Level of consciousness of Antifa and BLM?

[Danioover9000]

nuance

/ˈnjuːɑːns/

Learn to pronounce

noun

a subtle difference in or shade of meaning, expression, or sound.

"he was familiar with the nuances of the local dialect"

Similar: fine distinction subtle distinction/difference shade shading gradation variation modulation degree subtlety nicety refinement overtone verb

give nuances to.

 

bigger picture(Noun)

An understanding of a situation that includes more than what is immediately apparent.

 

humour

/ˈhjuːmə/

noun

1.

the quality of being amusing or comic, especially as expressed in literature or speech.

"his tales are full of humour"

Similar:

comical aspect

comic side

funny side

comedy

funniness

hilarity

jocularity

absurdity

absurdness

ludicrousness

drollness

facetiousness

satire

irony

Opposite:

seriousness

2.

a mood or state of mind.

"her good humour vanished"

Similar:

mood

temper

disposition

temperament

frame of mind

state of mind

spirits

verb

comply with the wishes of (someone) in order to keep them content, however unreasonable such wishes might be.

"she was always humouring him to prevent trouble"

Similar:

indulge

pander to

yield to

bow to

cater to

give way to

 

   I'm doing this because sometimes if we have a discussion that's mostly implicit rather than explicit, we tend to not clearly see the issues involved.

[Nyseto]

15 minutes ago, Danioover9000 said:

nuance

/ˈnjuːɑːns/

Learn to pronounce

noun

a subtle difference in or shade of meaning, expression, or sound.

"he was familiar with the nuances of the local dialect"

Similar: fine distinction subtle distinction/difference shade shading gradation variation modulation degree subtlety nicety refinement overtone verb

give nuances to.

 

bigger picture(Noun)

An understanding of a situation that includes more than what is immediately apparent.

 

humour

/ˈhjuːmə/

noun

1.

the quality of being amusing or comic, especially as expressed in literature or speech.

"his tales are full of humour"

Similar:

comical aspect

comic side

funny side

comedy

funniness

hilarity

jocularity

absurdity

absurdness

ludicrousness

drollness

facetiousness

satire

irony

Opposite:

seriousness

2.

a mood or state of mind.

"her good humour vanished"

Similar:

mood

temper

disposition

temperament

frame of mind

state of mind

spirits

verb

comply with the wishes of (someone) in order to keep them content, however unreasonable such wishes might be.

"she was always humouring him to prevent trouble"

Similar:

indulge

pander to

yield to

bow to

cater to

give way to

 

   I'm doing this because sometimes if we have a discussion that's mostly implicit rather than explicit, we tend to not clearly see the issues involved.

Any confusion there may be among us, love is always the answer in the end. Fuck it

That's all the guidelines point to in the end. When I read them where they were mentioning things like "Watch your devilry, etc." I was like oh boy...I can tell Leo is trying his best here to show the bigger picture. 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Nyseto

[Forestluv]

20 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

No, I shared those memes because of the humor. 

“I was just joking” can also be used as a diversion from accountability and introspection .

I’m not saying everything you write is 100% wrong. I think it has some truth in some contexts. Yet wearing one lens is very limiting and can lead to distorted views. Part of consciousness expansion is increasing multi-perspectival awareness and understanding.

[Nyseto]

10 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

“I was just joking” can also be used as a diversion from accountability and introspection .

I’m not saying everything you write is 100% wrong. I think it has some truth in some contexts. Yet wearing one lens is very limiting and can lead to distorted views. Part of consciousness expansion is increasing multi-perspectival awareness and understanding.

Trust me, there's nothing that you've been saying which I've never heard. Now you might say to that, "Yeah well there's a difference between saying you heard everything I've said and actually understanding it."

And get ready for this one ok? Drumroll....I've heard that too.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Nyseto

[Consept]

3 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

Trust me, there's nothing that you've been saying which I've never heard. Now you might say to that, "Yeah well there's a difference between saying you heard everything I've said and actually understanding it."

And you know it...I've heard that too.

