Public Shaming C/D?

Doxxing and call out/cancelation culture could be an entirely other thread. Every single time there is a horrible event they always misidentify people (on purpose). I don't get it but I also don't do anything in my life for clicks.

― Yerac, Tuesday, 22 January 2019 12:58 (sixteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Surprised there isn't a thread on this already (or maybe there is but I couldn't find it)

Thought about this a few years ago when I read Jon Ronson's 'So You've Been Publicly Shamed' - imo his best book, and very prescient in certain regards (but really not in others). From the (not very well-written) blurb on Amazon:

For the past three years, Jon Ronson has travelled the world meeting recipients of high-profile public shamings. The shamed are people like us - people who, say, made a joke on social media that came out badly, or made a mistake at work. Once their transgression is revealed, collective outrage circles with the force of a hurricane and the next thing they know they're being torn apart by an angry mob, jeered at, demonized, sometimes even fired from their job.
A great renaissance of public shaming is sweeping our land. Justice has been democratized. The silent majority are getting a voice. But what are we doing with our voice? We are mercilessly finding people's faults. We are defining the boundaries of normality by ruining the lives of those outside it. We are using shame as a form of social control.

Since then we have had the rise of the alt-right, who have received a great deal of shaming, but have been using the same tactics themselves for different ends. Also we've had the 'me too' movement, which while in general being an overwhelmingly positive thing, has muddied the waters in this particular regard by amping up cancelation culture. Since 2015 Twitter seems to have shuffled down a couple of circles of hell, and often it's hard now to tell what the actual transgressions are under all the fury (the company policy on which accounts to ban, and the existence of a certain president on there do not help of course.)

Public shaming is connected to: doxxing, me too, Twitter, whatever debate is currently taking place on Twitter, or on other social media. However, it is IMO a separate issue which seems to get neglected and/or bundled-in when it shouldn't be.

So, opinions!

fp'd

Gives new meaning to the global 'village'.

its very very difficult to draw the line nowadays between the public interest and the lack of a centralised, controllable group of actors with a monopoly on the dissemination of information

shaming is a difficult term to nail down

the desirability or otherwise of the general idea is heavily dependent on context

in short, like everything else, when i agree with this its good and when i dont its bad and when i log off and ignore it altogether its best

I just don't think it works with younger players, how can it when they are earning more than the manager before they've even made a sub appearance in the carabao

otm

shame on people who make everything about soccerball

Quite enjoy Limmy's ongoing scholarship of cancellation. He really does seem like an impartial observer for most of them

for me, public shaming is a response to perceived/experienced injustice and the perceived/experienced inability of civil society to deal with inappropriate behavior. it's an inadequate response but is often a symptom of a larger problem.

Yeah, that's pretty otm

perceived means

when i agree with it its good

I think this tweet makes a good point

A lot of the internet is 10000 people bullying someone who deserves to be bullied by maybe 1 to 3 people

— Brooks Otterlake (@i_zzzzzz) May 22, 2016

The population of a hamlet seen through the lens of a megalopolis.

There is something extremely creepy to me about public shaming. The ostensible goals — fighting racism and sexism — are extremely honorable, like the most urgent moral tasks imaginable, but it’s hard too believe this is the “real” goal when people so clearly relish going ofer the top with it and piling on. This is the contradiction that bothers me with it.

Like that girl who plagiarized a poem a few weeks ago and all of twitter said she was a soul murderer colonialist or whatever

Same thing with dragging a maga hat wearing child into the public square. I was a teacher once—teens do awful things—they are in a phase of life where adults should try to teach them a better way not turn them into a nationally famous symbol of evil.

That wasn't 'all of twitter' or 'people', that was the writers whose suffering she was profiting off.

It wasn’t just them. It was dozens of people involved in the poetry world.

Public shaming is absolutely necessary. A lot of the time it’s the only way to hold otherwise untouchable people in positions of power or privilege accountable

Classic. No need to explain why.

The worst thing that has ever happened is that people treat twitter or comments as a newsource, reality. First problem was that they let those kids wear MAGA hats in a place that they were not familiar with.

ime a lot of ritual internet public shaming is comprised of ppl who were shamed as children and have been carrying around the anger and resentment for years looking for an opportunity to transmit their suffering to someone new (and in their mind more deserving)

Re: the plagiarism case, there were the writers at the centre and then a much larger group (me included) watching from the sidelines and commenting on the spectacle. In retrospect, I don't know why I cared.

xpost Maybe for internet career trolls who I always assumed were mostly teenagers and retirees. I think a large part of it is that the formal justice system only really works for a certain demographic and people are tired of it. Which was kind of said above.

I think having her lose her standing and book deal was enough. I’m sure she was embarrassed. The idea of getting the knives out *at that point*, when she had lost her good name, is just an impulse I do not get.

One of the bigger problems with public shaming is that those most in need of it are those least likely to be impacted by it. When the willful, spite-motivated violation of social norms becomes a beloved pastime for many, I'm not sure how much utility shaming has.

