Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Vector]

It makes a fatal assumption, and runs with it, by begging the question that children raised in such a circumstance will never, and can never, question the conditions of their upbringing.

That isn't my assumption at all.

[wierd]

please elaborate, then, why it is that your thesis is hinging on "Paba and Maba" having been exposed to a certain thing, and thus being unable to change.

[Vector]

Oh. OK, my point is that part of what's operating here is early childhood nostalgia for what is unquestionably racist material being passed on uncritically, potentially by well-meaning and "liberal" people.

A lot of times people say "the schools will fix it," and my point is that teachers are not, like ... grown in a vat without racist formative experiences. Teachers who want to change things can have their hands tied by parents. My own mom, for example, is very angry that some people are not teaching the fairy tale version of Thanksgiving to kindergartners anymore because it's "nostalgic" and "traditional," objected to me learning about the native american genocide in 8th grade because it was "anti-white," . . . etc. I could go on. And on. And on.

OK, and so, that was my experience, and then I became a teacher. Fortunately, I'd learned to think differently from my parents, so I was able to keep myself from passing on some of what I was deliberately taught.

I did do things like teaching my students that algebra came from the middle east, not Greece. They generally assumed the opposite. I did this as gently as I could and didn't shame them for not knowing it or try to go "so WHY did you think it was GREEK, HUH? HUH? HUH?" However, some of them were upset because they considered this political correctness gone amuck. The argument goes something like "why are we trying to draw attention to something that will 'only divide people' in math class."

One, it's literally the truth, and two, we are happy to say that Euclidean geometry comes from Greece and that Newton invented the calculus and that Descartes invented the Cartesian plane and.

This is treated as neutral, non-divisive knowledge. But the other isn't.


I'm getting too tired and sleepy. Sorry for any incoherence.

[Vector]

Like, shit, Ukraine was always "The Ukraine" when I was learning it in elementary/middle school. but apparently that's a holdover from Soviet era Russia trying to discredit or debase the nation? I don't understand the controversy very well, and despite my best efforts, I'm still going to slip up and call it 'The Ukraine' even if I don't intend to, until I've put in that effort to really understand why not to do that.

This is a great example, and I happen to be able to answer your question. In Russian, the word literally means "borderlands." You inflect regular old nouns "the plains," "the ruins," "the street" differently from proper place names "England," "France," etc.

So in the USSR, they would call it as an improper place name, "borderlands" meaning "the Russian border," as opposed to "that country named Border." This is a little like in Hebrew how there is a push to claim that "Palestinians" is derived etymologically from "Philistines," a historical enemy, through using a certain spelling/etymology. That spelling is one of the tools used in propagandistic material to justify violence.

Translation as "The Ukraine" for whatever reason was used to replicate the effect in English of referring to Ukraine not as "Border" but "the border." So in English calling it "The Ukraine" really means nothing, but it directly refers to the policy in the USSR of treating Ukraine as unceded territory, belonging to Russia. We see the geopolitical impact and presence that this thinking still has in Russia from the Maidan events in Crimea some time ago.

And as for why this minor difference of a couple of letters matters so much to people -- you can investigate the holodomor, deliberate state-down policy of starvation of Ukrainians. So it isn't about a small border skirmish, instead about attempted purge of the population, starting first with that gesture of ownership.

Why I know this -- it was considered of enough knowledge to be first-semester core knowledge in the Russian course I took, along with saying "I don't know" to any question a Russian police officer asks you

[Rolan7]

I have a radical suggestion:

If you find that bit of children's literature offensive, then create something to replace it with, and then subtly replace it.

Dont make a virtue signal that space aliens can see from alpha centauri out of it.

Okay I'll pour my heart into a stream-of-consciousness post on the inherent value of humankind.
Oh no, racists are still sharing copies of Birth Of A Nation and also their fresh antisemitic and white supremacist memes

but my marketplace of ideas!!

Short of burning books like in Fahrenheit 451, you will never be able to prevent the sharing of racist and or, destructive ideation or literature between generations (Especially since freedom of speech is a fucking constitutional right). It's LESS than pointless to try, because you just open the door wide for those tactics to be used to destroy more progressive ideation.

