Has political correctness actually gone mad?

I'm always curious why people think the term Social Justice Warrior is an insult. If anything should tip you off to the fact you might be the baddies, it's when the derogatory terms you use for your 'enemies' are actually really nice and positive things.

"Social Justice!? Pah! Who dares bring this blight of justice upon our lands? And damn those dastardly fluffy bunnies, too. We'll show them and their adorable cotton ball tails before the winter's out. Mwa ha ha ha!"

Same goes for 'bleeding heart'..."Oh no, you care to much! What a cnut."

If I found myself being constantly agitated by the thought of generally nice ideas, I'd probably start checking my hat for skulls.
 
Last edited:
@hobbers how does that definition and example differ from racial prejudice or discrimination?
Being called an Uncle Tom might hurt their feelings sure, but then what, is racism just name calling and thinking less of someone?
 
Any thought or action that discriminates against someone based on the colour of their skin. Holding a belief that skin colour is an indicator of someones value as an individual or of a certain ability or weakness they possess. Although I'd also expand that definition to the belief that an individual must act in certain set ways according to their skin colour.

For instance, when a black lives matter activist calls a black conservative a race traitor, coconut or an uncle tom. That's acutely racist.

Good to know you're setting the rules here. I'm sure you're well placed to know what is and isn't racism.
 
I'm always curious why people think the term Social Justice Warrior is an insult. If anything should tip you off to the fact you might be the baddies, it's when the derogatory terms you use for your 'enemies' are actually really nice and positive things.

Did you read the Washington Post article, Pedro posted a little further up the page? Would you categorise what occurred there as really nice and positive?

This thread doesn't exist to deny social justice, indeed most posters have a fairer society in mind. It is rather that some of the people featured have proved to be hypocritical in their purported attempts to achieve such.


Good to know you're setting the rules here. I'm sure you're well placed to know what is and isn't racism.

Steady on Pogue, vi1lain just asked to define those actions he considered to be racism.
 
Last edited:
I would argue that an act of racism extends beyond mere thoughts and name-calling, however offensive it is.

For example across the road from where I work there is a bloke who racially abuses any person of colour that he sees when he's drunk. He presents no danger and is generally laughed at by the local residents who see him has a bloke who's prejudiced and holds racist views. In fact when sober, he makes no bones about how attracted he is to black women.

On the other hand for many people they fear people in authority that hold similar racist views (ie Police officers, politicians etc) because they possess the power to act on those beliefs. They can actually affect and alter the outcome of someone's life, and in many a instance over many years have done so.
 
It's more the fact that it doesn't seem to affect anyone other than a few oversensitive, invariably white SJWs who would still think we hadn't gone far enough to amend for the colonial wrongs of our ancestors when the self flagellation had removed every last trace of our pasty white flesh.

I've always found it absurd the way we attempt to tiptoe around racial and cultural stereotypes for fear of causing offense whilst the rest of the world just largely gets on with it and laughs, I remember as a left wing student being acutely embarrassed when my Indian housemate at Uni stuck on "The Party" one stoned Saturday afternoon and not quite understanding how he was pissing himself laughing at Peter Sellers rather than being offended. After all these years I still don't understand it, I'm just sure it's me that's got it wrong to some extent as I see 70s sitcoms like Mind Your Language are still airing on TV and sell on DVD in India and Singapore.
Great Post. Thanks.
 
Racism can only exist in the form of thoughts which may or may not lead to actions, so essentially yes. But obviously action can have a much broader scope than just name calling.




Really? Well, if you disagree with my opinion you're more than welcome to critique it.

Again, how does that differ from prejudice or discrimination?
What makes something racist versus it just being discrimination based on race?
 
I would argue that an act of racism extends beyond mere thoughts and name-calling, however offensive it is.

For example across the road from where I work there is a bloke who racially abuses any person of colour that he sees when he's drunk. He presents no danger and is generally laughed at by the local residents who see him has a bloke who's prejudiced and holds racist views. In fact when sober, he makes no bones about how attracted he is to black women.