Do you think blm or something similar is necessary? If so how would you combat racial inequalities? Keeping in mind if you do protest peacefully you would either not be listened to or if you're high profile like in the case of kaepernick be demonised, lose your job etc 

[Forestluv]

17 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

Trust me, there's nothing that you've been saying which I've never heard. 

 

Trust me, there's nothing that you've been saying which I've never heard. Now you might say to that, "Yeah well there's a difference between saying you heard everything I've said and actually understanding it."

And you know it...I've heard that too.

Within the context you are creating, that is true. Yet it is also a contraction within that context and a deterrent to expanding. If one lives within a map of Paris, they will not see maps other than Paris nor will they see Paris from outside countries. 

Tier 2 minds have a different orientation. In a way, Tier 2 minds are like thieves. Such minds are so into multi-perspectives to create systemic / holistic views that they can recognize when others have a piece to a larger puzzle. Rather than protect a contracted view, they “steal” the piece from the larger collective mind to create a more integrative, systemic view.

It’s not about “your” views vs “my” views. We are both within a larger collective mind. 

 

[Scholar]

1 hour ago, Forestluv said:

Have you studied MLK’s views regarding overcoming racism, looting and vandalism? His views are different than yours. He did not frame the movement as you are trying to do.

Saying that anti-racism protestors should be 100% peaceful and act like “good boys and girls” can be used to maintain the status quo of injustice. It can maintain asymmetric power dynamics. Look at the decades of purely peaceful efforts of the suffragists. They got nowhere. And look at the impact the suffragettes had. Similarly, there have been decades of peaceful efforts to overcome systemic racism with little progress. Quite often, making those in power uncomfortable is an impetus to progress.

And how can we make progress toward greater equality by focusing on untasteful incidents within groups that are subjected to injustice? If we wanted to help a Native American group being abused by a larger, more powerful group - how would it help to focus on the fact that seven people within the Native American group is alcoholic and abuse their wives? Cherry picking and portraying the group as a bunch of violent alcoholics is a distortion and a distraction to the larger goal of trying to correct abuse injustices being committed to a marginalized group. 

If our main goal is to correct systemic racism and move to greater equality, the focus should not be to portray blm as hypocritical, looters and vandals. That may be an issue to address, yet the deeper issue is correcting systemic racism. A common way to undercut movements by cherry picking and distracting from the underlying motivation of a movement.

And it’s much easier to be “tone police” when one does not have the life experience of those protesting. If you were a young black male living in an inner city, subjected to racial profiling, got unfairly treated in a judicial system and watched this happen to your friends and family - you would have a very different view than you do now. Yet you are unable to see and understand that perspective. You are wearing a particular lens are normalizing through that lens. That lens has partial truth and some value, yet it is a partial view of the whole. If you try to extrapolate with that one lens, the bigger picture will be distorted. To see and understand more points within a bigger picture, one must take out their lens and wear another lens. Yet this can be extremely hard to do since most minds are attached and identified to one lens. 

For example, in an effort to see through another lens, I lived in poor areas of Honduras and Colombia for months. This gave me a glimpse into very different experiences and expanded my mind. There were times in which I could not fully trust police or the justice system. There were a few times in which evading a police officer or resisting arrest was on the table - even though I didn’t do anything wrong. I never experienced anything like that in my life and it expanded my mind and allowed for multi-perspectival understanding. 

Excellent analysis Forest. I find this kind of mentality often occupied by people who resist progress towards a more vegan society. Many people for example will use the hypocrisy of vegans to justify whatever they are doing.

Crop deaths are a good example. Someone might say, why is it okay to kill animals in crop production but not to kill animals in a slaughterhouse? The vegan is clearly a hypocrate, therefore I can continue to consume meat from slaughterhouses. The one who is using this line of reasoning does not actually care about animals who die in crop deaths nor about those who die in a slaughterhouse. He is simply using that example to hinder progress. It is as if a proponent of slavery had said that the abolitionists are hypocrates because while they think it is wrong to enslave a certain race of humans, they do believe it is fine to enslave animals. Yes, the abolitionist is indeed a hypocrate. But the argument here is not being used to actually point out a flaw so that it can be corrected, no, the argument is made so that a change in behaviour can be dimissed.

