PantsyMcPants

For what it’s worth, there’s a picture of me wearing a MAGA hat out there on the internet too. Ironically, of course, but I do sympathise with the guy. I do think it’s out of order for the Linux Foundation to ban him for this (although they claim there are other reasons).

That aside, this doesn’t mean I think he’s a good guy. From what I gather he seems like a normalish dude, maybe a little troll-ish, but I mean we all enjoy a good troll every now and then. I can’t hold that against him. But there’s no chance he wasn’t aware of the symbolism of posting that picture when he did. He pretends he doesn’t, but you’d have to be a fool to accept that.

I doubt he’s a Trump supporter or a racist, but even if he was I don’t think that’s good enough grounds to ban him unless there was good reason to think he was going to be a disruptive presence.

I decided to put all my cards on the table here because I’m a bit disturbed by the idea that you think that he was banned because he’s a white man? Banned by an organisation that is run largely by white men? Just trying to figure out how this works in your head.

Is it the white men on the board that hate him for being white? Is it the Asian men on the board that hate him for being white? Or is it the white women on the board that hate him for being white?

If you could clear that up, it’d be cool.

Awwww... I don’t think I’ve ever met someone that’s eaten one of Trump’s talking points in the wild before.

So, firstly Martin Luther King was assassinated for fighting for civil rights only 51 years ago. So you might wanna get your time line sorted. When you say “centuries” I reckon you’re talking about slavery, which ended in America about 150 years ago, which also technically isn’t even a multiple of centuries yet, so maybe you wanna look into that also.

Secondly it is actually exactly the policies that MLK was fighting against that still have their effects on black communities today. Segregation, underfunded school districts, black disenfranchisement, these things are still going on. They don’t just disappear when the laws change, you know. The result of centuries (yes multiple) of mismanagement and mistreatment don’t disappear in decades.

Lastly, it’s great that the black white unemployment gap has closed a little bit, but it’s not clear that this is a result of directed policy to achieve that. Currently we’re living in a time of extremely low interest rates and decent public spending. Anyone who wants money can get money cheap right now, which has helped aid extremely low unemployment generally. It’s a risk though, because the national debt has ballooned and this policy if not properly regulated can easily precipitate a recession. Low unemployment is a nice side effect though.

I didn’t say anything about his character. I don’t know anything about his interlocutors. Both of those things are kind of irrelevant to my post which is about the hat.

I think you’ve lost the thread. I’m not pretending I don’t know how much people would find my perspective disturbing like he was.

That said, no. I don’t.

Weirdest bit of apologetics ever. Making small tactical adjustments that reduces the spread of statements target, but has little effect on its meaning or effect.

I agree that active supporters of Trump are just as valid as any other group like white nationalists, KKK etc, but I disagree with the idea that is implied by your text that a group’s size makes them more valid as a group.

Half the country are not Republican. About half the electorate is. Voter turn out Was about 55%. 46% of the people voted for Trump. So about 25% of the citizens in the country voted for him. Even less currently support him and this is not even counting undocumented immigrants.

None of this should even matter anyhow because the size of the group doesn’t make it okay. I shouldn’t have to invoke Godwin’s law to justify this, but I will at the slightest provocation.

Child separation policy was new. Building a concrete wall across the border is new. Banning Muslims is new. Refusing a president the right to nominate judges and having the senate vote on them is new. I could go on.

I mean, I suppose we’ll never know what’s in his mind, but he seems suspiciously unaware of how much people would find that picture disturbing. Almost like in 2016 no one thought there was anything weird about Trump at all.

He could be a Trump supporter, but is actually trolling. He could be trolling and not be a Trump supporter. Either way, it’s impossible to accept that he didn’t know that Trump was a controversial character in 2016.

I mean, I wouldn’t take him at his word.

Major difference here being that black people weren’t allowed in because the hosts had unfair predujices, while people with MAGA hats aren’t allowed in because the people wearing them have unfair prejudices.

Subtle but important difference.

Of course, some people might be wearing MAGA hats and be unaware of Trumps demonisation of immigrants, banning Muslims, alleged (and admitted) attacks on women and refusal (initially at least) to condemn the KKK, Nazis and white supremacists, but I’m gonna go out on a limb and assume most of them have an inkling of this.

A MAGA hat is not dissimilar to a nazi symbol, albeit to a much lesser degree. You wouldn’t want Nazis around even if you knew they weren’t gonna do anything. Just having people around that devalue other human beings as lesser than them is enough.

It’s only a meaningless phrase if you’re motivated to interpret it in ways that are unhelpful. In that sense every phrase is a meaningless phrase until you get some details added to it.

Yeah, I’m not sure those two things are very different. History happened, it’s still happening. The Republican Party is still disenfranchising black voters as they did in history. Black people with equal education and training still find it harder to get jobs than white people, as they did in history. You can’t chuck history out of the window if you wanna create equal opportunities because history is what’s created the unfair system we live in today.