On the other hand for many people they fear people in authority that hold similar racist views (ie Police officers, politicians etc) because they possess the power to act on those beliefs. They can actually affect and alter the outcome of someone's life, and in many a instance over many years have done so.

Good post, I agree.
Everybody is discriminatory or holds prejudiced views for example many people think blondes are better than brunettes. Difference is what you do with those thoughts and opinions that really matter.
Can blondes show their advantage over brunettes to the point where it affects their ability to get a job, get a house etc. No, of course not. Has there been a long historical context that displays brunettes as being second class citizens and worth less than blondes? Nope. Are brunettes more likely to be a target of violence or threat based on their hair colour? Nope, and so on.
Therefore what's the real impact other than it being someones opinion?

I think people get tied into this idea that racism is simply insulting or thinking less of someone based on their race only, and something can only be racist if there are derogatory terms associated with it.
And until you've lived your life being a person of colour, I don't really see how you can qualify what is truly is racist.

Whether the intention behind the discrimination stemmed from a racist ideology.

I still don't think that adequately differentiates between racism and prejudice or discrimination, but i'm not going to tell you what your opinion should be.

I would however suggest that you're not really in the position to talk about the impact of racism, or it's overuse - especially since (i'm assuming) it's not something that impacts your life? Therefore how could you measure the impact it has on those it does affect?
 
To what extent do you think the Trump phenomenon is explained by the issues being discussed in this thread? I mean, there's also Nafta and his supposed business acumen. And then there's the question of whether Clinton lost it, rather than Trump winning it. But how much is down to the fact he says what a lot of people think but are afraid to say? Or feel frowned upon for saying?
 
To what extent do you think the Trump phenomenon is explained by the issues being discussed in this thread? I mean, there's also Nafta and his supposed business acumen. And then there's the question of whether Clinton lost it, rather than Trump winning it. But how much is down to the fact he says what a lot of people think but are afraid to say? Or feel frowned upon for saying?
Lots. The guy in this video touched upon some of it. Well, from what I could tell while I was trying to avoid throwing up from the camera work, anyway

 
Yeah I saw that video, caused quite a stir among a few people I know. But I agree. Saw a clip on a right wing channel called Louder with Crowder which said something like "people don't want some ****** taking a dump next to their 6 year old daughter while they're at Chucky Cheese", which I thought summed up a certain mood quite amusingly.
 
I watched that video ready to disagree with him and did with some of his opening gambits. Since when is admitting to having a public and private persona a bad thing?! But he makes some good points, which I've been banging on about in this thread. The combination of social media and ever diminishing important stuff to complain about means that the liberal left has crawled up its own arse and become its own worst enemy.
 
But what are the "liberal left" actually saying (or not) that is causing such extreme reactions? A genuine question?

Surely it's got to be more than "I can't say what I think" argument? If so why the outrage at things like kids protesting about a safe space in college. In the 60s were there not protests about black students going to white colleges? What's different?

Are there more immigrants and people of colour in better jobs, homes or positions of status and influence that I'm not aware of? Last time I checked they ranked highly amongst the dispossessed and unlistened to in society.

Is arguing for a fairer world for all so wrong? Why does the white voter feel so alienated in a world which in recent history they have dominated?
 
Lots. The guy in this video touched upon some of it. Well, from what I could tell while I was trying to avoid throwing up from the camera work, anyway



The guy hits the nail on the head imo. Instead of being angry at the Trump voters they should be angry at their own party for not offering a real alternative to Trump. She lost because she couldn't get people to vote for her and not because the racists and misogynists came out in droves.

His point about the debating culture the regressive left and the alt right have created is also very poisoned atmosphere very everyone who doesn't agree with them 100% is automatically the enemy, if you want to convince someone of your view point that's a dead certain way to not make it happen and will drive a lot of people who are moderate into one or the other extreme corner and the debating culture goes to complete shit.
 
But what are the "liberal left" actually saying (or not) that is causing such extreme reactions? A genuine question?