With this kind of reasoning, progress can be halted. The slaves nor the animals get to live a existence free of enslavement.

 

However the context changes. Today it is quite valid to compare a person who believes human slavery to be wrong but yet justifies it in the animal context. It is the case because this comparison is not use to invalidate progress, but rather to fuel it.

 

Now the question is, who will go on the streets and fight for the animals? Imagine how long it would have taken black people to free themselves of slavery if none of them had the ability to speak or resist. I think this is perfectly demonstrated if we look at how animals are treated. If humans of the same capacity for sentience were to be treated this way, we would deem it to be justified to kill those who are enslaving them so that we could put an end to this tremendous kind of suffering.

 

Imagine how it might expand your mind if you could spend a month in a factory farm, or a slaughterhouse.

[Nyseto]

10 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

Within the context you are creating, that is true. Yet it is also a contraction within that context and a deterrent to expanding. 

Tier 2 minds have a different orientation. In a way, Tier 2 minds are like thieves. Such minds are so into multi-perspectives to create systemic / holistic views that they can recognize when others have a piece to a larger puzzle. Rather than protect a contracted view, they “steal” the piece from the larger collective mind to create a more integrative, systemic view.

It’s not about “your” views vs “my” views. We are both within a larger collective mind. 

I know that I know nothing.

[Forestluv]

12 minutes ago, Consept said:

If so how would you combat racial inequalities? Keeping in mind if you do protest peacefully you would either not be listened to or if you're high profile like in the case of kaepernick be demonised, lose your job etc 

One of the key dynamics in addressing inequality. 

[Nyseto]

28 minutes ago, Consept said:

Do you think blm or something similar is necessary? If so how would you combat racial inequalities? Keeping in mind if you do protest peacefully you would either not be listened to or if you're high profile like in the case of kaepernick be demonised, lose your job etc 

Yes I think something similar is necessary. Everything in life comes with a consequence. What matters is if you can accept it fully. I guess I'll know how to help fix America's racial inequalities one day when I become president. 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Nyseto

[Forestluv]

20 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Excellent analysis Forest. I find this kind of mentality often occupied by people who resist progress towards a more vegan society. Many people for example will use the hypocrisy of vegans to justify whatever they are doing.

Crop deaths are a good example. Someone might say, why is it okay to kill animals in crop production but not to kill animals in a slaughterhouse? The vegan is clearly a hypocrate, therefore I can continue to consume meat from slaughterhouses. The one who is using this line of reasoning does not actually care about animals who die in crop deaths nor about those who die in a slaughterhouse. He is simply using that example to hinder progress. It is as if a proponent of slavery had said that the abolitionists are hypocrates because while they think it is wrong to enslave a certain race of humans, they do believe it is fine to enslave animals. Yes, the abolitionist is indeed a hypocrate. But the argument here is not being used to actually point out a flaw so that it can be corrected, no, the argument is made so that a change in behaviour can be dimissed.

With this kind of reasoning, progress can be halted. The slaves nor the animals get to live a existence free of enslavement.

 

However the context changes. Today it is quite valid to compare a person who believes human slavery to be wrong but yet justifies it in the animal context. It is the case because this comparison is not use to invalidate progress, but rather to fuel it.

 

Now the question is, who will go on the streets and fight for the animals? Imagine how long it would have taken black people to free themselves of slavery if none of them had the ability to speak or resist. I think this is perfectly demonstrated if we look at how animals are treated. If humans of the same capacity for sentience were to be treated this way, we would deem it to be justified to kill those who are enslaving them so that we could put an end to this tremendous kind of suffering.

 

Imagine how it might expand your mind if you could spend a month in a factory farm, or a slaughterhouse.

There does seem to be parallels. Rather than racism, it’s humanism. Just as humans downgrade the existence of other races, they downgrade the existence of other animals. Yet the mind has an amazing capacity of rationalizing.

My understanding is that factory farms and slaughterhouses strictly forbid video footage from being recorded  and released publicly as this would increase awareness of the violence. I’ve seen some outside images and they look like prison complexes. Yet rather than to keep inmates in, they are trying to keep people out. The animals cannot escape. I agree that if everyone spent a month living in those conditions, their feelings and views would change. And the working conditions inside slaughterhouses are awful. The workers have all sorts of psychological and physical problems that go untreated. And those that run the slaughterhouses often side-step government standards and inspections.

