If that's all you're exposed to and there's no contrarian opinion or really anything, it's totally normal to think that if you've never been exposed to it.

were you raised in eurasia?

I wasn't even exposed to THAT,

To me, Left was caring about society, and Right was caring about the economy

boy was i wrongly informed

I'm close enough to chicago where I'm impacted by all of their bullshit laws, if that tells you anything.

😬 🔫

Yeah, from what I recall of my education, there wasn't any deep philosophical discussions or attempts at explaining anything relating to political parties or anything.

"This is the system. This is how the system works. Here's a very condensed, ultra-simplified version of American history."

So from what I remember it was less "the left cares about society and the right cares about the economy" and more "the left cares about society, the left also cares about the economy, and we're not going to say it outright but we can imply that because we, the left, are the good guys, then.. *they're* the bad guys."

yeah, so basically "left = good, right = bad" mentality

It wasn't until I was in high school with a very unorthodox teacher (at times) that I was even introduced to the concept that it's not automatically a good thing that a) everyone thinks the same way or b) that everyone is on the left.

Also, coincidentally, my first experience with one of those political spectrum tests.

Of which, I, and pretty much everyone in the class ended up left/lib, roughly 2/3rds closer to the middle than the outer edge.

There's a reason why this conditioning is so damn difficult to break I imagine.

It's the same shit that happens to kids born into ultra religious families.

the trick, is getting a hot chick to explain right-wing politics, trust me 😛 it will all make sense

Hah.

i imagine you probably get a skewed american history lesson about republicans too

like did they even mention how the KKK assassinated hundreds of white republicans for their views? or that it was a republican that wrote the 13th amendment?

Im not saying theyre the same party as they were then...

It's honestly all a blur. The most I remember is that because of the string of constant moves I basically ended up relearning the exact same stuff over and over again in slightly greater detail each time.

I remember that they taught us that the cause of the civil war was primarily because of slavery and that abraham lincoln was the president ultimately involved in freeing them.

Though I don't recall them mentioning his political affiliation or anything.

nor his skin color 🤔

Wasn't Lincoln what we'd consider today as fairly right?

Well, he was a republican.

thats another thing that kind of annoys me about the alt right.... when they say crap like "white people ended slavery" its like... no.. not really... it was British and Americans... not "white people"

Well that's just identity politics in a nutshell, right?

Alt right kinda started up *because* of identity politics of the left.

well, at the time, 90% of brits and americans WERE white, so its kind of semantics,
but then again, if it were up to the alt-right, white people invented the human race

and from the other side "white people started slavery" ... like... white people didnt even EXIST when slavery started 😛

So if you define everything by identity, they were right. Whether or not that truly matters in the grand scheme of things is another thing entirely.

>conveniently forgetting it was a slave **trade**

how about all fucks of the western world forgot that "Slavery" was coined based on the White "SLAVS" of eastern europe

`blyat`

cyka

jokes aside 😛 its literally where the word came from

`Just another non-issue.`

so black people aren't even allowed to use the slavery card!

yeah but thats just a language thing

its us Slavs who were the first to be enslaved! 😛

its not called Enblackment! 😛

Don't give them ideas.

haha

i think america could be more inclusive if they got rid of the term "african american" ... i think the US is the only country in the world that does that

well duh, you're not gonna make much sense if you call a black guy in Europe an "african American"

Don't people already do that?

Also the term itself is kind of.. hilarious.

like in britain ... if you are black... youre just british

in Britain you're either a black guy, or a black british guy

Consider, I dunno. Jamaicans or something.

But then again.

"African american" is still considered politically correct so people'll continue to use it.

It's either that or "pee oh see" these days.

another thing... to say black panther is a "black movie"... I would say its an "african movie" .. I would say culturally a white person growing up in Africa - is more african than a black man raised in the US (culturally speaking)

black movie? try gay movie 😛

you could say "but my heritage is african" ... but so is everyones 😛

although apparently thats become more complicated recently with new findings

PoC feels like a fancy way of saying "colored person"

It really is.

Segregation is racist, unless we do it.

PoC feels like something a racist would say

But it's to hold non-white people to a higher regard. So it's not racist. Clearly.

Oh wait... it is.

I think context matters

Racism is racism.

In either direction.

People of color, is to Colored people,

How "Jerome, please Paint", is to "Black paint" 😂

Its there to lump people together because of their race. There is no more context needed to make it racist.

And black panther is a mid to upper tier marvel movie with bad special effects. Nothing more, nothing less.

just lumping people together because of race is not racist on its own... biologists do it.. doctors do it... but to imply some sort of superiority makes it racist

I haven't watched it but I watched an analysis of it breaking down how drunk the story is.

I can ignore bad effects. Story with plot holes the size of the moon, ehhhhh.

Doctors do not lump people together because of their race. They group them in „risk-groups“ that just so happen to be devided by race.

White people are more likely to develop osteoporosis, etc etc.

Though I've been listening to a lot of voices on the whole "racism" debate.

Including a black dude who says racism is "okay" as long as you aren't being a piece of shit with it.

Racism is ok, as long as you live in a meritocracy

Depends on definitions i guess... i don‘t believe that you can really choose if you are racist or not (just like you do not conciously decide if you like cats or dogs) but you can decide how you deal with it if you are.

Racism becomes a non-factor

To a degree.

In terms of.

Change my mind =p

Basically, at the end of the day. Everyone is at least a little bit racist. And that's honestly okay.

That's the message I got from the black guy I watched talking about this stuff.

Without it, you'd end up just being blind / stupid.

I would love to do a change my mind with crowder on gun control... his arguments are so bad 😁

It's the same argument you can apply to everything.

racism has just gotten a lot of bad rep imo,

All them asian wamen who prefer rich white dudes, thats racism too, buy who's gonna call it bad, amirite? 😎

I prefer to say racism doesn't exist, than debate the definition where in the end it means "people are different". Which we already know

I see.

I dunno. Crowder's a good guy / is entertaining. The quality of his reporting is.. mixed.

I still remember that one debate he had with the pro-socialist college kid a while back. That went so well I couldn't bring myself to watch the rest of the video.

I did not say that he is not entertaining 😁

I prefer Crowder's reporting to Tim's tbh

He is biased, but you know where he stands

He's biased but it's okay. He's *trying* to be honest at the very least.

Same for Tim?

Everyone's biased, Tim's less so than crowder.

By a fair margin.

Crowder is good if you want pro-right wing, Tim pool just tells the story in context and lets you decide