Jump to content

The culture barrier is real


dUSt

Recommended Posts

WARNING: LANGUAGE

I've been watching this "rocker" guy's journey as he's experienced hip-hop music for the first time over the past year. It's fascinating.

His latest opening commentary is worth a listen. It's only about three minutes. Watch between 3:50-6:50.

@fides' Jack This touches on our conversation from a different thread.

Again, he says some cusswords, so if that makes you want to go to confession, just don't watch it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, dUSt - and I truly mean that.

In these topics that I've participated in (which lately have mostly been just the most controversial ones), I've been called many things, and accused of many things.  Very few have assumed the best of me, which we are all supposed to do as Christians, and which, from your point of view, would be to assume that I am simply ignorant.  So, thank you for assuming the best.

That being said, I know that I am ignorant of much.  Like the speaker in the video, I did not know what the Tulsa Massacre was.  I looked that up, and I learned something.  So thank you also for that.  And while I am horrified by the fact that it happened, I can't say I'm surprised.  I don't deny that racism has been extremely significant and dark throughout history.

You touched on something in the other thread that is absolutely correct; I have not been exposed to it the way others have.  I grew up and still live in an area where racism really isn't a big issue.  If I have my way, I would want my kids to grow up with the same, if only to preserve their innocence as long as possible. 

But I am not wrong on the evil motives behind the BLM movement.  These are the same people as the murdering abortionists, and the lgbt warriors and, frankly, satanists.  If we actually had the full conversation, and took the time to flesh this out, and I looked at your sources and you looked at mine, and we both came to it with an open mind, and we both kept cool heads, and we both prayed to be opened to the truth by God, I'm certain of two things - one, we would both learn more and be less ignorant, and two, you would end up more conservative.

The problem is, that conversation would take dozens of hours.

At the very least, going forward, I will endeavor to tone down the rhetoric on this issue, as much as is possible.  But there's not really a non-rhetorical and non-provocative way to say that something is demonic.  Sometimes that needs to be said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@fides' Jack I grew up listening to Rush Limbaugh--I rarely missed an episode during my high school days. Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens constantly come up in my social feeds, as well as many other conservative voices. Most of my family are staunch Trump supporters. I also have a black wife and black kids. I guess you can say I have a personal interest in understanding other viewpoints.

I don't agree or support the BLM organization either, but I recognize that most people who are using the phrase "black lives matter" are not part of the organization. They are just people who want to bring awareness to an issue that is important to them.

I'm drawn to people who show a willingness to think outside of the liberal/conservative boxes one would assume they are supposed to fit in. 

Anti-racism republicans are amazing. Pro-life democrats are amazing.

The only thing I try to make sure I do is look at things through a Catholic lens, first and foremost. All the political stuff, I couldn't care less about. I used to. A lot. Not any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, dUSt said:

I don't agree or support the BLM organization either, but I recognize that most people who are using the phrase "black lives matter" are not part of the organization. They are just people who want to bring awareness to an issue that is important to them.

I believe this is 100% true.

29 minutes ago, dUSt said:

I'm drawn to people who show a willingness to think outside of the liberal/conservative boxes one would assume they are supposed to fit in. 

It's possible we use these terms differently.  I no longer think in terms of Democrat and Republican, nor do I associate them in any way with traditional notions of what is liberal or conservative.  As far as I'm concerned they are the same political party.  Most members stand for much of the same nonsense, anyway. 

I've never considered myself less of a Republican than I do now.  Independent parties really aren't much better, either.

35 minutes ago, dUSt said:

Anti-racism republicans are amazing. Pro-life democrats are amazing.

Do you see any pro-racism republicans?  I mean, at all?  There are always folks like David Duke and Richard Spencer, but I'm not even sure where they line up politically anymore.  David Duke clearly WAS republican, but being tied to racism is now what antisemitism was after the holocaust.  It's just such a ridiculous position now almost nobody is willing to admit it, even if they have those leanings.

But to me, I think the issue is really that the general public believes that racism is a conservative thing - which you implied in this statement.  And I think that's a lie perpetrated by the left that most people just blindly accept.  The KKK was specifically a democrat organization, just like BLM is today.  And while the left and the democrat party have backed off of overtly anti-black racist positions now, it's interesting and telling that they're now fighting for overtly anti-white racist positions.  (Many republicans are, too)

People talk about the Big Switch, and Dinesh D'Souza gives some reasonable evidence showing why the big switch was just a lie.  When you look at it strictly in terms of Catholic morality, it's clear who the bad guys are, and who they've always been.  It is not tied to political party, except that the immorality is codified by democrats, but the immoral values are also clearly in the republican party as well as independents.  As you suggest in your thread title, it's a culture war.

54 minutes ago, dUSt said:

The only thing I try to make sure I do is look at things through a Catholic lens, first and foremost. All the political stuff, I couldn't care less about. I used to. A lot. Not any more.