Surely it's got to be more than "I can't say what I think" argument? If so why the outrage at things like kids protesting about a safe space in college. In the 60s were there not protests about black students going to white colleges? What's different?

Are there more immigrants and people of colour in better jobs, homes or positions of status and influence that I'm not aware of? Last time I checked they ranked highly amongst the dispossessed and unlistened to in society.

Is arguing for a fairer world for all so wrong? Why does the white voter feel so alienated in a world which in recent history they have dominated?
My guess is the biggest turnoff is the frequently pushed idea of 'white privilege'. All other things being equal, of course it's easier being white than being a minority. But all other things aren't equal - there are huge variances in circumstances. A lot of white people feel poor and left behind... telling them they're 'privileged' is a sure fire way to piss them off and show that you don't understand their circumstances.

The biggest indicator of privilege in our societies is wealth. That's not to say we should completely stop talking about other considerations such as gender, race or nationality, but there needs to be a focus on the fact that a poor white person has more in common with a poor black person than they do with a rich white person. And a rich black person has more in common with a rich white person than a poor black person.

Focussing on identity politics that seeks to elevate racial division above wealth as the issue of our time is completely counterproductive. It divides the natural working class coalition we need to construct if we are to win elections from the left.
 
I've been reading some of Obama's speeches from 2008 - he delivered a brilliant speech on race at the National Constitution Center. It contained this passage which I think perfectly encapsulates the problem:

That anger [that black people feel] is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.

In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.

Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.

That's exactly it. Obama understood that dividing up the working class into blacks, whites, latinos and the rest is an extremely counterproductive thing for any liberal to be doing. It means you can't win elections from the left.

Worth reading the full transcript here: http://constitutioncenter.org/amoreperfectunion/
 
T
I've been reading some of Obama's speeches from 2008 - he delivered a brilliant speech on race at the National Constitution Center. It contained this passage which I think perfectly encapsulates the problem:



That's exactly it. Obama understood that dividing up the working class into blacks, whites, latinos and the rest is an extremely counterproductive thing for any liberal to be doing. It means you can't win elections from the left.

Worth reading the full transcript here: http://constitutioncenter.org/amoreperfectunion/

Thanks for the link and earlier response. I have to read the full transcript.

I totally agree with you that in a ideal world we should be focussing on shared issues and ideologies, rather than those that divide us. It's a travesty that in the 21st century that the issue of racial division still exists. But it does. But isn't that what happened with Brexit and Trump? The politics of "us and them"? Elevation of race, immigration etc as the reason for the lack of wealth?

I cant agree that people should live in a world where all things aren't equal circumstancewise or any otherwise simply because that the way it is.

Your comment:

A lot of white people feel poor and left behind... telling them they're 'privileged' is a sure fire way to piss them off and show that you don't understand their circumstances
.

I think you could replace "white people" with black, Latino etc and this comment would still be correct.

So what does someone who falls into the "minorities" (god I hate this word) group do when they feel disenfranchised or left behind? How do they make their voices heard, or doesn't it matter because they aren't white and poor?

What other elements contribute to "white privilege" other than wealth for you? I believe there are many other important factors at play, such as education, housing, opportunities for employment, social acceptance etc. The list is endless....
 
My guess is the biggest turnoff is the frequently pushed idea of 'white privilege'. All other things being equal, of course it's easier being white than being a minority. But all other things aren't equal - there are huge variances in circumstances. A lot of white people feel poor and left behind... telling them they're 'privileged' is a sure fire way to piss them off and show that you don't understand their circumstances.

The biggest indicator of privilege in our societies is wealth. That's not to say we should completely stop talking about other considerations such as gender, race or nationality, but there needs to be a focus on the fact that a poor white person has more in common with a poor black person than they do with a rich white person. And a rich black person has more in common with a rich white person than a poor black person.

Focussing on identity politics that seeks to elevate racial division above wealth as the issue of our time is completely counterproductive. It divides the natural working class coalition we need to construct if we are to win elections from the left.

