It's staggering how many people on this forum are totally ok with shitting on white people at every opportunity while screaming for equality at the top of their lungs daily.
QFT. It's disgusting.
It's staggering how many people on this forum are totally ok with shitting on white people at every opportunity while screaming for equality at the top of their lungs daily.
It's staggering how many people on this forum are totally ok with shitting on white people at every opportunity while screaming for equality at the top of their lungs daily.
Who's ok with this? Name them and links to their posts please.
Surely you can see these posts on the first page are downplaying what this clown said? They don't literally spell out "nothing wrong", but can you earnestly tell me those posters (and others in subsequent pages) are not downplaying the guy's message?Again, Im failing to find in the thread where people feel that Nick said nothing wrong.
Some random ass dude with 400 subscribers on youtube puts up a video that's anti-white so youtube and the country of France freaks the fuck out? Nothing better to focus on?
It's obviously not a message of love, but it is a message told through art and not a call to arms or anything. The reasoning that this will make kids want to kill white people is some straw-clutching fragile shit.
I can't speak for other posters, but those posts are basically the reason why I decided to continue to read the thread and join the discussion. By the time I got to the last page, I found some posters (who I quoted and civilly discussed with) speaking of definitions of racism/etc. As I said, I'm also partly to blame on the focus shift to "definition of racism" subject vs. the original "hate speech" topic.I'm not one of the people who needs their smelling salts after reading the lyrics to an obviously satirical song from a nobody.
Surely you can see these posts on the first page are downplaying what this clown said? They don't literally spell out "nothing wrong", but can you earnestly tell me those posters (and others in subsequent pages) are not downplaying the guy's message?
I can't speak for other posters, but those posts are basically the reason why I decided to continue to read the thread and join the discussion. By the time I got to the last page, I found some posters (who I quoted and civilly discussed with) speaking of definitions of racism/etc. As I said, I'm also partly to blame on the focus shift to "definition of racism" subject vs. the original "hate speech" topic.
By the way, thanks for the informative post above re: racism dynamics. I mean that.
I posted only four on the first page to show that it is happening. Do you want me to go through the entire thread? Why are you moving the goalposts? Are you interested in having an honest discussion or not?So, 4 posters that maybe lean in the direction that your saying in a thread with almost 600 replies and you feel thats the narrative of the thread? Thats a prime example of searching for victimhood.
I posted only four on the first page to show that it is happening. Do you want me to go through the entire thread? Why are you moving the goalposts? Are you interested in having an honest discussion or not?
"victimhood". Man. Really. I don't think you care about the discussion at all.
I think (or would like to anyway) that we are having that discussion. I don't know why you're using quotes. I do apologize if I'm being antagonistic, that's not my intention. I wanted to ignore this thread but the first few pages of people just casually dismissing this guy's rhetoric, calling the reaction "pearl-clutching" (a sexist term by the way) finally got to me and I figured I would rather say something before I decided to leave the community.
I think I understand what you're saying. The subject in the topic shifted for the past few pages. I myself am guilty of that. I want to make sure I'm super clear on this: I'm not downplaying real systemic/institutionalized racism. I wish that that very real and day to day racism ended way before this other type of racism (sorry, I know we don't agree on the use of the term) was addressed. Meaning, this song may make me uncomfortable but I've never been persecuted or subjugated due to my ethnicity. I have, however, experienced "diet" racism and mockery due to race. As an individual it hurt back then, but I also understand it's nothing compared to the reality an entire culture has lived.
I posted only four on the first page to show that it is happening. Do you want me to go through the entire thread? Why are you moving the goalposts? Are you interested in having an honest discussion or not?
"victimhood". Man. Really. I don't think you care about the discussion at all.
Wow, so when Nazis put slavs into concentration camps, when they called them subhumans and classified them in the same manner they did with jews and killed millions of them through orchestrated famine campaigns, it wasn't racism. It was just "ethnic genocide".
This is pure Nazi apologist garbage. For real. And you aren't even aware, because you probably weren't aware that such a thing as slav concentration camps existed or don't think they were as bad. Either way, you should really read up about them and consider if this is something you want to defend:
Some select quotes:
But go on, complain about people "clutching their pearls" while you downplay the racisms that drove genocide after genocide.
Really, I'm done with this forum. I've posted a bit in some garbage sites like RPG Codex and the like and that was enough. But I've never, ever seen the degree of denialism that exists in ResetERA and people don't even blink.
what are you seriously going on about? When did I imply ethnic genocide was a "just" situation compared to racism?
Like y'all are getting worked up on a video no one saw, well overblowing it.
I'm taking an 8 hour course right now but come on
Surely you can see these posts on the first page are downplaying what this clown said? They don't literally spell out "nothing wrong", but can you earnestly tell me those posters (and others in subsequent pages) are not downplaying the guy's message?