Also, the internet is the worst goddamn venue imaginable for shaming (and for most things tbf).

Far as i'm aware mob "justice" is a long-standing phenomenon, the Internet has just created a new vector for it. It's probably not as bad as being stoned or tarred and feathered, mostly. But the nature of mobs makes them unamenable to correction on a person by person level.

ime a lot of ritual internet public shaming is comprised of ppl who were shamed as children and have been carrying around the anger and resentment for years looking for an opportunity to transmit their suffering to someone new (and in their mind more deserving)

― Mordy, Tuesday, January 22, 2019 3:29 PM (twelve minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

^^ this aspect seems more explicit than usual wrt smirking-MAGA-kid, lots of people talking about how his facial expression is the one they remember on the faces of the teens who tormented them when they were children. I feel like if this same incident had happened but with e.g. a burly MAGA hat wearing 30-something in place of the kid, it would not have had the same impact, part of the reason people are going in on the kid is *because* of the fact that he's obviously in some ways weaker and more vulnerable than they are, not despite it. like, they know that if they were alone in a room with this kid they could fuck him up, it's like a fantasy of going back in time to confront your childhood bullies now you're bigger and stronger than them. the fact that the subjects of public shaming are often fairly small fry in the great scheme of things is maybe a feature and not a bug of this phenomenon?

related (nb i was about to post this on the other thread) even if he wasn't a kid - attacking/shaming ppl for smirking/making a bad face at the wrong person is too close to thought policing to me. attack ppl for what they say + do not the faces they make imo. i understand lots of u had bad experiences with abusers smirking at you. the crime wasn't the smirk it was the suffering the smirk was covering over. even tho the smirk lives on as an open wound there's imho transference occurring but even if u had hard evidence that he was thinking some hate crime shit while smirking, faces still are not something i think as a society we'll benefit from shaming ppl over.

xpost I took it as this kid is already experiencing the power of being white and he's just going to grow up to be an even shittier adult. I see adult men do that posturing a lot when they are harassing people.

If I felt the need to call out every white dude with resting smirkface I'd never get anything done in a day.

This thread is bad and you should all feel bad

also that it gives people a way to express feeling that would normally be socially unacceptable, like wanting to beat up a schoolkid? some of the responses to those viral stories of white women calling the cops on black people feel like people enjoying a socially acceptable way to express normally forbidden misogynistic vitriol, there's a thrill of transgression

btw those of u who think only white males smirk are fucking lunatics. i have see smug looks from both genders this is an equal opportunity asshole face.

Basically there are a lot of Lee J. Cobb in 12 Angry Mens out in the world

if you've never seen a woman smirk you've never met a woman

as Bryan Adams once sang

Lol

have you ever really
really really ever pwned a woman

ime a lot of ritual internet public shaming is comprised of ppl who were shamed as children and have been carrying around the anger and resentment for years looking for an opportunity to transmit their suffering to someone new (and in their mind more deserving)

The victim becomes the oppressor, often at the first opportunity. Welcome to Earth.

Treeship, how old are you? Knowing this will really help me read and understand your posts, no joke.

ctrl+f for 'only white males smirk'...one result?!? Weird.

Of course y’all would immediately reframe this conversation to remove the actions of the person being shamed from the equation and focus entirely on some bizarre Freudian analysis of the people doing the work of holding them to account

unperson: you often seem like someone who bullies ppl to deal with your own insecurities and history of bullying so maybe knowledge of this information isn't enough to break the cycle?

OL: if you haven't seen the implication that smirking is particularly a crime of the privileged white male and not behavior all humans participate in then i suspect you either haven't been following the discourse around this closely or elided some of the subtext?

Shaming is particularly useful at this historical moment, because we have in place a set of social norms that are a remnant of a more civilized time: before the 2016 election.

They got up that close to your face, mordy? With other women laughing the background. I enjoyed that Bryan Adams song.

The white woman calling 911 on black people is also a very visual/modern signifier of how white women have always been partner to white supremacy and they will do a lot of shitty things to retain what power they do have in it.

Dan I: I don't believe you're an antisemite but maybe there's a lesson to be learnt about how we should judge ppl's words and actions compassionately even when they act like thoughtless assholes even if they may be signaling bigoted beliefs?

Unperson I am 29 and I have asked you to killfile me. Peace xp

Unperson I am 29 and I have asked you to killfile me. Peace xp

Now I have go find that thread about smirky animated characters, a la Kung Fu Panda.

You are all so wrong, here are a whole bunch of people of color smurfing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGD51BXPwa4

Oh wait

Treesh is around 30 but I think he adopts the mindset of a naïf as an exercise, which I can’t really object to

he's just a thoughtful & sensitive person. he's not a naif. he's sometimes soft-spoken.

