News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:John McWhorter: The Neoracists by lisper on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @02:42PM (#26081647)
Just because a slogan is "all over" doesn't mean that people actually believe in its literal meaning. It's kind of like the difference between "black lives matter" and "all lives matter". The literal meaning of both of these slogans is clearly true and so on their face they are not at odds with each other. But there is a sub-text to both slogans that pits them against each other.

Likewise, "Silence is violence" doesn't literally mean what it says. What the people who recite it actually mean, I suspect, is that if you do not actively speak out against racism then you are complicit in it, which is a not-entirely-unreasonable position.

But McWhorter was not talking about the slogan. His wording presents it as a literal truth.

Re:John McWhorter: The Neoracists by edbob on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @09:19PM (#26085088)
> But McWhorter was not talking about the slogan. His wording presents it as a literal truth.

You're making that up. This is everything he said about the slogan: "3. Silence about racism is violence. But elevate the voices of the oppressed over your own." There is absolutely nothing to suggest that he is forcing a literal meaning of the phrase.

Originally you said "I am highly skeptical that a significant number of people profess to believe this." Now that your claim has been proven false, you're moving the goal posts to "people don't believe in its literal meaning" and trying to pretend that McWhorter suggested otherwise. Yet you accuse McWhorter of strawmanning. Ironic.

Re:John McWhorter: The Neoracists by lisper on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @09:43PM (#26085221)
> There is absolutely nothing to suggest that he is forcing a literal meaning of the phrase.

Actually there is: the inclusion of the words "about racism". "Silence is violence" is a catchy slogan. "Silence about racism is violence" is less catchy, so it is not at all implausible that he did not intend it to be read as a slogan, but rather an actual literal assertion.

Re:John McWhorter: The Neoracists by edbob on Tuesday February 09, 2021 @10:40PM (#26085498)
I'm at a loss to see how one could rationally arrive at that conclusion. It's self-evident from the article that McWhorter meant the phrase in the same sense as it's commonly understood. Anything else would be pointless, since he's discussing contemporary usage of the phrase.

One should generally try to figure out what the author's intended meaning was, rather than twist the meaning into something that's easy to argue against but the author would never approve of.