:
Immigrants in Dayton, though, fear the president's rhetoric puts them in danger.
Audria Ali Maki:
I worry about somebody who is not very stable taking those comments to heart.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EBIssf9U4AAtX_b?format=jpg&name=small

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, ignatius said:

regarding Dayton Ohio

recent news story about Ohio voters, white flight, Dayton's diversity compared to its surroundings.

reasonable people look at this and they see how heinous the situation is. the more i apply myself to the question of what is going on, the more i think that the information fog humanity recently woke up in bears a lot of responsibility. we need to focus on catalyzing the adaptation necessitated by the information era: people need to have adequate information handling practices.

Edited by very honest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, very honest said:

reasonable people look at this and they see how heinous the situation is. the more i apply myself to the question of what is going on, the more i think that the information fog humanity recently woke up in bears a lot of responsibility. we need to focus on catalyzing the adaptation necessitated by the information era: people need to have adequate information handling practices.

there's always been voters like this woman they interviewed. as long as i can remember this type of story has been on the news only the focus changes. the issues now seem more dangerous than all the standard right vs left shit that's usually talked about. but these same voters are essentially in the same mental place they've always been in. they have no sense of history, no sense of time.. no idea about what is normal except in their own little me bubble. 

and yeah.. totally.. a lot of people do not understand how things have changed and keep changing in the 24 hour news cycle and the information era. 

plus, america is fundamentally broken in several ways and lot's of people just don't realize that because they're blinded by some type of pride or nationalism or old school deep rooted belief that "america is the best nation on god's earth" and blah blah blah. 

i can't put all the thoughts together. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

funny how most US commentators still aren't using the t-word to describe these acts.

the threat of rightwing terrorism coming from independent armed groups who resist the state has been considered more serious by US federal law enforcement agencies than Islamic terrorism for years now. this fact hasn't entered public consciousness because news media is still fixated on what sells, which is Islamic terrorism or threats from the outside. now that you have random angry dickheads, both in the US and abroad (let's not forget our own Australian in Christchurch) fuelled by the the words of rising rightwing populist leaders committing these acts, I suspect the perception of what terrorism is/what terrorist threats are is going to change over the next few years in the mind of the public at large.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usagi you are delusional. This stuff has been all over the news.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

? did I say it wasn't in the news? I wasn't talking about a coverage problem, l2comprehension.

Edited by usagi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" this fact hasn't entered public consciousness because news media is still fixated on what sells, which is Islamic terrorism or threats from the outside "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the "white nationalist terrorist" hasn't become standardized yet. it's only now starting to become a term that news outlets use as a default and only slightly.  they still largely go to "mentally ill" or something like that. they have a much easier time calling brown/muslim people terrorists.  they're still far from calling these types of mass shootings "terror attacks". 

it's in the news and some people are asking the question "is this domestic terrorism" but they haven't quite gone down that path totally.. they await cues from law enforcement/FBI/prosecutors etc.  there's the odd police spokesperson here or there who straight up calls it domestic terrorism when giving a briefing though. 

i think a lot of people are ahead of the media on this but for some reason there seems to be resistance to calling it what it is by news outlets.  they still opt for "lone wolf" or something. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, maitake said:

" this fact hasn't entered public consciousness because news media is still fixated on what sells, which is Islamic terrorism or threats from the outside "

quoting this part accounts for your failure to comprehend the point how exactly? I wasn't saying it's not on the news because it's not Islamic terrorism, I'm saying it's not being called rightwing terrorism because that doesn't fit the narrative of what terrorism is supposed to be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) It is being called right wing extremism. That is commonly discussed on US media networks now. This has escalated rapidly now that it's become a simple way to shame conservative politicians.