It's important to note that "white privilege" isn't only about economic status, money, wealth etc. - this is a dangerous concept that will only leave you feeling frustrated, especially if you aren't rich.
Privilege is a wide scope that covers a lot of things, social environments, education etc.
Also depending on the context, white privilege isn't even a bad thing, it can be used to make changes that impact everybody. Instead the usual response is to feel attacked and get defensive. Similar principle for Black Lives Matter. Instead of asking the question why these things exist or what we can do to build bridges and open communication, we stay isolated and listen to propaganda from both sides.

To be able to say "i'm a white person who feels left behind" means that you begin to understand what minorities have been saying for decades, that the system is broken, politicians don't represent us, a change needs to be made etc.
The difference is when white people begin to feel left behind things change much quicker.
 
It's important to note that "white privilege" isn't only about economic status, money, wealth etc. - this is a dangerous concept that will only leave you feeling frustrated, especially if you aren't rich.
Privilege is a wide scope that covers a lot o
It's important to note that "white privilege" isn't only about economic status, money, wealth etc. - this is a dangerous concept that will only leave you feeling frustrated, especially if you aren't rich.
Privilege is a wide scope that covers a lot of things, social environments, education etc.
Also depending on the context, white privilege isn't even a bad thing, it can be used to make changes that impact everybody. Instead the usual response is to feel attacked and get defensive. Similar principle for Black Lives Matter. Instead of asking the question why these things exist or what we can do to build bridges and open communication, we stay isolated and listen to propaganda from both sides.

To be able to say "i'm a white person who feels left behind" means that you begin to understand what minorities have been saying for decades, that the system is broken, politicians don't represent us, a change needs to be made etc.
The difference is when white people begin to feel left behind things change much quicker.

Great post
 
I cant agree that people should live in a world where all things aren't equal circumstancewise or any otherwise simply because that the way it is.
That's not the world I want to live in either. I'm saying the left has been failing to some degree on the messaging and means of achieving a more equal world.

Your comment:

A lot of white people feel poor and left behind... telling them they're 'privileged' is a sure fire way to piss them off and show that you don't understand their circumstances
.

I think you could replace "white people" with black, Latino etc and this comment would still be correct.
Exactly. If you said to a poor black person that they were 'privileged', they would rightly say you're an idiot. But we have been telling poor white people they are in some sense 'privileged' and they've now told us we are idiots.

I don't know if you've seen the documentary 'Making a Murderer'? It was quite effective in showing that poor white people suffer tremendous discrimination at the hands of the criminal justice system and broader society because they are poor (and 'white trash').

It's hard to make this point coherently, but I'll give it a go. If you imagine a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 is someone with no 'privilege' whatsoever, and 100 is someone like Donald Trump (rich, large inheritance, white, male, straight, elite etc). For arguments sake, let's say the average poor black man comes out at a 15 on this imaginary privilege scale... if an average poor white man comes out at a 25 on the scale, telling him he's 'privileged' is going to piss him off because there's a whole 75 points above him. He may have some more advantages in society compared to the poor black man, but he is still relatively unprivileged.

So what does someone who falls into the "minorities" (god I hate this word) group do when they feel disenfranchised or left behind? How do they make their voices heard, or doesn't it matter because they aren't white and poor?
They should do all the things they are doing: vote for the democrats, form protest groups and try to influence institutions to eliminate racial bias. What we as liberals shouldn't do is see the fight for greater racial equality as a reason to tell other disadvantaged groups (i.e. the poor white working class) that they are 'privileged' because of their race. It's a completely counterproductive and divisive message.

What other elements contribute to "white privilege" other than wealth for you? I believe there are many other important factors at play, such as education, housing, opportunities for employment, social acceptance etc. The list is endless....
Agree on all that. I'm not denying it's worse, on average, to be poor and black than it is to be poor and white, for all the reasons you state. But the poor have far more common grievances than differences, regardless of race. I can't be as eloquent as Obama, so I'll just point back to that passage of his speech I quoted above.
 
