Saturday, June 20, 2020

Why Black Lives Matter so Much to White Liberals...

40 comments:

  1. What a weirdo. Why does he keep sneezing into his hands then wiping the snot all over his face?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Because he doesn't believe in using tissues?

    ReplyDelete
  3. You like what this guy has to say because you prefer to wring your hands over imaginary crimes committed against phony victims. Real victims can't be historically oppressed people. The "real" victims are their oppressors (land-owning White males).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Why "Black Lives Matter" is opposed by White Conservatives...

    White grievance (White people terrified of losing their White privilege). Specifically White MALE grievance. As well as White fragility.

    Quote: Trump's willingness to make explicitly racist and sexist appeals during the campaign, coupled with the presence of an African American president and the first major-party female nominee, made racism and sexism a dividing line. ...this was, in all likelihood, the decisive determinant of the outcome in 2016. "While economic considerations were an important part of the story ... racial attitudes and sexism were much more strongly related to support for Trump. [end quote]

    ReplyDelete
  5. No, I love Slavoj Zizek because he's a freakin' intellectual genius and I don't 2 sh*ts about "victims", white, black, or shades between.

    ReplyDelete
  6. So why do you have no problem that Dotard's entire Schick is playing the victim? Also, I watched the video and saw no evidence of "intellectual genius".

    ReplyDelete
  7. Perhaps you should watch his "pervert's guide" movies, read one of his over 50 books, or watch some of his European Graduate School lectures. He put the "L" in Lacanian Studies.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Looks to me like he's telling us he's a pervert.

    ReplyDelete
  9. ...and in any relationship, who knows better what the other one really wants? lol!

    The question we should confront here is what, then, does the pervert miss, in his endeavor to absolutely separate the Truth from Lies? The answer is, of course: the Truth of the Lie itself, the truth that is delivered in and through the very act of lying. Paradoxically, the pervert's falsity (lie) resides in his very unconditional attachment to truth, in his refusal to hear the truth resonating in a lie. It was Shakespeare whose plays, long ago, provided a breathtakingly refined insight into the entanglement of truth and lies.
    ...
    This brings us back to perversion: for Lacan, a pervert is not defined by the content of what he is doing (his weird sexual practices, etc.). Perversion, at its most fundamental, resides in the formal structure of how the subject relates to truth and speech. The pervert claims direct access to some figure of the big Other (from God or history to the desire of his partner), so that, dispelling all the ambiguity of language, he is able to act directly as the instrument of the big Other's will. In this sense, both Osama bin Laden and President Bush, although politically opponents, share a pervert structure: they both act upon the presupposition that their acts are directly ordered and guided by the divine will.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Your "mind reading" is the ultimate pervert's art... that of reading "the Big Other's" Mind.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Slavoj Zizek: In the last couple of years, I have been often asked by friends... whether I still stand by my preference for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton, or would I now admit that I was terribly wrong. My answer is easy to guess: not only do I stand by what I said, but I think last year's events fully confirmed my choice. [end quote]

    Reading what someone writes isn't "mind reading". As for your definition of "pervert", this must explain why many Dotard supporters think he was "sent by God" (the "My Pillow" guy, Mystere, etc). The perverts are all Dotard supporters. Whereas the "Godless Left" hates his guts.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The pervert claims... he is able to act directly as the instrument of the big Other's will.

    LOL!

    If Slavoj Zizek does not believe this very strongly applies to Dotard, he really is an idiot.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "History" was Karl Marx's "Big Other". Your's, the mythical "people of colour". White Jesus is going to kick your ass. lol!

    ReplyDelete
  14. That is just your bullshit mind reading. It's just the right thing to do. Otherwise it doesn't have any effect on me particularly at all. It certainly isn't any "big other" to me. Also, I don't give a crap about a non-existent "White Jesus".

    ReplyDelete
  15. Sorry, but Camus was right. The Universe IS absurd and means NOTHING.:)

    ReplyDelete
  16. ps - That feeling is a symptom of joissance, aka "will to power".

