achillobator55
Achillobator55
achillobator55

Not to mention the fact that fall is a traditionally a time of plenty and moderate temperatures. But, of course, that’s omitted from this “analysis” in favor of a tenuous - at best - tie in with “basic white girl” culture. 

This article is complete and utter garbage, but I suppose it gets a pass from the editorial staff because it’s sufficiently critical of American romanticism. In its haste to achieve this goal, it not only wanders off the tracks into a half-baked (lol) critique of Thanksgiving, it completely elides the fact that fall

Also, when did “goat” stop meaning the athlete who’s to blame for his team’s loss, like Bill Buckner?”

I think you may have missed this: “I can agree that these riots helped to galvanize the community and facilitated better organizing, but they did not actually produce change in terms of legislation or dominant perspectives on LGBTQ rights. Furthermore, riots and property damage aren’t really the context I was

The Salt March? Bloody Sunday?

I am going to go ahead and assume that you’ve just got a bone to pick with some enemy that isn’t me. This is the last time I will engage.

Jamaica was granted independence as part of the UK’s decolonization program. They did not achieve it through force of arms. Mississippi and South Carolina are not independent nations, they are territories within a larger state and subject to the power and numbers of that state’s laws and powers of policing.

The success of the LGBTQ movement in the US is almost entirely the result of advocacy and protest. I can agree that these riots helped to galvanize the community and facilitated better organizing, but they did not actually produce change in terms of legislation or dominant perspectives on LGBTQ rights. Furthermore,

I mentioned the Holocaust because I was asked about it, by Ms. Kai. So, again, check your notes.

I’ve had a very civil conversation with this poster that is absent any problematic power dynamics, mostly because neither of us has power over the other. I don’t like or appreciate the implication that noting someone’s misuse of a word, without malice, is the same thing as policing their grammar. I am grey here, so

“And, yes, the quote above states that black folks killed a white person and then white people killed a black person....but that is NOT in a bubble”

“I disagree that it was a direct factor in the entire community being burned down.”

There’s a lot here, and I don’t want to get pulled into a debate that’s going to devolve into a massive argument.

I wasn’t clear, which is my fault. I am not making the argument that the people in Tulsa should not have defended themselves. They had no choice, you are completely correct. That being said, the truth is that the scale of the destruction was also accelerated by two groups of armed people confronting each other in the

Fair question. There are times when there is no choice but to respond with violence. As I noted, given the circumstances in Tulsa at that time, violence was rampant and what happened was likely the unavoidable conclusion within that environment. The Nazis were only stopped by violence. The Confederacy was only stopped

So, that’s a reasonable interpretation. If that is what was meant, then I’d concur that it’s important that these stories are told and that we are not fed a watered down history of the fight for equality and racial justice in this country that omits things like Nat Turner’s rebellion, the Houston Riot, and the

I am not arguing that they did not have good reason to be self reliant and engaged in self defense. You’re missing the point. The larger argument isn’t about what this community was forced into doing. They had no choice, and tragically, died fighting for their lives and livelihoods. My criticism is with the larger

Except that the example here produces literally the opposite conclusion -- Violent resistance resulted in a more violent response that destroyed the wealthiest Black community in the US and cost somewhere between 30 and several hundred Black lives. But yea, sure, okay. 

Does using a word that means the opposite of what you intend get your point across? Certainly language can be flexible...but meaning is, in fact, important. 

I am not arguing against being ready and willing to defend yourself against white supremacy. I think that the bigger issue is recognizing what effective defense looks like. The argument that you are free to express your opinion because of violent rebellion or resistance, as opposed to say, the massive changes that