Watch out for that stick he's carrying though.

xpost maybe he's just a nice guy. Although, since he uses social media that seems impossible.

well idk about a stick

See that’s the thing Mordy, some people deserve public shaming and some don’t. I’m not worried that people will think I’m an anti-Semite because it’s obvious that I’m not. The MAGA hat chuds should be very worried that they will experience the consequences of people thinking that they’re white supremacists—because they are in fact white supremacists

he quits social media all the time tho and then is dragged back in (sorry for talking so much about u tres), i think he finds it physically painful (tho otoh who doesn't)

xp fyi it's not obvious that you're not

wins otm

I've read ethnographic studies on egalitarian societies where shaming is used as a formalized means of social control to keep potential upstarts from getting too big for their britches. The implication being that a dose of mild clowning is strike one but that continued infractions will lead to banishment from the community or, y'know, straight-up execution. Without some formalized structure or an understanding on all sides of what the roles of the shamer and the shame-ee entail, it's kinda just like...aimless vigilante flailing in an attempt to shore up the extent to which our law/society fails to adequately address malignant transgressive behavior.

i give ppl the benefit of the doubt on these sorts of things pretty much always so i'm inclined to say you were just thoughtless and dumb when you made your comments but other ppl disagreed and i wasn't 100% sure myself. xxp

My partner uses absolutely no social media and is like a baby panda.

Aww

I am however apparently a very poor speller in the absence of autocorrect! Xposts

Watch out for that stick he's carrying though.

Stick or shtick?

aimless: vigilante flailing in an attempt to shore up the extent to which our law/society fails to adequately address malignant transgressive behavior.

― E Pluripubis Unum (Old Lunch), Tuesday, 22 January 2019 16:02 (ten minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think he should adopt this persona fwiw

Make it a case study then— Public shaming is about making the truth of someone’s actions widely known. Here’s the video of the chud kids (“full video” or not, take your pick, they don’t come off any better in any version) everybody, here they are captured on film. They aren’t being publicly shamed so much as bringing shame upon themselves

Same thing with dragging a maga hat wearing child into the public square.

Resolved: That a rich Catholic school boy who got bused in with a whole bunch of other rich Catholic school boys to stand around Washington DC telling women they shouldn't be allowed to get abortions didn't get "dragged into" shit.

I think a degree of self-shaming is necessary as a corrective against antisocial behavior but what do you do in a world where a generation of people have watched other people coast to fame (and the White House) on a wave of shamelessness, thus blunting much of the impact and the impetus of shaming?

ie is shame a concept that mostly only holds water with us olds?

eliza d otm.

It’s not about making them feel bad. If the chud kids have a hard time getting into colleges, finding girlfriends, getting jobs, then the public shaming worked.

I feel the same about all convicted felons

I feel like shaming when Cee-Lo says "it's not rape if you don't remember" is valid and necessary.

Public shaming for an unintentional, minor transgression by an individual, less helpful than teachable moment.

Former more common than latter.

MAGA kid can't claim he and his cohorts wore MAGA hats in a very public place, took of their shirts and showed their asses in public, then act like they have any expectation of privacy. Wah wah.

Felons have never had the option of pretending they aren’t felons. Shaming forces everyone to take that same responsibility for their words and actions

I’m trying to agree find common ground with the Captain Save-a-MAGAs: we won’t shame him if we can all agree that he needs that smirk punched off his face (a la Spencer) at 12:01am on his 18th Birthday.

No one is saying the kid is a cool guy, just that it’s weird for national publications like Slate to put someone so young on blast for smirking. It’s displaced anger. The chaperones are responsible for the behavior of the kids on the trip and the Republican Party is responsible for promoting a toxic, craven and bigoted form of politics across the nation.

Just to clarify, I’m ok with the chaperones getting punched also.

The chaperones are responsible for the behavior of the kids on the trip

FUCK no

No ones accusing them of a crime! Their being under 18 does absolutely nothing to excuse their actions

idk trís

totally emboldened asshole bigots dont spring fully formed at 18

v handwavey there about agency of this fella and the many like him

Felons have never had the option of pretending they aren’t felons. Shaming forces everyone to take that same responsibility for their words and actions

does no such option exist in america? in other countries it does. it's possible to show compassion towards criminals. people's behaviour has mitigating circumstances. otherwise why not just stone people to death or jail them for life? why have varying sentences? not sure the punitive mindset has functioned particularly well in dealing with people's bad behaviour yet it seems fairly popular in recent times.

I didn't know ILX to be such a staunch opponent of social determinism.

^

Sorry menat to one up fernando

Like the kid only matters as an example. Do we want to resist right wing populism by zeroing in on one person at a time and pecking them to death? Would that even work? The live in their own spheres anyway and will just see one another more and more as victims.

We could peck more to death with A.I. birds

Now we're talkin'.

If you had the technology to peck every single trump supporter to death, that at least would have the benefit of being effective

It serves to marginalize them. It serves to reinforce the idea that what they did is and should be widely considered Wrong. It serves to prevent their behavior from becoming normalized.