Yes, this - exactly.  100%.  In my mind, when I say "conservative", it's much more in line with what "conservative" meant 50 years ago, which is very much more in line with traditional Catholic teaching. 

But what is for me a religious issue others might think I'm arguing because of politics.  A good example would be the death penalty.  The Catholic teaching on the matter is actually pretty settled and has been for centuries (even millennia), but most people today, including faithful catholics, don't understand it, and so Church teaching is misapplied on this issue everywhere.

Just so you know, I don't think I could possibly care less about the midterms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Do you see any pro-racism republicans?  I mean, at all?

Yes. A lot. Any Republican who doesn’t speak out about racism in fear of being alienated by their voter base is racist. 

Just like I’d consider any politician who doesn’t speak out about abortion as pro-abortion.

The sin of omission is basic Catholic teaching. 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dUSt said:

Yes. A lot. Any Republican who doesn’t speak out about racism in fear of being alienated by their voter base is racist. 

Just like I’d consider any politician who doesn’t speak out about abortion as pro-abortion.

The sin of omission is basic Catholic teaching. 
 

 

I don't buy it.  There isn't a single voter base that is pro-racism (at least not anti-black racism).  Not for any of the major political parties.

I challenge you to find a single political candidate, republican or otherwise, above city mayor, who hasn't ever spoken out publicly against racism.  Even your neighborhood HOA wouldn't vote in somebody if there was any question about racist views.

It's political suicide, in just about every area, and in just about every level of politics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

I challenge you to find a single political candidate

To be clear, I don't just mean candidate.  I mean candidate or politician.  And in fairness, we should limit the scope to those who have had a reasonable amount of time to do so.  If someone just announced their candidacy yesterday, that's not really sufficient time to make a public statement on every issue that a statement needs to be made on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t have time for all that. If you have the time, you show me where every Republican has spoken up about racism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would take far less time to find one than to prove all.  You made a fantastic claim which, based on my challenge, requires very little evidence to substantiate.

I don't have time to disprove every example you come up with, either, but I will if it means that you might start to change your mind about racism being a mostly republican or conservative issue.

Still, you made the claim.  You said you've seen "a lot".  You said that the republican voter base is racist.  If you are correct, providing one example of a politician who won't speak up about racism should be incredibly easy.  The burden of proof is on you.

Now, if I am correct, that there is very little anti-black racism in politics anymore from any side, then the claim that a politician sins by omission when he doesn't speak up against it ceases to be true.  If virtually everyone is in agreement, as I claim, then there is no moral necessity of speaking about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

You said that the republican voter base is racist. 

Never said that.

9 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Now, if I am correct, that there is very little anti-black racism in politics anymore from any side, then the claim that a politician sins by omission when he doesn't speak up against it ceases to be true. 

This doesn't make sense to me. You're basically saying that if you're not anti-black then you don't have to be pro-black. 

Let me repeat what you said with a different issue...

"If there is very little pro-abortion in politics, then the claim that a politician sins by omission when he doesn't speak up against it ceases to be true."

That's not the case. Sins are sins, and if you don't take a stance against sin, it's a sin by omission.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dUSt said:

Never said that.

Not outright, but you certainly implied it:

On 5/19/2022 at 9:27 AM, dUSt said:

Any Republican who doesn’t speak out about racism in fear of being alienated by their voter base is racist. 

 

1 hour ago, dUSt said:

This doesn't make sense to me. You're basically saying that if you're not anti-black then you don't have to be pro-black. 

I don't understand how you took that meaning from what I said, but neither do I disagree with the statement.

I'm pro human: black, brown, red, white, gray, green, and purple.  And blue.  People need oxygen.

I don't have to stand up for black rights if black rights aren't in danger in any way.  I DO stand for black rights, anyway, but in fact they are not in danger in any way.  At least not in my country.  I would suspect in Africa the problem is much more real, where there are current wars that revolve around skin color.

I don't have to celebrate a person's blackness any more than I would want to celebrate another person's whiteness.  And in fact doing so furthers racism, rather than fights it.

1 hour ago, dUSt said:

"If there is very little pro-abortion in politics, then the claim that a politician sins by omission when he doesn't speak up against it ceases to be true."

That's not the case. Sins are sins, and if you don't take a stance against sin, it's a sin by omission.

That's not necessarily the case - especially if nobody is committing the sin.  Furthermore, not all sins are equal.  I don't think that's what you mean, but that's kind of what you are implying, and for your argument to be valid, it would need to be the case that you mean all sins are equal.

There are two different claims here: 1) that a person sins by omission by not standing against sin, and 2) that a person is racist if he doesn't stand against racism.  I concede that, if further argument (below) fails, a person may indeed sin if he doesn't stand against racism.  But that doesn't mean he's racist.