[Nyseto]

8 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

There does seem to be parallels. Rather than racism, it’s humanism. Just as humans downgrade the existence of other races, they downgrade the existence of other animals. Yet the mind has an amazing capacity of rationalizing.

My understanding is that factory farms and slaughterhouses strictly forbid video footage from being recorded  and released publicly as this would increase awareness of the violence. I’ve seen some outside images and they look like prison complexes. Yet rather than to keep inmates in, they are trying to keep people out. The animals cannot escape. I agree that if everyone spent a month living in those conditions, their feelings and views would change. And the working conditions inside slaughterhouses are awful. The workers have all sorts of psychological and physical problems that go untreated. And those that run the slaughterhouses often side-step government standards and inspections.

Lol I'm glad you brought slaughterhouses up. That reminds me of this video on YouTube of some people protesting a slaughter house by bringing U-locks and putting them around their necks while attaching them to the assembly rack. They all chained themselves towards the end as well. When the employees started the machine, the protestors were demonizing the employees. If you protest peacefully, sure you may get ignored. But if you protest like a jackass, you may get ignored even more and get thrown in jail. Or if you do raise more awareness, it won't be the kind you want: where people are rolling on the floor laughing at your cause. 4:50

 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Nyseto

[Scholar]

2 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

There does seem to be parallels. Rather than racism, it’s humanism. Just as humans downgrade the existence of other races, they downgrade the existence of other animals. Yet the mind has an amazing capacity of rationalizing.

My understanding is that factory farms and slaughterhouses strictly forbid video footage from being recorded  and released publicly as this would increase awareness of the violence. I’ve seen some outside images and they look like prison complexes. Yet rather than to keep inmates in, they are trying to keep people out. The animals cannot escape. I agree that if everyone spent a month living in those conditions, their feelings and views would change. And the working conditions inside slaughterhouses are awful. The workers have all sorts of psychological and physical problems that go untreated. And those that run the slaughterhouses often side-step government standards and inspections.

An interesting question is, how much responsibility, or even a moral obligation, do humans have to speak our for those who cannot speak for themselves? Do you think it would have been an obligation, that if you had the required awareness, to have been actively advocating against slavery during when it was going on? It could be put even more controversially. If there was going on a human holocaust on the scale of the animal holocaust, what would it mean if we would not dedicate a significant amount of our time and energy into an attempt to fight against it? Especially if fighting against it brought virtually no consequences to us other than having spend our time differently.

Would not any other problem in society pale in contrast to that? Would it not feel almost bizarre that we invest so much energy into other problems, while that most obvious one has virtually nobody speaking out against it?

 

5 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

Lol I'm glad you brought slaughterhouses up. That reminds me of this video on YouTube of some people protesting a slaughter house by bringing U-locks and putting them around their necks while attaching them to the assembly rack. They all chained themselves towards the end as well. When the employees started the machine, the protestors were demonizing the employees. If you protest peacefully, sure you may get ignored. But if you protest like a jackass, you may get ignored even more and get thrown in jail. Or if you do raise more awareness, it won't be the kind you want: where people are laughing at your cause.

 

Can you see how your response is not a genuine attempt to help this cause, but rather to invalidate it? Also notice who you are focusing on. You are not focusing on the fact that there are people laughing at such a cause, you seem to have a disinterest analyzing that and finding ways to change that. Rather, all you have done is invalidate this cause. You have pointed to some things that activists might be doing wrong, simply because this annoys you, not because you want them to be more effective so that the world can change more quickly.

 

Notice this. It is fear, not love, that fuels you attention.