    ReplyDelete
  17. der Wille zur Macht :(

    Sticking it to the Libs, "owing the libs", and revenge are your joissance. Hate is your "big other". Which you will likely deny, but I've seen the confession.

    ReplyDelete
  18. You caught me. I'm against Affirmative Racism. And nothing gives me more "joy" than watching you squirm to justify racist policies in the name of "doing good".

    ReplyDelete
  19. You are 100 percent in favor of "affirmative racism". Why you voted for Dotard. He affirms your racism daily.

    ReplyDelete
  20. lol! And so why I claim above to be anti-affirmative racism?

    ReplyDelete
  21. I guess you didn't notice that I took your term "affirmative racism" literally with my comment. I know you meant "affirmative action" but I rejected your racist spin.

    You're a Malcolm X fan? Somehow I doubt it. And your audio is from 1964. The Dixiecrats don't exist any longer.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Sure they do. 99% still call themselves "Democrats". :)

    ReplyDelete
  23. They call themselves republicans. Nixon converted them using the Southern Strategy (a strategy used by the republican party to this day).

    ReplyDelete
  24. How people vote isn't public information. The proof is that the South is now solidly red. Whereas voters in the South was formerly supported Democrats.

    Quote: After the 1960s and passage of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, ensuring federal enforcement of constitutional rights in registration and voting, African Americans in the [South] were able to register and vote, rejoining the political system for the first time since the turn of the 20th century. While nearly six million African Americans had left the region by then in the Great Migration to other areas of the country, they and most of those who remained became affiliated with the Democratic Party. Its national leaders had supported the civil rights movement. Around the same time, white conservatives began to shift to the Republican Party, and by 2000 most had aligned with that. African Americans have elected numerous candidates of their choice, generally Democrats, from districts where their votes have been concentrated. [end Wikipedia excerpt "Solid South"].

    ReplyDelete
  25. It's real simple. You name a known Dixiecrat, and then show that he changed parties.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  27. You're talking about politicians. I'm talking about voters. Or does your reality-denying tell you that Southern States don't reliably vote republican? Of the former 11 states that made up the Confederacy (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia) all but Virginia voted for Dotard in the 2016 election. This was an "improvement" over 2012 election, in which all the former Confederate states voted for Romney excepting Florida and Virginia. Also 2008 (when it was Florida, North Carolina and Virginia that went blue).

    Dotard won more of the former Confederate states than Romney or McCain. Because Dotard did a better job of pandering to Southern state prejudices. The Dixicrats (aka the States' Rights Democratic Party) was founded and dissolved in 1948. Nixon used the Southern Strategy (to appeal to former Dixiecrat VOTERS) to get elected in 1968-72 (winning 5 former Confederate states in 68 and ALL of them in 72).

    ReplyDelete
  28. You're talking about politicians. I'm talking about voters. You ignoring that fact doesn't make your "point" valid. I know the politicians didn't change parties. But the racist Democratic politicians died and the racist politicians who took their place (representing the racist voters) identified as republican. And still do. Why the South votes republican.

    ReplyDelete
  29. lol! Then name the voters who switched. There must be massive lists of former Democrats who all changed their party affiliations to Republican. Have you counted them? How many officially switched parties and disassocated themselves from Democrats?

    ReplyDelete
  30. btw - wIth All those party switchers. to Republican in the late 60s, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi must have had some great Republican governors in the 70s and 80s.....


    ....oooooops.

    ReplyDelete
  31. So Whites in the southern states don't vote mostly for republican presidents? Who knew? How many southern states did Obama and Hillary win? Ooops.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi all voted for Dotard in 2016. Must be because so many Whites voted Democratic? Certainly it wasn't because Dotard received 8 percent of the Black vote.

    ReplyDelete
  33. In 2008, Obama won 3 (NC, VA, FL), Clinton won NC and VA again in 2016. Did she employ a "New Southern Strategy"? lol.

    ReplyDelete