Instead, you should focus on rational thought, and proper education for children in public schools, so that they can be exposed to things that are not pure invective and hate.

I wrote up a big post on this, I might still have it somewhere, but it boils down to a simple question-
What does the Right want in terms of stopping "cancellation"?

Obviously we run into trouble when we try to silence hate speech - by allowing private corporations to not broadcast it.
What exactly is the Right calling for when they say "free speech"?  They're definitely calling for corporations to change their practices - sometimes through legislation (so much for the marketplace of ideas).

Maybe I'm mis-characterizing their argument, but they seem so reluctant to spell it out.  What, exactly, should be done to extend "free speech" into private business forums?  What's the fee for refusing to host a nazi flag?

Is it like the established precedent of not having to make a gay wedding cake?

[dragdeler]

-

[bloop_bleep]

Russia has operated for centuries to try to wipe out and agglomerate Ukrainian identity, achievements, and autonomy. Even the name Russia is a lie. Russia was named after Rus' (and I think also out of an intended similarity with Prussia to a degree). Rus' was a medieval state with a capital in Kiev and covering mostly Ukraine. The name is literally Kievan Rus'. It was the center of learning, arts, and agriculture in Eastern Europe for centuries. Russia arose from a Mongol outpost to the east that pillaged and conquered the area (as they do best) and claimed to be heir to Rus' despite little ethnic or political continuity. Ukraine is no freaking borderlands, that is a Russian lie. In fact Ukraine was called "Ruthenia" before it was called "Ukraine". Another Russian invention. The entire USSR rocket program was spearheaded by Ukrainians. Korolyov, the famous """Soviet""" scientist and engineer, was UKRAINIAN. (Interesting how often I see Russian people living in the USSR called "Russian" and Ukrainian people in the USSR called "Soviet".) He even had his jaw broken by Russian KGB officers which caused him to die to being unable to get a surgery. Scores of Ukrainians scientists were interned at sharashkas to work for the Soviets, after which their discoveries were taken and published by famous Russian scientists with connections. Who knows how many Ukrainian people who were alive or could've been without the mass killing and genocide were oppressed and had their identity wiped out. Of course there was the cultural crackdown, the banning of the Ukrainian language by Russian despots. (How many people I hear say "Ukrainian? That's just Russian right??" even though even the *alphabet* is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT with major differences in letter inclusion and letter meaning and pronunciation. Go tell a Portuguese person that Portuguese is just Spanish -- and even there the alphabet is largely the same!.) Ukraine was a major industrial and engineering center in the USSR on top of being a major grain producer. A lot of famous "Russian" culture like hopak or borsch is UKRAINIAN in origin. Russia just coopted it as their own, as empires do. It still angers me when I hear these things called Russian. So much taken heritage. The Ukrainian people are incredibly talented themselves. Largest plane ever made? Ukrainian. Soviet rocketry like I said? Ukrainian. Igor Sikorsky, major contributor, arguably inventor of the helicopter? Ukrainian. (You know what his wikipedia page says? ""Igor Sikorsky was born in Kiev, Russian Empire (now Kyiv, Ukraine)." And it calls him Russian too.) It sickens me. The writer Gogol? Ukrainian. (They call him Russian too. Even my past history teacher did.) CD? Ukrainian. Cholera vaccine? Ukrainian. Remember this is a PISS-POOR COUNTRY (because of the Soviets. Because of course). I remember reading a couple years ago that the premier national institute had its heat shut off because it couldn't get the coal. And yet somehow Ukrainians are very educated and do spectacularly for their economic situation on international contests like the IMO.  (I think out of the top 15 positions on the 2020 IMO results Ukraine was the poorest by GDP.) The level of education for such a financial and political situation is nearly unheard of. Imagine if Ukraine was rich like by all means it should've been. It would lead Europe most likely.

I'm very proud of my Ukrainian heritage.

[dragdeler]

-

[bloop_bleep]

Is it the Ukrainian national anthem? Because it isn’t I don’t wanna hear about it. 

