March 6, 2024: Dwarf Fortress 50.12 has been released.
News: February 3, 2024: The February '24 Report is up.
News: February 4, 2021: Dwarf Fortress Talk #28 has been posted.
News: November 21, 2018: A new Threetoe story has been posted.
Forum Guidelines
Not saying you shouldn't try, I didn't mean it's fruitless overall, but if you want to have less people killed, you don't want to wait another 100 years. Something like changing the way police is trained and / or monitored for example can be implemented in a much much shorter time, like a couple of years. Admitting that you have a class problem and doing something against economical inequality can be done in a shorter time also.Again, not that fighting racism isn't a noble goal, but it is an even more fruitless endeavour than disarming the US I think, especially concerning subconscious prejudice. People are people after all. Focusing on better standards of life and massively reforming the police and the way they deal with things looks a lot more promising, if getting less people killed within the next decade or so is the goal.
I don't think its fruitless. Its not the sort of thing people should give up on. I think its probably still a lot better than it was 100 years ago, so its not like people aren't slowly getting better.
Even if your police were racist, they would, I assume, have less people to be racist against and any undue violence against a different race would not add up to the staggering numbers we have.Our (German) law enforcement regularly carries guns, though our criminals often don't. The police certainly have enough people to potentially be racist against, at least in the big cities, less than in the US, but still. It's not like we have no complaints about racist police. They may be better trained, they certainly aren't geniuses though. Still they very rarely shoot anyone, regardless of race/origin/whatever. They definitely are a lot less afraid to be shot at, because that is very unlikely to happen.
Also, law enforcement not regularly carrying guns and not being trained to escalate a situation as often as possible probably helps a ton.
So what, even if racism doesn't translate 1:1 from the US to Europe, it's most likely on a pretty similar level.I suspect other countries are just as racist, they just have significantly less targets to point their ignorance at.
Or the targets of ignorance are an altogether different race. I hear arabs are particularly despised in Europe (people here treat them like shit too, so I'm not getting on any sort of high horse.) Also, gypsies. There is an inordinate amount of hate towards gypsies.
I thought that was mostly Islamophobia?
yea bigots don't really differentiate between targets. Like if you really hate Muslims, and a Sikh walks by, you aren't going to stop and go "no man, he's got a turban and a sword, he's cool with me" you are going to see everything you hate. The skin color, the arabic features, the outfit being at all arabic, I mean a bigot isn't going to take the time to differentiate between different fashions in the arabic world or know what christian arabs are wearing this season. He's just looking for anyone different to hate on.
They totally fucked that up, that one dog is only half-white and the other one is clearly brownish/black.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean Russia isn't out to get me.-snip-I honestly think you Germans are needlessly paranoid about this whole "new Nazi Germany" stuff.
No, I meant pre-Nazi Germany indeed. I said I didn't really want to pull a Godwin, but I totally did.Also, and I don't really want to pull another Godwin here, but if you say it like that, people being distrustful of democracy after bad experiences and hoping a strong leader might fix everything, boy, does that remind me of something.All those countries that aren't liberal democracies, but that also didn't turn into another Nazi Germany either?
That's the real reason why most people didn't like the dissolution of USSR. Artificial borders propping up, making travel more difficult.But you don't need another USSR-ish structure for that, just get your own Eurasian version of the Schengen treaty (or maybe even work towards joining ours someday) and you're all set.
Correct. But those years or rampant, lawless corruption have, for Russians, ruined the idea of "Western democracy", just like the years of Soviet rule have ruined the idea of "domestic democracy." Nowadays people just seek a strong leader who isn't too crazy.If you phrase it like that, do you still wonder why everybody is so concerned about Russia? I can't think of any example of a "strong leader" that hasn't lead to war, except if said leader was only powerful inside his own country and otherwise isolated and contained. Russia isn't what it used to be, but it's still one of the most powerful countries in the world. If Russians want a strong leader, the logical conclusion for the rest of the world must be that Russia should be weakened as much as possible, before things get too bad.
I honestly didn't know that the word "Holocaust" itself was imbued with such exact definition - I used it as a synecdoche for genocides in general in the post you quoted originally. Rest assured, I did not want to deliberately equate the Holocaust with anything, but rather argue that it was not, unfortunately, the only example of genocide in human history.I know, that's why I quoted that post in the first place, to point out that you came off as implying things I didn't think you wanted to imply.
Okay - I guess this was mostly Germans being GermansThat too, probably.
Like Helgo said, there are many reasons why the Holocaust is regarded as a unique event, thus deliberately equating it to other genocides is generally regarded as historical revisionism (usually of the anti-semitic kind). Not that I think you were doing that deliberately, it's just important to know the distinction. With that pointed out, I agree this tangent can end here.It was unique in other ways as well: It was the only truly industrialized genocide, with death factories and the giant ovens, and it was one of the few genocides in which the victims were not selected on some outer characteristic (belonging to a certain ethnic or cultural group, for example) but for purely racial reasons: Even a perfectly integrated half-Jew who had no idea of his jewish descent - and thus was completely indistinguishable from those around him - was not safe.Helgo, let me just say that I absolutely agree with everything you've said and stop this discussion here, because I am really feeling like I would go tapdancing on a minefield if I were to continue talking about the Holocaust - too many possibilities to be misunderstood and come off as a piece of insensitive human waste that tries to argue that Jewish genocide didn't exist, and if there are things I would never do, being a Holocaust denier is one of them.
Besides, there's a big difference between denying the Holocaust and insisting that the Holocaust wasn't unique to the European Jewry, that many other peoples (Armenians at the hands of Turks, most Chinese peoples at the hands of IJA, many, many peoples in Africa at the hands of each other and colonial powers, Romani at the hands of Nazis, Kurds at the hands of Saddam Hussein, the list goes on) have also been subjected to genocide and that pretending that what happened in Nazi Germany was somehow unique and unrepeatable means rendering ourselves willfully blind to any future Holocausts.You are mixing up the terms "genocide" and "Holocaust". The Holocaust particularly means the unique event of the systematic genocide of the European Jews and nothing else. And yes, confusing the terms would probably be taken as pretty offensive by many people.
I wish I could study in USA.Where in Germany are you going? And aren't you a bit young to get sent to study abroad?
But noooooooo. I get sent to Germany instead. I'm not even sure if we have Germans here. Just Austrians and Nords iirc.
Meanwhile, on the front lines ofIt certainly wasn't presented as if no one in the West uses doping anymore, that would be ridiculous, with all the recent doping scandals (Tour de France and stuff for example). The 99% claim comes from a Russian athlete who was interviewed in the documentary.propaganda warobjective reporting: German television channel Das Erste has broadcast a "documentary film" claiming that 99% of Russian sportsmen use doping. It was presented as if almost no one in the progressive West uses doping anymore.
Russian athletes and officials were not amused: the Russian Athletic Federation has threatened to sue Das Erste.
