Note that the FBI did not say the event was racially motivated. They know it wasn't. — frank

Apparently you missed this quote in my previous post:

Although I don’t have the percentage for you, the attackers on January 6th included a number — and the number keeps growing as we build out our investigations — of what we would call militia, violent extremism. And we have had some already arrested who we would put in the category of racially motivated violent extremism [ ... ] Those would be the categories so far that we’re seeing as far as January 6th. — FBI Director Wray, senate testimony 3.2.21

Sigh. Fine.

The event was planned and advertised across a variety of far right platforms, including 4chan's /pol/, 8kun, the_Donald, and greatawakening.win.

Aside from photos of their "load outs," i.e. the weapons they were going to bring in the lead up to January 6th, and lists of which lawmakers could be assasinated and would then be replaced by Republican lawmakers, was a constant stream or calls to use the platform as a launching point for the extermination of Jews, Blacks, transexuals, and other undesirables. It's pretty hard to spend any time on the far-right sites where planning for the event went on and not come across a torrent of calls for not just racial violence, but full genocide.

People live streamed the attack to these sites to choruses of calls for genocide, so your claim is frankly willfully ignorant at best. If you have an arrest record for hate crimes and stream your riot to hate sites, I think it's fair to say what your motives were.

The primary issue was a belief that Trump had been elected, that evil forces had interfered with the election, and that Mike Pence was committing treason.

White supremacists were a significant part of the sea of lunacy from which the event emerged, but still only a part. What's the motive for denying that?

The primary issue was a belief that Trump had been elected, that evil forces had interfered with the election, and that Mike Pence was committing treason. — frank

Ask yourself what's so appealing about this that it attracts white supremacists in droves?

I suggest that this was the excuse and the racists heard the racism Trump stands for loud and clear and wanted 4 more years of that, willing to believe the lies because it was convenient to get what they wanted. Or are we back to the other side being too stupid to figure out the truth for themselves?

Ouch!

The primary issue was a belief that Trump had been elected, that evil forces had interfered with the election, and that Mike Pence was committing treason. — frank

I'm more interested in how it happened. Where did these ideas come from?

Just exposing you again, Harry, not trying to persuade. — 180 Proof

Exposed what? In all the examples you provided, both sides have blood on their hands.

Amanda Gorman's Dutch translator stands down after uproar that Black writer wasn't chosen.
https://www.cnn.com/style/article/amanda-gorman-dutch-translation-scli-intl/index.html

So does this mean that whites can never understand the language used by blacks? If so, then I think that NOS4A2 is right when they say that this is just going to lead to more division and segregation.

Question:
When a white person looks at a black person and the black person looks at the white person, how much of each other should they see in themselves?

When a white person looks at a black person and the black person looks at the white person, how much of each other should they see in themselves? — Harry Hindu

There's no should. Love reveals unity.

Exposed what? In all the examples you provided, both sides have blood on their hands. — Harry Hindu

Res ipsa loquitur. :roll: Pax!

So does this mean that whites can never understand the language used by blacks? If so, then I think that NOS4A2 is right when they say that this is just going to lead to more division and segregation. — Harry Hindu

Some issues here.

1. We have black, female, bilingual, spoken word artists familiar with black emancipation in the US in the Netherlands, hell, we have bilingual spoken word artists that would presumably have a better understanding of the medium at least, none of them were approached;
2. Publisher knew this so there was a team of sensitivity readers set up because this translator's knowledge and grasp of the English language are mediocre at best;

The criticism was primarily about experience and knowledge of the translator.

Res ipsa loquitur. :roll: Pax! — 180 Proof

Sic semper tyrannis.

There's no should. Love reveals unity. — frank

So it appears that you're saying that the black group that thinks whites can't speak for them has no love for unity and is not doing what they should.

So it appears that you're saying that the black group that thinks whites can't speak for them has no love for unity and is not doing what they should. — Harry Hindu

Do you see yourself in people of other races?

Absolutely. Maybe you haven't heard: Humans share over 99% of their DNA. Focusing on the small differences, which are just surface level, just shows how shallow you are.

Some issues here.

1. We have black, female, bilingual, spoken word artists familiar with black emancipation in the US in the Netherlands, hell, we have bilingual spoken word artists that would presumably have a better understanding of the medium at least, none of them were approached;
2. Publisher knew this so there was a team of sensitivity readers set up because this translator's knowledge and grasp of the English language are mediocre at best;

The criticism was primarily about experience and knowledge of the translator. — Benkei

LOL. So you, as a white person, Benkei, can speak to what it is like to have owned slaves and what its like to have to let them go because your side lost the war? Can the descendents of northerners speak to what it was like trying to free slaves and the risks that they were taking? No black person alive today can speak to the experience of being a slave that was emancipated. And it can also be said that every person alive today had ancestors that were enslaved or oppressed in some way. Your argument just fell flat on its head.

Having trouble reading again I see. I'm talking about experience and knowledge of "black emancipation", "spoken word" and the "English language". Rijneveld is a writer who has written poems but doesnt perform, has zero experience as a spoken word artist, hasn't studied the English language or literature, isn't bilingual, isn't versed in US sociology or politics let alone the black emancipation movement. She's entirely unqualified to do this.

So your reply is totally idiotic.

Absolutely. Maybe you haven't heard: Humans share over 99% of their DNA. Focusing on the small differences, which are just surface level, just shows how shallow you are. — Harry Hindu

It's materialist to judge people by their appearance.

Having trouble reading again I see. I'm talking about experience and knowledge of "black emancipation", "spoken word" and the "English language". Rijneveld is a writer who has written poems but doesnt perform, has zero experience as a spoken word artist, hasn't studied the English language or literature, isn't bilingual, isn't versed in US sociology or politics let alone the black emancipation movement. She's entirely unqualified to do this.