I can't speak for other posters, but those posts are basically the reason why I decided to continue to read the thread and join the discussion. By the time I got to the last page, I found some posters (who I quoted and civilly discussed with) speaking of definitions of racism/etc. As I said, I'm also partly to blame on the focus shift to "definition of racism" subject vs. the original "hate speech" topic.
By the way, thanks for the informative post above re: racism dynamics. I mean that.
In an interview with Le Parisien, Conrad says the video is "fiction" and that he "wanted to reverse the roles of the white man and the black man".
He said he understood the controversy and that the "shock was wanted, necessary, but not at such a level".
"We must also put things in perspective: this clip, published as part of the release of my EP, was also part of a mini-series whose episodes would complement, argue my thinking," he said.
You said no one saw the video so I'm posting it in case people want to see itIs that the video? Are you actively promoting it for some reason?
You said no one saw the video so I'm posting it in case people want to see it
Just so we are clear here you neither want to answer my question nor apologize?Is that the video? Are you actively promoting it for some reason?
Don't you have better things to do than attempting to create a circle jerk in a thread about some dude calling to hang white people and their babies?I can't believe this thread. RedMercury DigitalOp Nepenthe Y'all gonna drive away all the majorities.
There's an uproar for everything. Doesn't matter which side. As long as as call bullshit on both of them.This whole thread and situation reminds me of body Count and the uproar over the song, Cop Killer. It's so easy for lyrics to be taken literally when it suits the agenda of white people. Another small group makes a song with inflammatory lyrics and suddenly it's national and even international news and is speaking to a rise in hatred or so the powers that be would have you believe. This always happens with racial issues or truthfully any issue conservatives want to use as a platform for their beliefs.
i mean if the guy broke the law, then give him his fine and move on. This really isn't worth all the "concern" and "fear"
None of those things would be hatespeech.This situation just makes me wonder how it'd be if a fictional movie came out depicting white people being slaves, enduring apartheid, and/or going through institutionalised racism in the modern era. Just playing everything straight and serious; no comedic or ironic angle.
I'm thinking more of how it'd be received. It'd definitely be a different situation than this one, but the thing is, I'm seeing ridiculous hate aimed at the singer and his ethnicity proportional to the ridiculous hate in his video. The difference is, you usually only see that kind of response on one end of the spectrum, and not from the other, as depicted in this video.
This situation just makes me wonder how it'd be if a fictional movie came out depicting white people being slaves, enduring apartheid, and/or going through institutionalised racism in the modern era. Just playing everything straight and serious; no comedic or ironic angle.
Oh sure, that sounds in line with what I was thinking, thanks. I'll need to check it out.Not exactly what your talking about but pretty close:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Man's_Burden_(film)
Me and you both are trying to find the real issue. I'm confused at why there's 12 pages of arguing, when there shouldn't be a two sides to this case. Clearly a guy making a song about hanging newborn white babies is a racist, he saved everyone the arguments but people are still trying to argue semantics. You don't see how arguing semantics is problematic in a thread about someone threatening to hang babies? It's trivial and dumb.Again, Im failing to find in the thread where people feel that Nick said nothing wrong.
I mean, the dude threatened babies... obviously he's over the line.
And on top of that, dude is getting investigated for it. Thats a promise. So whats the real issue here?
I can't help but feel that this thread has turned into a battle over calling Nick a racist. Thats where the anger and the debate is at right now.
You do? Certainly not in this thread? Like, of course right wing assholes are having a gourmet feast with this shit but otherwise?I'm thinking more of how it'd be received. It'd definitely be a different situation than this one, but the thing is, I'm seeing ridiculous hate aimed at the singer and his ethnicity proportional to the ridiculous hate in his video.
No, not in this thread. I'm talking about comments calling the singer a monkey, people on Twitter sending death threats to wrong Nick Conrads, people telling him to go back to his country, and people generally threatening him with what he's depicting in his video. Except, that's always how it is on the internet; it's nothing new when you're a person of color. What I feel is new, is that kind of dumb response towards white people, in the form of this video.You do? Certainly not in this thread? Like, of course right wing assholes are having a gourmet feast with this shit but otherwise?
I would guess if such a movie exists the same people who scream Soros or Clinton, meaning your average Trump voter,would throw a serious fit (maybe some old ones would get a heart attack) but that's it.
I hope not, I don't want to drive people away. Racists, sure, but if we can have a civil discussion about this stuff the forum is better for it. This should be a place where these questions can be asked and points can be raised. Ideally, that would be a conversation that brings people in, for the right reasons.I can't believe this thread. RedMercury DigitalOp Nepenthe Y'all gonna drive away all the majorities.