Abortion is clearly happening, and the world is split as to its morality.  As Catholics we MUST speak against abortion.  It's entirely clear, and the Church is unequivocal in stating that abortion is, in every circumstance, gravely evil and gravely sinful - it cries to heaven for vengeance.  There isn't a case of abortion that is not serious matter.

Racism is much different, and acts of racism are very generally defined.  We probably don't even agree on what constitutes the sin of racism.  I think we would both agree that depriving a black man of just wages because he's black would indeed also cry out to heaven for vengeance.  But what about you making a ribbing joke to your black friend (or your wife) about his/her skin color?  I would argue that's not a racist act, especially if he knows that you really don't care; some others here would surely disagree.  Nevertheless, if it's sinful it's certainly not mortally sinful.  

Now let's say, for the sake of argument, that 100% of all people, everywhere on the planet, agree that racism is bad (obviously this is not the case).  There's no reason that a politician should be morally obligated to bring a lot of attention to something that doesn't require any attention.  Similarly, the Church doesn't define dogma unless She sees there's a moral need to (generally speaking throughout history). 

You could argue that there is a "perception" that anti-black racism is everywhere, and therefore a politician should publicly take a stand against it, but the moral obligation for him doesn't exist if he doesn't believe that's the case, and it certainly doesn't make him racist.  It might still be prudent for him to do so, especially if he wants to win an election, but it is not morally obligatory, nor does it constitute racism.

On 5/19/2022 at 9:27 AM, dUSt said:

Any Republican who doesn’t speak out about racism in fear of being alienated by their voter base is racist. 

So, no.

 

For the sake of my challenge, however, and contrary to this truth, I will concede even this outlandish point, if you can find even one politician who has not spoken out against racism, or will not speak out against racism.  

Don't take that lightly, there are much broader implications there.  You seem to have a presupposition that racism (at least of the anti-black variety) is predominantly a republican or a conservative problem (I still don't know for sure if you see those two as synonymous).  My presupposition is that it's hardly a problem for anyone.  The consequences of either of these being proved true are far-reaching.

If you truly have seen specific cases a lot, which you claim, and if your presupposition is true, you could have easily already provided an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not going to sit here and debate when you won't even acknowledge there's a problem with racism (and the affects of decades of racism) in this country. It's like debating a flat earther. Please watch the documentaries I suggested and let me know if you have any questions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have acknowledged, several times, that there is a problem with racism.  Kids are being taught, in schools across the country, that being white is bad.  Clearly there is a problem with racism, both institutionally and culturally.

Moreover, there is still a problem with anti-black racism.  And as I said, if you have an example of that I will help you fight it.

Moreover, I fully acknowledge, and have already implied that I do acknowledge, that there remain effects of some very terrible and evil racism from the past that linger to this day.  

I already watched much of "13th", and while they reach some conclusions or make implications that I don't agree with, I admit that they bring up some good points.  Specifically, I would not at all be surprised if the original intention of the war on drugs was a racist one.  I'd even believe that the government (both Democrat-controlled and Republican-controlled) had a hand in supplying drugs in inner-city communities to get those communities hooked on the stuff - they don't say that but they do leave you to wonder.  And that's really sad.  Certainly the current administration with its immigration policies wants to make that problem worse.

So yes, I do have questions:

  • Do you believe republicans are more likely to be racist?
  • Do you believe the terms "republican" and "conservative" are synonymous?
  • Do you believe there are many politicians out there that are actively advocating for directly anti-black racist policies or laws?
  • Do you believe that anti-black racism in politics is a larger or smaller issue than anti-white racism in politics currently?
  • Have you watched "Death of a Nation"?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Do you believe republicans are more likely to be racist?

No. Democratic abortion policies targeting black and minority neighborhoods are totally racist. I don’t see much difference between the people that make up each party when it comes to racism. 

51 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Do you believe the terms "republican" and "conservative" are synonymous?

I lean more that way every day. It’s two parties who are only interested in power, and will change policies at the drop of a hat if they think it will win more votes. 

51 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Do you believe there are many politicians out there that are actively advocating for directly anti-black racist policies or laws?

Of course not. That’s why your premise of “find an anti-black” politician is a bit absurd. Nobody will say they are anti-black. Racism isn’t that bold anymore. Now it’s subtle and disguised. Democratic policies of “more abortion access in lower income communities” is anti-black, but it’s disguised. Republican policies that consistently oppose laws that attempt to create equity (healthcare, student loans, etc) are anti-black, but disguised. 

51 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Do you believe that anti-black racism in politics is a larger or smaller issue than anti-white racism in politics currently?

This is an absurd question. Lol. 

51 minutes ago, fides' Jack said:

Have you watched "Death of a Nation"?

No. I usually avoid watching films with a 0% on Rotten Tomatoes. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dUStnot to blow my own horn or anything, but I am now an officially certified anti-racist. :smokey:

received_406394547636412.jpeg

Edited by Nihil Obstat
Link to comment
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
×
×
  • Create New...