[Scholar]

15 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

Lol I'm glad you brought slaughterhouses up. That reminds me of this video on YouTube of some people protesting a slaughter house by bringing U-locks and putting them around their necks while attaching them to the assembly rack. They all chained themselves towards the end as well. When the employees started the machine, the protestors were demonizing the employees. If you protest peacefully, sure you may get ignored. But if you protest like a jackass, you may get ignored even more and get thrown in jail. Or if you do raise more awareness, it won't be the kind you want: where people are rolling on the floor laughing at your cause. 4:50

 

Imagine there was a slaughterhouse with humans. In the background you can see humans being treated like objects. Then there is a human that is protesting that in what you consider a silly way. They chain themselves to the machines that kill the humans. Now, people post videos of this an laugh at how silly those humans are for trying to save the other humans.

Imagine how sensitivity you would have to be for you to come forth and criticize that person, announcing it with the word "Lol", for being what you consider ineffective in their activism. Imagine all of this. This is you, my friend.

 

And now ask yourself. How could you possibly have become so insensitive to the suffering of your brothers and sisters? It is fear, it is a lack of love. Your heart is not open, and your mind cannot see the humans who are being treated like objects. You mind can only see the silly activist. Because that is what your mind has chosen to focus on, fuel by fear and hatred.

 

Open your heart.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Scholar

[Forestluv]

1 minute ago, Scholar said:

An interesting question is, how much responsibility, or even a moral obligation, do humans have to speak our for those who cannot speak for themselves? Do you think it would have been an obligation, that if you had the required awareness, to have been actively advocating against slavery during when it was going on? It could be put even more controversially. If there was going on a human holocaust on the scale of the animal holocaust, what would it mean if we would not dedicate a significant amount of our time and energy into an attempt to fight against it? Especially if fighting against it brought virtually no consequences to us other than having spend our time differently.

This is one of the ageless ethical questions

3 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Can you see how your response is not a genuine attempt to help this cause, but rather to invalidate it? Also notice who you are focusing on. You are not focusing on the fact that there are people laughing at such a cause, you seem to have a disinterest analyzing that and finding ways to change that. Rather, all you have done is invalidate this cause. You have pointed to some things that activists might be doing wrong, simply because this annoys you, not because you want them to be more effective so that the world can change more quickly.

 

Notice this. It is fear, not love, that fuels you attention.

This highlights your point that distracting away from racial equality is a similar dynamic to distracting away from animal violence.

And I hadn’t thought about it from the perspective of what fuels one’s attention. Part of it is internal, yet part seems to be driven by environment, such as media.

[Nyseto]

11 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

I really don't like how you're demonizing the left, no world view really deserves to be demonized, especially not the world view that is where our society NEEDS to ascend to in order to avoid climate and economic catastrophe.

You're pointing out the worst aspects of BLM and using that to Demonize all Leftists. I'm personally incredibly far to the left and would never dream of disturbing peace through protest.

 

11 minutes ago, Scholar said:

An interesting question is, how much responsibility, or even a moral obligation, do humans have to speak our for those who cannot speak for themselves? Do you think it would have been an obligation, that if you had the required awareness, to have been actively advocating against slavery during when it was going on? It could be put even more controversially. If there was going on a human holocaust on the scale of the animal holocaust, what would it mean if we would not dedicate a significant amount of our time and energy into an attempt to fight against it? Especially if fighting against it brought virtually no consequences to us other than having spend our time differently.

Would not any other problem in society pale in contrast to that? Would it not feel almost bizarre that we invest so much energy into other problems, while that most obvious one has virtually nobody speaking out against it?

 

Can you see how your response is not a genuine attempt to help this cause, but rather to invalidate it? Also notice who you are focusing on. You are not focusing on the fact that there are people laughing at such a cause, you seem to have a disinterest analyzing that and finding ways to change that. Rather, all you have done is invalidate this cause. You have pointed to some things that activists might be doing wrong, simply because this annoys you, not because you want them to be more effective so that the world can change more quickly.

 

Notice this. It is fear, not love, that fuels you attention.

I can't change other people laughing when those protestors brought it upon themselves, I wasn't the one who was there and protested. Have you considered that you may be invalidating the problems those protestors were causing to the slaughterhouse? If one of them got injured, it would be a major liability for the slaughterhouse. That's a dirty way to protest. You aren't helping the cause much either by condoning that kind of behavior. You're an employee going to work one day at a slaughterhouse and some entitled  protestor almost dies protesting at your slaughterhouse. Put yourself in their shoes as well 

Edited January 4, 2021 by Nyseto

[Scholar]

7 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

This is one of the ageless ethical questions

This highlights your point that distracting away from racial equality is a similar dynamic to distracting away from animal violence.