Last edited:
It's important to note that "white privilege" isn't only about economic status, money, wealth etc. - this is a dangerous concept that will only leave you feeling frustrated, especially if you aren't rich.
Privilege is a wide scope that covers a lot of things, social environments, education etc.
Also depending on the context, white privilege isn't even a bad thing, it can be used to make changes that impact everybody. Instead the usual response is to feel attacked and get defensive. Similar principle for Black Lives Matter. Instead of asking the question why these things exist or what we can do to build bridges and open communication, we stay isolated and listen to propaganda from both sides.

To be able to say "i'm a white person who feels left behind" means that you begin to understand what minorities have been saying for decades, that the system is broken, politicians don't represent us, a change needs to be made etc.
The difference is when white people begin to feel left behind things change much quicker.
What I'm trying to explain is why the inevitable response is to feel attacked and get defensive. If we are to get liberals elected - and achieve real change - we need to find a message and a tactic which gets poor whites and blacks on the same side, not seeing each other as a threat or gaining advantages at the other group's expense.
 
I've been reading some of Obama's speeches from 2008 - he delivered a brilliant speech on race at the National Constitution Center. It contained this passage which I think perfectly encapsulates the problem:



That's exactly it. Obama understood that dividing up the working class into blacks, whites, latinos and the rest is an extremely counterproductive thing for any liberal to be doing. It means you can't win elections from the left.

Worth reading the full transcript here: http://constitutioncenter.org/amoreperfectunion/

Never heard/read that speech before. So on the money and gets right to the heart of the "whitelash" against the Democrats. Such a pity that it obviously didn't get heard by the people that needed to hear it.

Of course, the genuine grievances felt by working/middle class whites about their problems not being heard or not being taken as seriously as those of minorities are mixed in with a load of old school racism, homophobia and general dislike and fear of anyone who is different. When you have a growing population (native plus immigrants) competing for scarce resources then prejudice against the "other" is almost inevitable. Trump came to power on the back of all of the above, which makes it hard to feel much sympathy for the disenfranchised white working class, even if the liberal left is unfairly ignorant of their plight.
 
That's not the world I want to live in either. I'm saying the left has been failing to some degree on the messaging and means of achieving a more equal world.


Exactly. If you said to a poor black person that they were 'privileged', they would rightly say you're an idiot. But we have been telling poor white people they are in some sense 'privileged' and they've now told us we are idiots.

I don't know if you've seen the documentary 'Making a Murderer'? It was quite effective in showing that poor white people suffer tremendous discrimination at the hands of the criminal justice system and broader society because they are poor (and 'white trash').

It's hard to make this point coherently, but I'll give it a go. If you imagine a scale from 0 to 100, where 0 is someone with no 'privilege' whatsoever, and 100 is someone like Donald Trump (rich, large inheritance, white, male, straight, elite etc). For arguments sake, let's say the average poor black man comes out at a 15 on this imaginary privilege scale... if an average poor white man comes out at a 25 on the scale, telling him he's 'privileged' is going to piss him off because there's a whole 75 points above him. He may have some more advantages in society compared to the poor black man, but he is still relatively unprivileged.


They should do all the things they are doing: vote for the democrats, form protest groups and try to influence institutions to eliminate racial bias. What we as liberals shouldn't do is see the fight for greater racial equality as a reason to tell other disadvantaged groups (i.e. the poor white working class) that they are 'privileged' because of their race. It's a completely counterproductive and divisive message.


Agree on all that. I'm not denying it's worse, on average, to be poor and black than it is to be poor and white, for all the reasons you state. But the poor have far more common grievances than differences, regardless of race. I can't be as eloquent as Obama, so I'll just point back to that passage of his speech I quoted above.

Again thanks for the response. A lot of food for thought and future debate don't you think? I've enjoyed talking to you. Gonna read that link you sent.
 
What I'm trying to explain is why the inevitable response is to feel attacked and get defensive. If we are to get liberals elected - and achieve real change - we need to find a message and a tactic which gets poor whites and blacks on the same side, not seeing each other as a threat or gaining advantages at the other group's expense.

I agree with that wholeheartedly, and it will take effort from both sides to do so.

