BlacKKKlansman

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: BlacKKKlansman

    Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
    In case you missed it:

    *Donald Trump was the first presidential candidate to be endorsed by the KKK.
    *Donald Trump refused to condemn the KKK during his campaign before being pressured into doing it.
    *Donald Trump refused to condemn the Nazis and KKK members marching in the streets at Charlottesville before being pressured into doing so. He then walked it back not long afterwards.

    There is very little effort needed for conflation.
    Lol. You know how many politicians were in the KKK? The newly released JFK files even claim that Johnson was in the KKK.

    I'm not even a republican or conservative. I don't care if you think the president and his Jewish daughter are escaped Nazi war criminals.

    I'm making the argument for open and civil debate. Or at least for not trying to ban anyone you disagree with.


    ----------------------------------

    The bottom line is that the movie has a political message. If this message is something new and worth listening to than it's also worth discussing both points of view.

    On the other hand, if the message is that we all need to fall in line or be cast out of society, then you are just pushing authoritarian propaganda.

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: BlacKKKlansman

      It's 2018. No politicians should have KKK ties. Why is this even up for debate?

      If people believe that the KKK is acceptable they do deserve to be cast out.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: BlacKKKlansman

        Would anybody watch Shoah and say "okay but what do the Nazi critics have to say about this?".

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: BlacKKKlansman

          Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
          The bottom line is that the movie has a political message. If this message is something new and worth listening to than it's also worth discussing both points of view.

          On the other hand, if the message is that we all need to fall in line or be cast out of society, then you are just pushing authoritarian propaganda.
          You notably ignored when I said that I didn't comment on the views Sailer expressed in his review, but rather the fact that he writes for a white supremacist publication. As I said, that automatically delegitimized any argument karsten was trying to make because the source is someone whose arguments are not based on logic, but rather irrational hatred.

          karsten has every right to share links by anyone he wants. But everyone else has the right to push back by:

          a) Highlighting the fact that he hasn't seen the movie, which is what this section of DDP is typically reserved for
          b) Highlighting the fact that the review he shared was written by a known white supremacist
          c) Express the belief that white supremacist views are not welcome, and are in fact opposed by most people in, civil society

          What guys like you seem to forget is that freedom of speech is only promised by the government. It is only when the government starts banning speech that we are approaching an "authoritarian" society.

          This, on the other hand, is a private forum. DDP has every right to keep certain individuals from sharing their links/views should it choose to do so. And we have every right to argue for that if we want.
          "I love being a writer. What I can't stand is the paperwork.-- Peter De Vries

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: BlacKKKlansman

            Originally posted by TheConnorNoden View Post
            It's 2018. No politicians should have KKK ties. Why is this even up for debate?

            If people believe that the KKK is acceptable they do deserve to be cast out.
            Good lord. We're talking about a movie reviewer by a writer who has nothing to do with the KKK. You're the only one talking about the KKK.

            The only presidential candidate connected to the KKK in 2018 was Hillary Clinton.

            Secretary of State Hillary Clinton: "It is almost impossible to imagine the United States Senate without Robert Byrd. He was not just its longest serving member, he was its heart and soul. From my first day in the Senate, I sought out his guidance, and he was always generous with his time and his wisdom."

            You don't actually care about that though because it's not useful for you. You just want to believe that anyone you don't like is secretly in the KKK.

            It may be hard to believe but people can be against the KKK and still dislike Spike Lee movies.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: BlacKKKlansman

              Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
              You notably ignored when I said that I didn't comment on the views Sailer expressed in his review, but rather the fact that he writes for a white supremacist publication. As I said, that automatically delegitimized any argument karsten was trying to make because the source is someone whose arguments are not based on logic, but rather irrational hatred.

              karsten has every right to share links by anyone he wants. But everyone else has the right to push back by:

              a) Highlighting the fact that he hasn't seen the movie, which is what this section of DDP is typically reserved for
              b) Highlighting the fact that the review he shared was written by a known white supremacist
              c) Express the belief that white supremacist views are not welcome, and are in fact opposed by most people in, civil society

              What guys like you seem to forget is that freedom of speech is only promised by the government. It is only when the government starts banning speech that we are approaching an "authoritarian" society.

              This, on the other hand, is a private forum. DDP has every right to keep certain individuals from sharing their links/views should it choose to do so. And we have every right to argue for that if we want.

              I wasn't planning on taking this to the supreme court. I am not claiming any legal right, just arguing that we should be open to debate. Some people want to ban debate on this subject and I was arguing for hearing opposing views.

              And again, the reviewer is simply not a white supremacist. He may be wrong but he is not a white supremacist.

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: BlacKKKlansman

                Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                The only presidential candidate connected to the KKK in 2018 was Hillary Clinton.
                This is an utter lie.

                First of all, by the time Hillary made this statement Byrd had long condemned his past in the KKK, calling it "the greatest mistake I ever made." You conveniently left that part out (more likely deliberately).

                Second, Donald Trump was the only candidate to be endorsed by the KKK. They would only do that if they believed he supported their views (a belief he gave much support with his repeated refusals to condemn them).

                Last, in case you missed it, Donald Trump's father was arrested at a KKK rally. While his exact role was not clear, the charge was "refusing to disperse from a parade when ordered to do so.”
                https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a7891701.html

                Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                I wasn't planning on taking this to the supreme court. I am not claiming any legal right, just arguing that we should be open to debate. Some people want to ban debate on this subject and I was arguing for hearing opposing views.
                Anyone can argue for hearing opposing views. You could argue for hearing the views of a pedophile if you wanted to. Most of us aren't interested in hearing the views of a white supremacist, and we will continue to say so.

                Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                And again, the reviewer is simply not a white supremacist. He may be wrong but he is not a white supremacist.
                How exactly do you define "white supremacist," ScreenRider?
                "I love being a writer. What I can't stand is the paperwork.-- Peter De Vries

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: BlacKKKlansman

                  Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
                  This is an utter lie.

                  First of all, by the time Hillary made this statement Byrd had long condemned his past in the KKK, calling it "the greatest mistake I ever made." You conveniently left that part out (more likely deliberately).

                  Second, Donald Trump was the only candidate to be endorsed by the KKK. They would only do that if they believed he supported their views (a belief he gave much support with his repeated refusals to condemn them).

                  Last, in case you missed it, Donald Trump's father was arrested at a KKK rally. While his exact role was not clear, the charge was "refusing to disperse from a parade when ordered to do so.-
                  https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-a7891701.html
                  An utter lie? Really?

                  So lets say if the founder of the KKK chapter who later "Changed" his views to be elected was then the mentor of Donald Trump. You wouldn't call that a connection to the KKK?

                  In the same post where you accused me of lying you somehow connected Trump to the KKK because his father was once arrested near a KKK rally before Donald was born.

                  Dude, I don't care about Hillary or Trump but that is just silly.


                  Muslim terrorists and Black Panther lunatics vote for Obama. Do you think that makes Obama a terrorist?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: BlacKKKlansman

                    Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                    I wasn't planning on taking this to the supreme court. I am not claiming any legal right, just arguing that we should be open to debate. Some people want to ban debate on this subject and I was arguing for hearing opposing views.

                    And again, the reviewer is simply not a white supremacist. He may be wrong but he is not a white supremacist.
                    You've yet to put forth what, exactly, this opposing view is that's worthy of debate. You've mentioned the movie's "political message" several times now. In your opinion, what is the other side of the coin to the movie's message that we should be examining?

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: BlacKKKlansman

                      Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                      So lets say if the founder of the KKK chapter who later "Changed" his views to be elected was then the mentor of Donald Trump. You wouldn't call that a connection to the KKK?
                      If it was clear that the founder was sincere in his rejection of his past views, then no, I wouldn't.

                      Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                      In the same post where you accused me of lying you somehow connected Trump to the KKK because his father was once arrested near a KKK rally before Donald was born.
                      My point was that Trump has more of a direct connection to the KKK than Hillary. But fine, we can let that one go.

                      Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                      Muslim terrorists and Black Panther lunatics vote for Obama. Do you think that makes Obama a terrorist?
                      I don't know what "Muslim terrorists" voters you are talking about. In any case, even if they did, there's a difference between individuals voting for someone and an entire organization formally endorsing you. The latter carries much more weight.

                      BTW -- you still haven't told me how you define a "white supremacist".
                      "I love being a writer. What I can't stand is the paperwork.-- Peter De Vries

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: BlacKKKlansman

                        Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
                        How exactly do you define "white supremacist," ScreenRider?
                        White -
                        2. belonging to or denoting a human group having light-colored skin (chiefly used of peoples of European extraction).

                        Supermacist -
                        1. an advocate of the supremacy of a particular group, especially one determined by race or sex.


                        Sailer believes that East Asians are more intelligent than white people.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: BlacKKKlansman

                          Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                          White -
                          2. belonging to or denoting a human group having light-colored skin (chiefly used of peoples of European extraction).

                          Supermacist -
                          1. an advocate of the supremacy of a particular group, especially one determined by race or sex.

                          Sailer believes that East Asians are more intelligent than white people.
                          And he also believes that white people are more intelligent than black or Hispanic people. Ergo, white supremacist.
                          "I love being a writer. What I can't stand is the paperwork.-- Peter De Vries

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: BlacKKKlansman

                            Originally posted by UpandComing View Post
                            And he also believes that white people are more intelligent than black or Hispanic people. Ergo, white supremacist.
                            Wouldn't Asian supremacist be more accurate? Why not aim for accuracy?
                            Doesn't have the same ring? Of course that's also assuming that he believes that higher intelligence makes you superior.

                            Are the KKK Asian supremacists?

                            Maybe the world is just more complicated than you want to believe.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: BlacKKKlansman

                              To bring this back around to the review on Page 1...

                              Has anyone who's defending it actually read it?

                              The review in question is not a "different opinion" on the film. I'm not convinced the reviewer even saw the film. The entire piece is an attack on Spike Lee, and has some definite racial overtones to the attack.

                              There is nothing useful to be gleaned from that review with regards to screenwriting or filmmaking.

                              When you take the reviewer's other work into account, it is abundantly clear that he views black people as inferior. Regardless of where he puts Asians on his superiority spectrum, he is racist. He views films and the people who make films through a racist lens.

                              His is not a perspective that benefits our community. He is not worthy of our debate. He should not be given some "let's respect ALL viewpoints" platform.

                              That review has no place here. It relates to the movie only on the slimmest of surface level. It doesn't add anything to the screenwriting conversation, which is the entire purpose of these forums.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: BlacKKKlansman

                                Originally posted by ScreenRider View Post
                                Wouldn't Asian supremacist be more accurate? Why not aim for accuracy?
                                Doesn't have the same ring? Of course that's also assuming that he believes that higher intelligence makes you superior.

                                Are the KKK Asian supremacists?

                                Maybe the world is just more complicated than you want to believe.
                                That's idiotic. It doesn't matter if he places another group higher in the "racial hierarchy." The fact that he believes certain people are superior because of their whiteness makes him a white supremacist. Period.

                                The fact that he regularly writes for VDARE, a white supremacist publication (which you conveniently ignore), alone, would be enough to disregard his views.
                                "I love being a writer. What I can't stand is the paperwork.-- Peter De Vries

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X