Even if it would picture an alternate universe where PoC are whipping white people on cotton fields and call them crackers all the time or it would show dozens of white people getting murdered it wouldn't be hatespeech if there's a context to those actions, as dumb or bad that context might be. The movie can have racism as a theme, or it can just be racist.
Just so we are clear here you neither want to answer my question nor apologize?
If that's the case just say so.
Even if it would picture an alternate universe where PoC are whipping white people on cotton fields and call them crackers all the time or it would show dozens of white people getting murdered it wouldn't be hatespeech if there's a context to those actions, as dumb or bad that context might be. The movie can have racism as a theme, or it can just be racist.
If it's just a video of a dude telling his audience to go and kill white people it would be hatespeech.
This whole thread and situation reminds me of body Count and the uproar over the song, Cop Killer. It's so easy for lyrics to be taken literally when it suits the agenda of white people. Another small group makes a song with inflammatory lyrics and suddenly it's national and even international news and is speaking to a rise in hatred or so the powers that be would have you believe. This always happens with racial issues or truthfully any issue conservatives want to use as a platform for their beliefs.
i mean if the guy broke the law, then give him his fine and move on. This really isn't worth all the "concern" and "fear"
Unless I missed something, seems like you just ended up arguing with people who either don't want to understand you or are incapable of it.I hope not, I don't want to drive people away. Racists, sure, but if we can have a civil discussion about this stuff the forum is better for it. This should be a place where these questions can be asked and points can be raised. Ideally, that would be a conversation that brings people in, for the right reasons.
Well let's explore this a bit, because there is context to this video:Even if it would picture an alternate universe where PoC are whipping white people on cotton fields and call them crackers all the time or it would show dozens of white people getting murdered it wouldn't be hatespeech if there's a context to those actions, as dumb or bad that context might be. The movie can have racism as a theme, or it can just be racist.
If it's just a video of a dude telling his audience to go and kill white people it would be hatespeech.
If the guy was doing this for artistic purposes to demonstrate a point, and in an artistic sense he thought it thematically necessary, and intended to shock people as he felt the shock necessary to the processing of his message, why is it treated differently? I'm not endorsing the message of killing babies and he knew there would be backlash, but doesn't it seem like a double standard when it's a black person doing it as far as the willingness to examine context?In an interview with Le Parisien, Conrad says the video is "fiction" and that he "wanted to reverse the roles of the white man and the black man".
He said he understood the controversy and that the "shock was wanted, necessary, but not at such a level".
"We must also put things in perspective: this clip, published as part of the release of my EP, was also part of a mini-series whose episodes would complement, argue my thinking," he said.
Oh yeah, they def don't want to, but maybe some people seeing that exchange will be spurred to jump in and have a discussion in good faith instead of resorting to stuff like:Unless I missed something, seems like you just ended up arguing with people who either don't want to understand you or are incapable of it.
If the guy was doing this for artistic purposes to demonstrate a point, and in an artistic sense he thought it thematically necessary, and intended to shock people as he felt the shock necessary to the processing of his message, why is it treated differently? I'm not endorsing the message of killing babies and he knew there would be backlash, but doesn't it seem like a double standard when it's a black person doing it as far as the willingness to examine context?
Even when coupled with a clearly fictional music video, as part of a larger project?It's because the song is in first person and, as such, can be easily construed as a statement of intent. There's no attempt from the rapper to separate his own self from the self he portrays in that song like there is in many other examples of extremist views being depicted in media. It doesn't matter whether he personally says it's fiction or not because, in the eyes of the French judiciary, they clearly do not see that as a fair excuse. To me that's fair as, after all, if one could deflect claims of hate speech simply by saying their speech was "fictional" after the fact then it would allow actually dangerous groups to hide behind the idea that the hateful rhetoric they're spouting isn't meant to be taken completely literally.
You aren't pushing anyone away. Nothing wrong with disagreement lolI hope not, I don't want to drive people away. Racists, sure, but if we can have a civil discussion about this stuff the forum is better for it. This should be a place where these questions can be asked and points can be raised. Ideally, that would be a conversation that brings people in, for the right reasons.
It's because the song is in first person and, as such, can be easily construed as a statement of intent. There's no attempt from the rapper to separate his own self from the self he portrays in that song like there is in many other examples of extremist views being depicted in media. It doesn't matter whether he personally says it's fiction or not because, in the eyes of the French judiciary, they clearly do not see that as a fair excuse. To me that's fair as, after all, if one could deflect claims of hate speech simply by saying their speech was "fictional" after the fact then it would allow actually dangerous groups to hide behind the idea that the hateful rhetoric they're spouting isn't meant to be taken completely literally.