2) People generally are more concerned with mass shootings, politically motivated or otherwise, than islamic threats currently. Maybe you'd feel this trend if you actually lived here. Islamic terror doesn't sell much anymore without wow-factor.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, still missing the point. extremism is a vaguer term that does not have the same connotation as terrorism, and as far as I can see no one's using that term to describe these shootings. the "t-word" is a uniquely dirty word reserved for ideological opponents. the perception is shifting slowly but the general public has still not fully not wrapped their heads around the fact that people who they would normally think are "on their side" ideologically, or an ordinary part of their society in other words, are the ones to watch out for in terms of committing "terrorist" acts. that is the point I was making, though stating it clearly up front apparently wasn't enough for you to not read it wrong and take a lame potshot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

texas governor appears to call it a hate crime. to me the thing about terrorism is there's some kind of organisation behind it with a specific goal. and in this aspect there is some difference. whether or not these massacres should be called an act of terrorism, i'm really not sure. to me it would be an obvious yes if there was some kind of organisation behind it. it doesn't look like there is. is it right to call this a hate crime instead? well, to me this is largely an academic discussion and i don't have any stake in it. if you've got good reasons to call this a terrorist attack, you have my blessings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leave it up to Usagi to equate a 4chan latino obsessed loser who decided to shoot up a Walmart with literal terror cells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, goDel said:

texas governor appears to call it a hate crime. to me the thing about terrorism is there's some kind of organisation behind it with a specific goal. and in this aspect there is some difference. whether or not these massacres should be called an act of terrorism, i'm really not sure. to me it would be an obvious yes if there was some kind of organisation behind it. it doesn't look like there is. is it right to call this a hate crime instead? well, to me this is largely an academic discussion and i don't have any stake in it. if you've got good reasons to call this a terrorist attack, you have my blessings.

Well, there are white nationalist organisations that might be the reason those losers did the shooting even if they weren't really part of a terror cell. In that sense they turn themselves into the extended arm of these organisations which isn't unwanted by same. I don't think that speaking of terror is wrong here

Edited by darreichungsform
*terrorism
  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The El Paso shooter has just been charged with Domestic Terrorism

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only prerequisite to be a terrorist is that you inflict terror on people. That's all. It doesn't matter if there is an organization or not. The Oklahoma City bombing back in the 90s was frequently called terrorism.

The narrative for what constitutes as terrorism changed around 2001 for obvious reasons.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, maitake said:

Leave it up to Usagi to equate a 4chan latino obsessed loser who decided to shoot up a Walmart with literal terror cells.

that's exactly the point, dickhead. it's terrorism, whether it's an organised terror cell driven by bad ideology or a crazy lone shooter driven by bad ideology. (actually the only real common factor is the use of "terror" as Braintree suggested, but let's not open up that can of worms with Mr Comprehension here)

on the one hand you insinuate that the two things so different they're not on the same level so I must be wrong, and on the other hand you post a lame news search result to suggest that news outlets really are putting the two things on the same level (even though half of them take the tone of "should we finally put these on the same level?") so I must be wrong. pick an argument instead of trying by whatever conflicted means you can to prove me wrong and cover up the fact that you just read my initial post wrong and reacted stupidly.

actually don't do that, quit wasting my time.

Edited by usagi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not just terrorism, but white terrorism. Carried out by pasty incels who frequent 4chan, take racist jokes for gospel, and jerk off to anime girls. Because 4chan is now an indirect threat to innocent people, it might as well be a terrorist organization. And I'm being sincere about this,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ambergonk said:

It's not just terrorism, but white terrorism. Carried out by pasty incels who frequent 4chan, take racist jokes for gospel, and jerk off to anime girls. Because 4chan is now an indirect threat to innocent people, it might as well be a terrorist organization. And I'm being sincere about this,

the tremendous amount of overlap grey area between what you're describing and literally the rest of the internet is where things get tricky ... but i agree with you here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I live in the US and open carry is an alien concept to me. Gun ownership is in general, really.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting piece in NYT on 8chan. Interview with its founder (who isn't currently involved anymore).

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/04/technology/8chan-shooting-manifesto.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage&login=email&auth=login-email

Quote

“Whenever I hear about a mass shooting, I say, ‘All right, we have to research if there’s an 8chan connection,’” he said about the online message board he started in 2013.

It didn’t take him long to find one.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...