[Vector]

Russia has operated for centuries to try to wipe out and agglomerate Ukrainian identity, achievements, and autonomy. Even the name Russia is a lie. Russia was named after Rus' (and I think also out of an intended similarity with Prussia to a degree). Rus' was a medieval state with a capital in Kiev and covering mostly Ukraine. The name is literally Kievan Rus'. It was the center of learning, arts, and agriculture in Eastern Europe for centuries. Russia arose from a Mongol outpost to the east that pillaged and conquered the area (as they do best) and claimed to be heir to Rus' despite little ethnic or political continuity. Ukraine is no freaking borderlands, that is a Russian lie. In fact Ukraine was called "Ruthenia" before it was called "Ukraine". Another Russian invention. The entire USSR rocket program was spearheaded by Ukrainians. Korolyov, the famous """Soviet""" scientist and engineer, was UKRAINIAN. (Interesting how often I see Russian people living in the USSR called "Russian" and Ukrainian people in the USSR called "Soviet".) He even had his jaw broken by Russian KGB officers which caused him to die to being unable to get a surgery. Scores of Ukrainians scientists were interned at sharashkas to work for the Soviets, after which their discoveries were taken and published by famous Russian scientists with connections. Who knows how many Ukrainian people who were alive or could've been without the mass killing and genocide were oppressed and had their identity wiped out. Of course there was the cultural crackdown, the banning of the Ukrainian language by Russian despots. (How many people I hear say "Ukrainian? That's just Russian right??" even though even the *alphabet* is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT with major differences in letter inclusion and letter meaning and pronunciation. Go tell a Portuguese person that Portuguese is just Spanish -- and even there the alphabet is largely the same!.) Ukraine was a major industrial and engineering center in the USSR on top of being a major grain producer. A lot of famous "Russian" culture like hopak or borsch is UKRAINIAN in origin. Russia just coopted it as their own, as empires do. It still angers me when I hear these things called Russian. So much taken heritage. The Ukrainian people are incredibly talented themselves. Largest plane ever made? Ukrainian. Soviet rocketry like I said? Ukrainian. Igor Sikorsky, major contributor, arguably inventor of the helicopter? Ukrainian. (You know what his wikipedia page says? ""Igor Sikorsky was born in Kiev, Russian Empire (now Kyiv, Ukraine)." And it calls him Russian too.) The writer Gogol? Ukrainian. (They call him Russian too. Even my past history teacher did.) CD? Ukrainian. Cholera vaccine? Ukrainian. It sickens me. Remember this is a PISS-POOR COUNTRY (because of the Soviets. Because of course). I remember reading a couple years ago that the premier national institute had its heat shut off because it couldn't get the coal. And yet somehow Ukrainians are very educated and do spectacularly for their economic situation on international contests like the IMO.  (I think out of the top 15 positions on the 2020 IMO results Ukraine was the poorest by GDP.) The level of education for such a financial and political situation is nearly unheard of. Imagine if Ukraine was rich like by all means it should've been. It would lead Europe most likely.

I'm very proud of my Ukrainian heritage.

Thank you. I really appreciate your sharing it with us

[wierd]

I have a radical suggestion:

If you find that bit of children's literature offensive, then create something to replace it with, and then subtly replace it.

Dont make a virtue signal that space aliens can see from alpha centauri out of it.

Okay I'll pour my heart into a stream-of-consciousness post on the inherent value of humankind.
Oh no, racists are still sharing copies of Birth Of A Nation and also their fresh antisemitic and white supremacist memes

but my marketplace of ideas!!

Short of burning books like in Fahrenheit 451, you will never be able to prevent the sharing of racist and or, destructive ideation or literature between generations (Especially since freedom of speech is a fucking constitutional right). It's LESS than pointless to try, because you just open the door wide for those tactics to be used to destroy more progressive ideation.

Instead, you should focus on rational thought, and proper education for children in public schools, so that they can be exposed to things that are not pure invective and hate.

I wrote up a big post on this, I might still have it somewhere, but it boils down to a simple question-
What does the Right want in terms of stopping "cancellation"?

Obviously we run into trouble when we try to silence hate speech - by allowing private corporations to not broadcast it.
What exactly is the Right calling for when they say "free speech"?  They're definitely calling for corporations to change their practices - sometimes through legislation (so much for the marketplace of ideas).

Maybe I'm mis-characterizing their argument, but they seem so reluctant to spell it out.  What, exactly, should be done to extend "free speech" into private business forums?  What's the fee for refusing to host a nazi flag?