I took a felony when I was much younger when I was charged with something I didn't do, and because I had no money to bail myself it was either plead guilty or sit in jail for months waiting for a trial at which I'd be defended by a PD and probably lose anyway on account of that. What island would you like me shipped to

mon over here rip and welcome

The one where they teach reading comprehension? Xpost

You seem like such a lovely guy, Dan

I like that you capitalized the W, Dan.

ah yes sorry and carry on

What island teaches that

This is perfectly emblematic of our disagreement! You apparently think there is something absurd or incorrect about the idea that a given behavior should be universally considered Wrong. I think there’s a categorical difference between good and evil—they’re not just two different sports teams xpost

Anyway that was kinda unnecessarily hostile Dan

Xpost

And that evil doesn’t need and doesn’t deserve to always have devils advocate walruses raising their hands from the back of the class

oh good we're getting somewhere, where's that list of whats good and whats evil again, fuckin handy reference that should really put it on the fridge tbh

dan are you new to ilx? maybe take a breather. ppl are discussing this in good faith and you're having a fucking meltdown bc they dare not to see things your way. we're not devils advocates or nazi sympathizers or sea lions or gaslighters if we don't sign onto your take. we're just ppl with different perspectives.

I pulled a felony from the tone police but I’m innocent y’all

bet you do a lot of smirking in yr life

Dan, you were just a jerk to rip van wanko when he shared something painful in his past. Should I write a slate article saying you’re a monster?

I do a lot of eye rolling atm

i thought you were mute in winter tbh

love it when a longtimer goes awry over some point of small-differences principle

walruses?

he meant sea lions

Ah yes I did mean sea lions

xpost I once rolled my eyes so hard a contact lens popped out.

this is why i don't wear contact lenses

this is why i watch Frozen Planet.

Nathan Phillips's turn for public shaming next

Though is it really public shaming if you go on CNN to do an interview? And where is CNN's credibility (lol) in not doing any kind of fact checking at all on Phillips.

"The chaperones are responsible for the behavior of the kids on the trip

FUCK no"

and why not? maybe not if these kids were like, 7 or 8. if you've ever gone on a field trip with a bunch of elementary school kids, yeah, you can't control them, the best you can do is make sure they don't get hit by a car. but these kids were in High School. They were clearly deemed old enough and mature enough to attend a Right To Life protest. Watching the full video makes it perfectly clear they behaved in a manner that was not acceptable; war whoops, dancing around, clearly mocking. There were adults present. The adults did not stop it. So yes, they are responsible for the behavior the kids on the trip, at least in part.

Fuck those kids. Imagine wasting .5 seconds worrying about them possibly facing consequences for .5 seconds (which of course they’re wiggling out of anyway bc the president is also a bigot)

one of the wildest things abt white supremacy is how white people's feelings abt racism are always the terrain being contested and always presented as The Stakes.https://t.co/CdmC0pNaA8

— Swole Porter. (@GeeDee215) January 22, 2019

Furthermore, the interesting thing to me abt the teens’ ironic affect is that it’s exactly what gives ppl like Mordy the space to imply identifying their racism is “thought police” type behavior bc it creates enough doubt ... I see their smarminess as having more to do w class than anything ... ironic racism gets a societal, structural, systemic benefit of the doubt (see all the old Momus posts), an opening for ppl to say they’re just being normal teenagers bc they too identify w the teenage impulse to be condescending towards “difference” (I still remember my high school class torturing the physics sub with the Russian accent). But this isn’t abt who is nice and who is mean; it’s abt drawing a line around racism & misogyny& anti semitism as having significantly more dangerous consequences, of being ideologically harmful w very real, physical consequences. IE prison camps for immigrant children. This is per usual “ironic” racism somehow getting a pass bc it’s not “real racism” aka poor people racism, the unfashionable sincere kind which we “all” instantly recognize... these kids learned if they do it like this they’ll get a pass from their parents and the president

16 year old "kids" have their future prospects negatively affected every day

this is one of the few instances to celebrate

does anyone want this 16 year old to have great prospects

I hold the controp that much of the divisions created in hot topics of progressive discourse (TERFism, East Asian appropriation of African-American culture, prison abolition, police abolition, sex work abolition, “should we write a think piece trying to understand the neo-Nazis or deprive them of all attention”-ism), that the vitriol and incandescent rage with which we approach these arguments is a literal product of cointelpro that seeks to keep conservatives in power while anybody with any empathy is caught up in meaningless discourse about whether or not it is ethical to send death threats to a white teen in a MAGA hat

There is some evidence for that, actually, fgti. I wouldn’t discount it.

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/426338-twitter-suspends-account-that-helped-incident-involving-catholic-school

The twitter account that first shared this “viral” video was found to be suspicious by twitter and suspended. Apparently it tweeted like 5 times per hour and the profile pucture didn’t match the purported owner of the account.

xpost I don't know that I'd go quite that far but would definitely assert that paroxysms of righteous indignation are often more about buttressing the ego than the affectation of anything constructive, and those on the opposite side of that ideological divide certainly aren't complaining about the extent to which that is so.