Slipknot frontman Corey Taylor is often the first to throw his hat into the ring, offering his opinion on anything from politics to music. But when Philip Anselmo gave a Nazi salute and barked "White power!" at the recent 2016 Dimebash event, Taylor held back on commenting. However, during a recent chat, the vocalist finally weighed in on the controversy surrounding the actions that took place that night.
When the Guardian asked Taylor for his response to Anselmo's racially charged actions, he revealed why he had been silent until now, stating, "I've been watching this all and I've kept mum for the most part, because I wasn't there. So I don't know the background on what happened, I haven't seen the video of it – though I've been told by many people that it's blatant, and there's no way to misrepresent what was done."
He goes on to say that this is not an issue exclusive to heavy metal and comments on what Slipknot stands for, offering, "This is a bigger problem than what happened that night. Slipknot has dedicated itself to bringing people together, to fighting racism, to fighting hate in general since the day we were started. I don't have time for people who judge other people by the color of their skin. If that in itself offends some of my fans, then I'm sorry, you're wrong. I don't ever want our fans to feel like we're judging them because of color, religion, culture, upbringing, etc. We welcome everyone, we always have and we always will."
"I know there is a problem in metal," the masked singer continued, "And it all comes down to, at least in America, where you grow up and what that culture is passed on from: parents, family members, friends, adults. It's a generational thing." Indicating strides had been made, Taylor lamented the fact that racism still permeates music, saying, "I thought we were close to phasing it out, but unfortunately I was proven wrong. So I just dedicate myself to fighting it. It's across the board in music, though – it's not a specifically metal thing. But it has come up in the metal community. It's risen its ugly head because of the incident we're talking about."
While recognizing a problem exists, Taylor praises the community values of metal when he said, "I've not only played a lot of metal shows, I've been to a lot of metal shows, and I know for a fact they are quite diverse and they always have been. We welcome the tribe of misfits -- we're the island of misfit toys, and we always have been. It will take very little to eradicate racism from metal because the majority of it isn't racist."
Anselmo's actions were met head-on with hostility from fellow musicians, most notably Robb Flynn of Machine Head and Anthrax's Scott Ian. Flynn, who took part in the Dimebash performance, was the first to take a public platform to voice his disgust, uploading an 11 minute video condemning Anselmo's excuses. Ian felt if the Panteralegend was truly sorry, he would make a donation to the Simon Wiesenthal Center, which is an organization that confronts racism and teaches lessons about the Holocaust.
Anselmo has since issued a second apology and even urged his bandmates in Down to continue without him. Since the incident, Down have been booted from two shows, including a hometown gig in New Orleans. Meanwhile, the decision not to remove Down from France's Hellfest by organizers led to the French government pulling their fundingfrom the event.
Even when coupled with a clearly fictional music video, as part of a larger project?
That's a fair view I think"Clearly fictional" might be literally true yet neither the video nor the lyrics make any attempt to convince people that the rhetoric within should be taken as fictional and, thus, something one should not try and replicate in real life. As I said, the author can explain what they meant in an after-the-fact interview or in another seperate video/song but in terms of the effects speech such as his may have on an audience who listens to it that's simply not good enough.
The French government's position on this matter seems to stem from the idea that hate speech is not about the literal intent of the author but in the damage it can do to society and the groups within. They've clearly sees his explanations yet they view them as a case of the "death of the author", a concept which I have seen used many, many times here to rightfully explain why problematic content regarding minority groups or women does not simply become harmless because the author said something contradictory in an interview.
"Clearly fictional" might be literally true yet neither the video nor the lyrics make any attempt to convince people that the rhetoric within should be taken as fictional and, thus, something one should not try and replicate in real life. As I said, the author can explain what they meant in an after-the-fact interview or in another seperate video/song but in terms of the effects speech such as his may have on an audience who listens to it that's simply not good enough.
The French government's position on this matter seems to stem from the idea that hate speech is not about the literal intent of the author but in the damage it can do to society and the groups within. They've clearly sees his explanations yet they view them as a case of the "death of the author", a concept which I have seen used many, many times here to rightfully explain why problematic content regarding minority groups or women does not simply become harmless because the author said something contradictory in an interview.
Why do you keep referencing other material that isn't hate speech made in countries with entirely different hate speech laws to France?
To me that's fair as, after all, if one could deflect claims of hate speech simply by saying their speech was "fictional" after the fact then it would allow actually dangerous groups to hide behind the idea that the hateful rhetoric they're spouting isn't meant to be taken completely literally.
Me? What are YOU going on about? You are the one saying that it wasn't racist when Hitler genocided slavs and otherwise downplaying racism against Eastern Europeans.what are you seriously going on about? When did I imply ethnic genocide was a "just" situation compared to racism