Honestly I think the recent elections both Brexit & Trump are the last throw of the dice for the old school way of thinking, there's a clear divide based on age, and I personally don't believe things will continue in this trend long term.
 
I agree with that wholeheartedly, and it will take effort from both sides to do so.

Honestly I think the recent elections both Brexit & Trump are the last throw of the dice for the old school way of thinking, there's a clear divide based on age, and I personally don't believe things will continue in this trend long term.

I really want this to be true. :)
 
I agree with that wholeheartedly, and it will take effort from both sides to do so.

Honestly I think the recent elections both Brexit & Trump are the last throw of the dice for the old school way of thinking, there's a clear divide based on age, and I personally don't believe things will continue in this trend long term.
I hope so. I'm less certain whether that will be the case though. The young haven't yet had their hopes and dreams crushed by the realities of the world. They could easily fall prey to the same reactionary and discriminatory forces that suckered in their parents, especially if their economic fortunes don't play out how they hope.
 
I could be wrong be it's worth saying the poorest and the middle class who did vote, voted in favour of Clinton. The problem was not enough people voted(I image that's more to do with Clinton being shite rather than people agreeing with Trump)



Never heard/read that speech before. So on the money and gets right to the heart of the "whitelash" against the Democrats. Such a pity that it obviously didn't get heard by the people that needed to hear it.
It's a bit cnuty of me but Obama for all his great talk hasn't help the situation at all.
 
I hope so. I'm less certain whether that will be the case though. The young haven't yet had their hopes and dreams crushed by the realities of the world. They could easily fall prey to the same reactionary and discriminatory forces that suckered in their parents, especially if their economic fortunes don't play out how they hope.

It isn't quite as simple as that.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mr-personality/201410/why-are-older-people-more-conservative

This should be perhaps be of greatest concern.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2015/10/do-we-become-more-conservative-age

This means that the Conservatives probably shouldn’t be too worried about their support base thinning out and being replaced by younger, less conservative generations. If history repeats itself, then as people get older they will turn to the Conservatives. Our evidence suggests that this is probably not due to “social ageing” (getting married, having children or an increasing income), but rather to the direct psychological processes of ageing that tend to make people more resistant to change. This, in turn, makes people gravitate towards parties that defend the status quo.

All this is good news for the Conservatives. The population as a whole is getting older, after all. What’s more, older people are more likely to vote than younger people. Looking to the future, politicians of the right should perhaps worry less about appealing to younger voters, in the hope that they’ll stick with the same party as they age. Instead, the main concern should be ensuring the continued loyalty of their older voters.
 
Last edited:
I could be wrong be it's worth saying the poorest and the middle class who did vote, voted in favour of Clinton. The problem was not enough people voted(I image that's more to do with Clinton being shite rather than people agreeing with Trump)
Not really.

  • White voters, who make up 69% of the total, voted 58% for Trump and 37% for Clinton. Non-white voters, who make up 31% of the electorate, voted 74% for Clinton and 21% for Trump.
  • White men opted 63% for Trump and 31% for Clinton; white women voted 53% for Trump and 43% for Clinton.
  • Among non-college-educated whites, 67% voted for Trump – 72% of men and 62% of women.
  • Among college-educated whites, 45% voted for Clinton – 39% of men and 51% of women (the only white demographic represented in the poll where the former secretary of state came out on top). But 54% of male college graduates voted for Trump, as did 45% of female college graduates.
  • More 18- to 29-year-old whites voted for Trump (48%) than Clinton (43%).
 
I hope so. I'm less certain whether that will be the case though. The young haven't yet had their hopes and dreams crushed by the realities of the world. They could easily fall prey to the same reactionary and discriminatory forces that suckered in their parents, especially if their economic fortunes don't play out how they hope.
When you think about the (un)affordibility of housing and the pitiful pensions future generations are facing, the seeds for disenchantment and pure anger are already well and truly sown.
 