Tbh, i felt the entire affair made the media and “resistance”-minded social media users—i won’t say “the left,” which refers to a different kind of group that overlaps—look like absolute clowns.

Like, if you get really mad at a bunch of teens yelling things irl. And if you try to go to the newspaper with the story of the teens being dicks. That would be stupid.

FGTI - there are plenty of examples of that being a real thing, absolutely lots of (at best) bad-faith actors joining in with any online scandal, however I would say the mechanics of how especially Twitter works is if anything a larger factor here. I see plenty of intelligent left-wing people getting caught up in ultimately minor arguments because the important big picture stuff is too complicated and messy and/or everyone in their bubble has already agreed about it and there's not much else to say.

I hold the controp that much of the divisions created in hot topics of progressive discourse (TERFism, East Asian appropriation of African-American culture, prison abolition, police abolition, sex work abolition, “should we write a think piece trying to understand the neo-Nazis or deprive them of all attention”-ism), that the vitriol and incandescent rage with which we approach these arguments is a literal product of cointelpro that seeks to keep conservatives in power while anybody with any empathy is caught up in meaningless discourse about whether or not it is ethical to send death threats to a white teen in a MAGA hat

― flamboyant goon tie included

for me the literal source of the incandescent rage is not relevant, though if someone becomes more skeptical of incandescent rage as a tactic if they believe it's the result of cointelpro or whoever as opposed to, you know, random white men, i don't object to that. it's more that uncontrolled rage and effective political action are not typically congruent, and any work we do to dismantle rage culture is valuable work.

How dare u, cue performative outrage

mechanics of twitter otm

dan are you new to ilx? maybe take a breather. ppl are discussing this in good faith and you're having a fucking meltdown bc they dare not to see things your way. we're not devils advocates or nazi sympathizers or sea lions or gaslighters if we don't sign onto your take. we're just ppl with different perspectives.

― Mordy, Tuesday, January 22, 2019 11:03 AM (yesterday)

lol he's been here literally like, decades, he's fine, you're all fine, except that sb guy

you people, sometimes

theres an sb guy now

a real piece of work

It's a recurrent benbbag issue we can't seem to clear up

(sorry for tmi)

fgti otm i think

https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/

On that note, this subreddit devoted to clowning on the bloviating nerds of the rational-sphere is very enjoyable https://www.reddit.com/r/SneerClub/

I thought the recent "civility above all" zeitgeist around here seemed pretty un-ILX-like; now I now where it's coming from

know

we've lost our edge maybe u can help us find it

looks like Greenwald had a point after all, eh

they should publicly execute the racist teen on good morning america imo

^ this unironically

i see we all did a lot of reading on MLK Day

(what a shitpile of idiocy)

There's probably an argument to be made that 'civility above all' (like nonviolence) only carries weight within a framework where it has some tangible efficacy. Like even if it's a noble and morally upright endeavor it may have negligible real-world impact at a point.

(Which is by no means an argument against its employment, just an argument against getting one's hopes up.)

in fact why even have civilization at all when humans do uncivilized things what benefits has it actually brought us

Civility is only good for long haul flights.

Like even if it's a noble and morally upright endeavor it may have negligible real-world impact at a point

ignoble and uncivil actions can have negligible real-world impacts too

For sure.

irl at work, with family, at the bar, wherever ppl are generally civil bc that makes life more comfortable. online where no one has a face ppl are less civil. anti-civility ppl online are presumably not going around acting like jackasses and getting into nasty fights calling ppl names at the office or wherever. and the ones who are don't get invited out much anymore. but that's ok bc it leaves them more time for twitter.

ignoble and uncivil actions can have negligible real-world impacts too

you mean like Dan I calling for the televised execution of teenagers?

did he start a change.org petition tho

I mean, my long-term personal goal is increasing my kindness quotient. But if pressed I don't know that I could make a strong argument that that's a particularly effectual way to approach the world. But my inability to construct that argument doesn't really impede my intentions (most of the time, anyway) (or at least some of the time).

um that was me give credit pls xp

xp it'll matter to the ppl who experience the kindness, idk about effectiveness but considering most of what we do help no one (and hurt ppl even) working on being more kind will at least have an unambiguous positive impact on others

Yeah, that's pretty much my take. If I can reduce the number of assholes a person encounters in a day by one, I've done my job.

Who’s talking about kindness—I’m talking about the dictatorship of politesse

oh poor baby have u been repressed i'm so sorry :(

Tell it to the Basilisk, man!

Dan, I'm the one who brought kindness into the equation. That was me. Mea culpa.

for me the literal source of the incandescent rage is not relevant, though if someone becomes more skeptical of incandescent rage as a tactic if they believe it's the result of cointelpro or whoever as opposed to, you know, random white men, i don't object to that. it's more that uncontrolled rage and effective political action are not typically congruent, and any work we do to dismantle rage culture is valuable work.