So your reply is totally idiotic. — Benkei

Who are you talking about? The Dutch writer is white and non-binary. They won the International Booker Prize in 2020. For more than 50 years, the Booker Prize has recognized outstanding fiction in the English-speaking world and is considered one of the top literary awards. The article is about how the Dutch writer is unqualified because they are white and doesn't mention any other reason other than that. So who is it that is having trouble reading again?

What is the point in asserting your greivances if the people you are addressing are incapable of understanding you? Every human being has to overcome adversity in some form or another. Every human being understands what it means to have to overcome adversity.

How far do we go when it comes to understanding others that are different than us?

Does this mean that atheists could never understand theists and vice versa? I was once a theist. I am an atheist BECAUSE I have come to understand religions and theism. I have asked for "white privilige" and "systemic racism" to be defined and to point out specifically who is participating in it and perpetuating it and I receive no concrete answers, just like when I ask a theist to define their god. So, until you are able to clearly define your religion, Benkei, I have no reason to believe it myself.

It's materialist to judge people by their appearance. — frank

I don't know what materialism has to do with it. An idealist can judge by appearances as well. We all judge by appearances. Some people judge and identify by skin color only (shallow, surface-level thinkers). Others judge and identify by behaviors (deeper and more thoughtful thinkers that judge by the content of one's character). Which one are you, Frank?

I guess.

Who are you talking about? The Dutch writer is white and non-binary. They won the International Booker Prize in 2020. For more than 50 years, the Booker Prize has recognized outstanding fiction in the English-speaking world and is considered one of the top literary awards. The article is about how the Dutch writer is unqualified because they are white and doesn't mention any other reason other than that. So who is it that is having trouble reading again? — Harry Hindu

The Booker Prize was for her translated book from Dutch to English, which was translated by Michele Hutchison, you fucking retard. The original is De avond is ongemak. Her English sucks and even if it didn't, she still doesn't know anything about the black emancipation movement and has zero experience with spoken word. But please, continue to ram your own foot in your mouth.

:smirk: :up:

You keep avoiding the question. Yet the article mentions none of that and only focuses on their skin color as the only reason they were not a good choice to translate the speech. Why do you think that is? I've provided a link that provides the information of what we are taking about. You havent provided anything to back up your assertions. Where are you getting your information? What is the black emancipation movement and if a non-blacks person are incapable of understanding it, then why translate it in the first place?

And if non-blacks can't understand the black experience then how can a man understand the female experience to assert that he is a she? Wait. Let pop some popcorn because watching you perform your mental gymnastics is entertaining.

I was being helpful telling you what the actual criticism was since I'm Dutch and live in the Netherlands. That you insist the Cnn article to be accurate an complete is your problem.

What is the black emancipation movement and if a non-blacks person are incapable of understanding it, then why translate it in the first place? — Harry Hindu

I haven't said this, I said she had no knowledge of it. As to what it is, try Google.

For someone who pretends to be colour blind, you're really hung up on making this about colour.

I haven't insisted on anything except evidence for your assertions and for you to address my questions. You being Dutch isn't enough, especially if your going to question my knowledge of American current events when in American. You keep contradicting yourself and avoiding questions.

I can read English and read local sources. How's your Dutch? Yeah? Thought so. That's why I can accurately comment about the US and you can't about the Netherlands.

For someone who pretends to be colour blind, you're really hung up on making this about colour. — Benkei

Try again. I'm asking why CNN and Gorman is making it about color.

I can read English and read local sources. How's your Dutch? Yeah? Thought so. That's why I can accurately comment about the US and you can't about the Netherlands — Benkei

Would you be able to successfully translate Gormans speech then? If not, then who and why, and does that not mean that English-speaking non-blacks hearing the speech directly from Gormans mouth before the Super Bowl were not able to understand the words?

I can use Google Translate. All I'm asking is for a link supporting your assertions. Saying that the CNN article is not complete requires evidence. Please forgive me if I don't take your emotional outbursts and name-calling as evidence. Instead I see your inability to answer direct questions as evidence that your are simply intellectually dishonest.

You may be able to read Englush, but according to you that still isn't enough to know the American experience. Look at how you contradict yourself with every post.

God, are you wilfully obtuse or what? We're talking about a translation from English to Dutch. That, at the very least, would require the person doing the translating being better at English than average. That has exactly zero to do with being able to know the American experience. That said, I'm obviously less qualified to comment on such experience than other Americans, but more qualified to comment on it than you do on the Netherlands.

And no, I wouldn't be able to translate Gormans speech as well as Munganyende Hélène Christelle, Rachel Rumai, Zaïre Krieger, Rellie Telg, Lisette MaNeza, Babs Gons, Sanguilla Vabrie, Alida Aurora, Pelumi Adejumo or Schiavone Simson but I sure as hell would be better at it than Rijneveld would be. For starters, I do have experience with spoken word performances and my English is better. As stated before, the publisher had appointed "sensitivity readers" precisely because of her crappy English.

Finally, the complaints about Rijneveld being chosen were mostly made online. I'm not a news curator working for your pleasure. I shared what was the case and you can either chose to believe me or not. I have exactly zero incentive to provide "evidence" for what is apparent for anyone living in the Netherlands.

And you keep insisting this narrative is correct because you want it to be about her being white so you get to make your inane "colour blindness" and there's "no systemic racism" point. But this was once again an example of systemic racism. Only white people would get the benefit of the doubt of doing such important work without having actual qualifications for the job! And that was also part of the complaint but not a complaint against Rijneveld herself.