This is a bit off the political correctness topic, but there was a Cracked article about the people that Mike has been talking about. The article is called "How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind", and I first found out about it from a video I watched a couple of weeks ago, which I'll post below as I think it's a good watch



The general topic comes up at 28:00 which I'd recommend watching from, but if you want to skip straight to the Cracked article go to 38:30.
 
Last edited:
This is a bit off the political correctness topic, but there was a Cracked article about the people that Mike has been talking about. The article is called "How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind", and I first found out about it from a video I watched a couple of weeks ago, which I'll post below as I think it's a good watch



The general topic comes up at 28:00 which I'd recommend watching from, but if you want to skip straight to the Cracked article go to 38:30.

Mockney posted that article a few weeks ago and it's one of the best I've read in terms of understanding Trump's appeal.
 
This is a bit off the political correctness topic, but there was a Cracked article about the people that Mike has been talking about. The article is called "How Half Of America Lost Its F**king Mind", and I first found out about it from a video I watched a couple of weeks ago, which I'll post below as I think it's a good watch

It's so scarily fascinating how at least 85% of that article can be applied directly to my country (and I assume to so many other places in the 'western' and probably whole world).
 
I think that Liberals, especially white liberals, do have a bit of a weak spot when it comes to working class white people* which has led to them being alienated and pushed towards people like Trump.

Although I do think another inescapable conclusion from this election is that the panic over PC culture overwhelming america was a load of overblown bullshit. Mainly caused by the media focusing on some of the most liberal places in the world, colleges, where all these liberal students were free to run wild with their liberal ideas, then report it as if it was somehow going to be imposed on anyone else. The largest demographic of generation snowflake, whites, just voted for Trump, I think America can rest easy from the threat of safe spaces.

* I think this is best exemplified by the fact that Idiocracy is a film hailed as a genius work of satire. It's entire conceit is that the world is getting dumbed down because stupid people are breeding more than smart people. It's a very clearly smug, classist, eugenics inspired piece of shit rational that was not only accepted but hailed by a whole bunch of liberal people mainly because it is illustrated by a dumb white hillbilly family.
 
I think that Liberals, especially white liberals, do have a bit of a weak spot when it comes to working class white people* which has led to them being alienated and pushed towards people like Trump.

Although I do think another inescapable conclusion from this election is that the panic over PC culture overwhelming america was a load of overblown bullshit. Mainly caused by the media focusing on some of the most liberal places in the world, colleges, where all these liberal students were free to run wild with their liberal ideas, then report it as if it was somehow going to be imposed on anyone else. The largest demographic of generation snowflake, whites, just voted for Trump, I think America can rest easy from the threat of safe spaces.

* I think this is best exemplified by the fact that Idiocracy is a film hailed as a genius work of satire. It's entire conceit is that the world is getting dumbed down because stupid people are breeding more than smart people. It's a very clearly smug, classist, eugenics inspired piece of shit rational that was not only accepted but hailed by a whole bunch of liberal people mainly because it is illustrated by a dumb white hillbilly family.
I don't get the 'safe space' thing tbh. Do black college students really feel in such mortal terror when walking around campus that they need some form of black-only common panic room:confused:
 
I hate that shit's gotten so bad that I find myself more or less thinking "yes" when faced with the question posed by this thread. I'm in a fecking group with men's rights activists and red pillers and other scum. Personally I reckon political correctness is fine... it's essentially just common courtesy... but it had to go mad :(
 
I don't get the 'safe space' thing tbh. Do black college students really feel in such mortal terror when walking around campus that they need some form of black-only common panic room:confused:

Safe spaces aren't just for black people. It's for people triggered by whatever... took a course in Greek literature and found it a bit too rapey? Go stroke a kitten in the safe space room.

Edit: appears I'm conflating some stuff.

In educational institutions, safe-space (or safe space), safer-space, and positive space originally were terms used to indicate that a teacher, educational institution or student body does not tolerate anti-LGBT violence, harassment or hate speech, thereby creating a safe place for all lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender students.[2] The term safe space has been extended to refer to a space for individuals who feel marginalized to come together to communicate regarding their experiences with their perceived marginalization, typically on a university campus