― The Elvis of Nationalism and Amoral Patriotism (rushomancy), Wednesday, January 23, 2019 9:17 AM (four hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

When confronted by public displays of racism i too wonder how we can address the real issue: people being angry

Rage is a tactic like any other, in that sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t; sometimes it’s purely cathartic, and sometimes it has efficacy. Effective political action and rage can be very congruent !

High levels of anger is certainly part of it, people's willingness to own and constructively utilize their anger vs. using it as blame fuel is another and perhaps bigger part of it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_sdubWaY5o

It’s just weird to me we’re more readily willing to police people’s emotional responses than we are to “thought police” their racist ideologies

It’s just weird to me we’re more readily willing to police people’s emotional responses than we are to “thought police” their racist ideologies

Yes, exactly!

When people say rage and anger as these terrible things, I feel like they are over-dramatizing what that actually looks like. It's one way to think they can control a situation to their comfort (outside of the GOP using it for their own agenda).

Rage is prone to misdirection.

it's also worth taking careful note of what gets coded as "civil" and "uncivil" and who gets to make that determination.

U wish it was

Xpost

societies will always have ppl with bad or even terrible beliefs and having a position about what we should do about them how we should deal w/ them (and not accepting some maximalist position) doesn't mean sympathy with the beliefs. u can think that it's unproductive to attack an underage person in the media for wearing a MAGA hat and also think it's a bad thing he's a Trump supporter. that doesn't mean you think "policing" ppl's emotions is more okay than "policing" the kid's racism.

this is so stupid i feel dumber having to spell it out but there u have it i guess

xpost yeah, I was kind of laughing at what mordy assumes what all the anti-civility people are doing in real life. Poking people with umbrellas and showing off ankles and bra straps.

It’s just weird to me we’re more readily willing to police people’s emotional responses than we are to “thought police” their racist ideologies

― ILX’s bad boy (D-40),

yeah i don't see *either* of these things happening

what are you even talking about xp

i assume the anti-civility ppl in real life are civil bc they're not stupid

Tbf the firewall between the internet and irl is thinning out day by day.

Well some people have a very narrow or differing view of what civility is or as eliza says, who defines that.

Civilized men are more discourteous than savages because they know they can be impolite without having their skulls split, as a general thing.

Sounds like a variation on 'an armed society is a polite society'.

well u already said you wouldn't roll your eyes in a way where someone could obviously see you so obv you're very polite irl xxp

I am very nice typically because it's ingrained from being raised by an asian mother and being female. Oh, but I would totally roll my eyes where you could see it. When I said from not two feet away from your face, I was referring to that racist teen.

I likely can't intimidate anyone but I do try to make people who deserve it feel stupid a lot.

wait rolling one's eyes is "uncivil" now?

Mordy thought me also telling anecdotes about my partner here was uncivil.

civility above all else feels like a gross and comfortable position to be coming from.

iirc i said you telling nasty anecdotes about your partner here was cruel but iirc actually i said i knew nothing about your marriage and merely commented that i'd feel hurt and i suspect my spouse would feel the same if one of us was saying mean things about us to strangers online and i think you decided it absolutely applied to you

civility is like "hey let's have a conversation and not call each other names" which is generally the only kind of conversation i'm personally interested in having but i don't begrudge anyone who likes conversations where ppl call each other names.

xxp asking for civility is not gross or comfortable if you've experienced real incivility, ie strangers threatening to beat you in public for being the wrong race

being polite/civil isn't sufficient obv you need to have what to say too. and i've spoken to ppl who have legitimately interesting things to say but couldn't say them in a polite package and then you have to weigh if the stuff being said is good enough or interesting enough to put up with the bad attitude, condescension, nasty remarks, and being around a generally ill at ease person. sometimes that calculation works out that it's still worth it tho in my life i've noticed i have less and less tolerance for talking w/ assholes. it's just unpleasant and i'd rather do other things.

mordy be assured that your definition of nasty (which I can't even pinpoint what you thought was nasty ) is likely very far from mine. And yeah you don't know me/us in real life so I can see where you probably misread internet tone.

in the context of racism, the "not calling each other names" part gets widely interpreted as precluding identifying racist ideas as racist ideas, because "racist" is a bad name. there's no easy way around this, but I presume there are possible circumlocutions that could avoid this catch-22.

Whose appeal to authority do I follow hmm

sure, if you're arguing with someone and they say something you think is racist you could say, "when you said X i think this comment was racist for this reason" as opposed to "you're a fucking racist i hope you die."

one can even discuss racism civilly none of these things are hard and honestly everyone should've learnt them in grade school

from the alt-right thread

i would like to again express my displeasure with any strategy that involves conscious avoidance of _provoking_ racist demagogues. this seems to me like an implicitly or explicitly victim-blaming strategy.