And I hadn’t thought about it from the perspective of what fuels one’s attention. Part of it is internal, yet part seems to be driven by environment, such as media.

Yes, I found that studying how people react to the propositions of veganism is an excellent way to come to learn about the human mindand heart. It is quite extreme, because I am at a point at which I do view most animals to be nothing but humans with minorly different anatomy.

 

5 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

I can't change other people laughing when those protestors brought it upon themselves, I wasn't the one who was there and protested. Have you considered that you may be invalidating the problems those protestors were causing to the slaughterhouse? If one of them got injured, it would be a major liability for the slaughterhouse. That's a dirty way to protest. You aren't helping the cause much either by condoning that kind of behavior either.

Replace this scenario with humans being the ones who are being slaughtered. Could you see how incredibly insensitive and absurd what you have said sounded? You are comparing the suffering and death of all of these individuals to liability of the slaughterhouse, or the fact that one individual that you consider to be worth of more consideration would get injured. Put that in relationship to what is happening in those slaugherhouses.

And again, your focus is still immersed in criticizing those people while you truly have no genuine interest in helping them with their cause. Nothing you said is helpful, it isn't a constructive critique. It is an attempt to invalidate.

 

It is clearly fear my brother. You have to open your heart.

Edited January 4, 2021 by Scholar

[Nyseto]

12 minutes ago, Husseinisdoingfine said:

I really don't like how you're demonizing the left, no world view really deserves to be demonized, especially not the world view that is where our society NEEDS to ascend to in order to avoid climate and economic catastrophe.

You're pointing out the worst aspects of BLM and using that to Demonize all Leftists. I'm personally incredibly far to the left and would never dream of disturbing peace through protest.

I don't have an issue with the left as I do so with how it's been manifesting itself. Take the left from Kennedy's era. I wouldn't be saying the same about them.

I used to be very right wing and when someone from the left would mention the worst about the right, it would bother me too but only because I was so identified with the right. I totally understand people identifying with the party they prefer.

[Nyseto]

2 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Yes, I found that studying how people react to the propositions of veganism is an excellent way to come to learn about the human mindand heart. It is quite extreme, because I am at a point at which I do view most animals to be nothing but humans with minorly different anatomy.

 

Replace this scenario with humans being the ones who are being slaughtered. Could you see how incredibly insensitive and absurd what you have said sounded? You are comparing the suffering and death of all of these individuals to liability of the slaughterhouse, or the fact that one individual that you consider to be worth of more consideration would get injured. Put that in relationship to what is happening in those slaugherhouses.

And again, your focus is still immersed in criticizing those people while you truly have no genuine interest in helping them with their cause. Nothing you said is helpful, it isn't a constructive critique. It is an attempt to invalidate.

 

It is clearly fear my brother. You have to open your heart.

But you do know that when you're pointing your finger at me, you have three pointing back at you right? You are stuck on the invalidating part as the ultimate truth and not seeing both sides. 

There is such a thing in life as suffering and death due to ignorance as well. If you're going to be as ignorant as walking into a police station with a weapon to protest thinking that the world revolves around you, you'd be surprised.

[Forestluv]

11 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

I can't change other people laughing when those protestors brought it upon themselves

?‍♂️ 

11 minutes ago, Nyseto said:

Have you considered that you may be invalidating the problems those protestors were causing to the slaughterhouse? If one of them got injured, it would be a major liability for the slaughterhouse. That's a dirty way to protest. You aren't helping the cause much either by condoning that kind of behavior either.

You give very little weight to those treated injustly and place a huge amount of weight to cherry-picking instances that distract from the underlying injustices. 

Imagine that you knew someone was kidnapped and being tortured. There is a group trying to help that person and you keep distracting them by pointing out people that have slipped on ice. From the perspective of the one who is suffering, it’s a crappy thing to do.