Is it like the established precedent of not having to make a gay wedding cake?

Here's my take, (however hot and spicy it may be..)

The Right is fucking addicted to playing the victim, because they know that their position is not really supportable, but they certainly FEEL.  As a consequence, they target rational discussion as liberal propaganda, while simultaneously stirring up liberal propaganda (which is not the same thing at all!) as proof of their being demonized without merit.

I will not even pretend that it is not dishonesty incarnate.

My take, is that the rise in both forms of propaganda are a consequence of propaganda being 'easier' than rational thought. Rational thinking requires accepting the potential that the other side might have some things right, or even be right in its entirety. (It also requires that fostering it in people, can have people come to conclusions that you find 'wrong'. Critical thinking and rational thought, are skills, not positions.) That is not something either side wants, and so it gets discarded for "PEOPLE JUST NEED TO BELIEVE LIKE I DO!!!!!" (Which then results in the high profile virtue signalling, both ways.)

In light of this, I propose that there are at least 3 ways to view/react to offensive literature.

1) BAN IT! BURN IT! DENY IT! IT'S EVIL AND HAS NO REDEEMING VALUE!!!!

2) IGNORE IT! IT'S FINE! IT'S SAFE! ALLOW ALL OF IT ALWAYS! IT'S OUR CULTURE!!!

and

3)  Evaluate the content of the medium, and make a decision about how we want to evolve as a culture, or as a person. 

I consider the first two to be manifestations of Leftist and Rightist propaganda machines, respectively. Both sides believe option 3 to be option 1 or option 2, depending on their perspective camp.  This is because option 3 restricts literature to rational discussion, in constrained avenues--  It does not outright ban, nor does it virtue signal about doing so.  Likewise, it does not outright permit, nor virtue signal about permittence.

I advocate option 3.

Take for instance, the infamous example of 'The adventures of Tom Sawyer and Huck Finn', a collection of works that flagrantly use the N word, depict rampant institutional racism as ordinary and acceptable, consider slavery acceptable, et al.

I do not believe this set of works should be out of publication.  However, I also do not believe it should be given directly to children, or held on a pedestal.  Instead, it should be assigned as reading in a higher classroom environment, when discussing the evolution of American culture, as a valuable window into what was once considered normal, and why.

This advocation of option 3, is why I do not think Dr Suess's books should be blacklisted by the publisher.  Instead, the publisher should proffer alternative literature for children, and move those books from the children's reading section to the adult reading section, under political science.

It should do that discretely, and not make a big scene about it.

There are reasons why I advocate for option 3.  Option 1 results in a dangerous "We define history!!!" condition.  I am not a fan of the Ministry of Truth.  Option 2 likewise, results in very undesirable outcomes.

[bloop_bleep]

My mother once said that the task given to every Ukrainian is, paraphrasing, to unscrew the world, so that’s what I’m gonna try to do.

[KittyTac]

What made it self-defense?

Wasn't he like attacked? I don't remember much of the incident.

If he indeed wasn't then yeah he's a murderer.

[Vector]

This advocation of option 3, is why I do not think Dr Suess's books should be blacklisted by the publisher.  Instead, the publisher should proffer alternative literature for children, and move those books from the children's reading section to the adult reading section, under political science.

It should do that discretely, and not make a big scene about it.

There are reasons why I advocate for option 3.  Option 1 results in a dangerous "We define history!!!" condition.  I am not a fan of the Ministry of Truth.  Option 2 likewise, results in very undesirable outcomes.

Oh. OK, yeah, I'd be down with this option. 100%.

[KittyTac]

This advocation of option 3, is why I do not think Dr Suess's books should be blacklisted by the publisher.  Instead, the publisher should proffer alternative literature for children, and move those books from the children's reading section to the adult reading section, under political science.

It should do that discretely, and not make a big scene about it.

There are reasons why I advocate for option 3.  Option 1 results in a dangerous "We define history!!!" condition.  I am not a fan of the Ministry of Truth.  Option 2 likewise, results in very undesirable outcomes.

Oh. OK, yeah, I'd be down with this option. 100%.

Fair enough. Also note that not all of his books are racist, those that aren't can stay.