― The Elvis of Nationalism and Amoral Patriotism (rushomancy)

this is a position i often see articulated by people who have never been victims and have little to lose by provoking racist demagogues

the "not calling each other names" part gets widely interpreted as precluding identifying racist ideas as racist ideas, because "racist" is a bad name

is that what we're talking about, or are we talking about not stooping to things like online harassment / doxxing / punching nazis?

societies will always have ppl with bad or even terrible beliefs and having a position about what we should do about them how we should deal w/ them (and not accepting some maximalist position) doesn't mean sympathy with the beliefs. u can think that it's unproductive to attack an underage person in the media for wearing a MAGA hat and also think it's a bad thing he's a Trump supporter. that doesn't mean you think "policing" ppl's emotions is more okay than "policing" the kid's racism.

― Mordy, Wednesday, January 23, 2019 2:28 PM (twenty-one minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this is so stupid i feel dumber having to spell it out but there u have it i guess

― Mordy, Wednesday, January 23, 2019 2:29 PM (twenty-one minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The second post here is kind of a snide incivility isn’t it? Incivility is in the eye of the beholder so watching it be weaponized for some and not others is kind of the point... Mordy is acting like I’m personally calling the kids’ school to get them expelled when I’m merely advocating not giving a fuck that some people were angry enough to call the kids school to get them expelled

why would advocate for not give a fuck about that sort of action, if that sort of action is ultimately counterproductive to your goals?

makes no sense to me

Mannered complacency is demonstrably counterproductive as well

"Mordy is acting like I’m personally calling the kids’ school to get them expelled when I’m merely advocating not giving a fuck that some people were angry enough to call the kids school to get them expelled"

honestly don't think the line between "it's cool if ppl call in death threats" and "i urge you to call in death threats" (i know u said expelled but death threats are happening too and it's worth using a more dramatic example to make my point - i think it logically follows in the more inconsequential version you cited) is as thin as you think. and neither really can coexist with an opinion that it's never okay in our society to call in death threats to someone.

Mordy was doing pop psych on what happened in ppl’s home life that caused them to be angry abt the maga racists, that to me is not really covered by the point of what TLG is saying ... isn’t the actual *anger* people feel pretty understandable! The anger is not the problem!

The moment you participate in a public demonstration of your politics, you are fair game.

I really don't think it's complicated.

This thread is bad and you should all feel bad

― gray say nah to me (wins), Tuesday, January 22, 2019 3:46 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i see what u did here and im FOR it

honestly don't think the line between "it's cool if ppl call in death threats" and "i urge you to call in death threats" (i know u said expelled but death threats are happening too and it's worth using a more dramatic example to make my point - i think it logically follows in the more inconsequential version you cited) is as thin as you think. and neither really can coexist with an opinion that it's never okay in our society to call in death threats to someone.

― Mordy, Wednesday, January 23, 2019 2:58 PM (nine seconds ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Wait... you think I’m pro death threats?

I’m pretty sure our system has actual legal recourse for death threats!

“Whoa there buddy, seems like you’re getting pretty hysterical—why don’t you calm down?”

like if your argument is that shaming ppl online or trying to get them expelled is not a big deal and my argument is that no those are shitty things to do, the difference between you indulging it and encouraging it isn't much of one

i'm going to be uncivil tho and say this is tedious and i'm not getting much out of the conversation so i'm going to leave ya'all to it

dan you accomplish anything anti-racist today beyond typing angry shit on the internet?

i don't know about you but i'm not just sitting around complacently waiting for racism to end

I have to work for a living, unlike some people

i for one am going to tell all you strangers, that I, a stranger, am going to go do nasty things to my spouse.

^ this was a joke in case mordy is having heart palpitations.

t/s public shaming vs kink shaming

not sure what you mean by that, dan

gah, i just found the "nasty" anecdotes and it wasn't even kink shaming. It was on the masculinity thread and it was me telling my spouse how to be more inclusive during meetings and about me giving him shit for talking over people when he doesn't know anything about a topic.

So nasty

it has just occurred to dan that participation in ilx is incompatible with working at a job for money, despite the fact that he participates in ilx and works at a job for money. he then generalized this new realization to the whole population of ilx and concluded that his case must be fairly peculiar and could not be widely replicated among ilxors.

like if your argument is that shaming ppl online or trying to get them expelled is not a big deal and my argument is that no those are shitty things to do, the difference between you indulging it and encouraging it isn't much of one

― Mordy, Wednesday, 23 January 2019 21:01 (fifty-one minutes ago) Permalink

Ahh I see where this got confused. No, my argument is that accepting the framing implicit in your post is the problem; tangentially, sure, I’m *generally* against doxxing and death threats (though not ... entirely? Or at the very least being anti doxxing is contingent on.... but more on that in a second) and generally in favor of public shaming of antisocial behavior (though again as TLG points out — sometimes it can be counterproductive). What I’m more against is the idea that the terms of the debate should be fixated on either of these issues; that civility gets prioritized in this argument *every time* even though we all broadly agree that ie death threats are bad and not accommodating racists is good and probably also agree that there are exceptions when it’s better to deny the racists the oxygen or whether or not we should dox baby hitler (this is a joke relax).

No matter how the argument falls re: civility, though, it always reinforces the same underlying structure: that the kids with maga hats are victims of an online mob, but the kids ie advocating for transgender bathrooms on their campus are part of an online mob

one can even discuss racism civilly none of these things are hard and honestly everyone should've learnt them in grade school

― Mordy, 23. januar 2019 21:54 (fifty-one minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Lol. New Board Description.

Are we not discussing racism civilly? Seems like we mostly are. Saying being angry is ok is not saying anger is the only medium!

What I’m more against is the idea that the terms of the debate should be fixated on either of these issues; that civility gets prioritized in this argument *every time*

what else is going to happen when obnoxious, shithead teens are--bizarrely--getting attention from national media outlets leading them to receive death threats? it was an absurd spectacle.

i'm with fgti. this could have been a cointelpro initiative to make the left appear foolish

It kind of doesn’t matter if it was or wasn’t, ppl’s reactions are coming from an authentic place. Questioning whether it started organically or not is almost beside the point as far as I’m concerned.

Is there a high profile example of ppl becoming a flashpoint like this that *doesnt* end in death threats? Liberal or conservative or other?

The idea that as soon as you receive death threats that any criticism of you is now an overreaction seems impossible to maintain

xpost Even if it was, there are still people making useful comparisons on how we treat white "credible" teenagers caught on tape being an asshole vs how we treat non-white teenagers caught on tape being an asshole or even just existing.

(And if not couldn’t the death threats themselves be cointelpro?? Once you start thinking like this it’s impossible to get anywhere)

if it weren't for the prominence of those MAGA hats, the native American drum, and all the other unmistakable indicators of who belongs to which officially-approved social group, I'm pretty sure the staunch defenders of these kids would be howling the words "juvenile delinquents".

DUD

no one is defending the kids on ilx

to be clear, the defenders I am referencing are not ilxors.

I am glad that David Hogg kind of spoke up about this. Because on my fb I was definitely seeing friends of friends soooo upset that a teenager is getting deaththreats/inappropriate media attention. And I *know* these same people were posting fucked up derogatory bullshit about Hogg right after the shooting.

also tbc, i'm not saying i think it IS cointelpro, just that it made everyone look so foolish that it might as well have been. i guess i'm coming from the perspective of having taught high school. teens behave egregiously often; it's adults' job to teach them. turning the fire house of public condemnation on a teenager just seemed so over the top.

yeah i understand yerac. conservative media is worse in ever way to liberal media. right wing twitter likewise. trump's is a hate movement. i just kind of hold liberals to a higher standard.

i was definitely outraged when that congressman from maine--i think--posted awful things about emma gonzalez

But at the same time he now has a team of people (adults) coaching him on never admitting to a single impure thought.

I'm getting more and more baffled as to how the US treats teenagers in generally...

never admitting to a single impure thought

boy, will his confessor be surprised!

xpost If a teenager isn't a white boy they are definitely part of ms-13 or a drunk slut who was asking for it or they will be shot on sight for looking thuggish and older than 12.

Okay guys, new year, new tweet storms. It's time to talk Covington Catholic. https://t.co/mQEDwEFkPT

Pull up a chair. I think we're going to be here a while.

— Megan McArdle (@asymmetricinfo) January 23, 2019

This is the best take I’ve read

Hat tip mordy

god

You have to read on to get the take

no

Alright. Simon H is telling me in another window that mcardle is a libertarian. I don’t think it’s really relevant though.

Adults, however, can be expected not to yell anti-gay slurs, or bang a drum in a stranger’s face.

this is basically the crux of the article

the acts of a SPLC-identified hate group and a Native American singing a peace prayer are the same magnitude, good work.

a hate group mind you that had like, less than 10 people present of the 200+ plus people gathered at the scene

would love it if one of these assclowns would admit that Phillips did not initially position himself in Sandmann's face and this is fairly obvious cos he's to his left and kid is smiling up a storm.

They were waiting for the bus

GTFO with that McArdle bullshit

I don't know Mcardle, but libertarian "personal responsibility" doesn't seem right for this opinion. Although there is that whole white people are awesome thing for them.

xxpost I know. but Phillips didn't just walk up to Sandmann's voice and go "bong bong bong". he was several feet away at first. a minute or so later he stepped forward a moment later, which supports his "trying to walk away" claim

Shes more willing to admit the kid wasnt smirking than i am. I think the kid sucks. But socia media mobs are terrifying and weird and it’s even weirder when national publications get involved with this stuff.

I watched a very brief interview with one of the march's organizers/native american lawyer. She explained what she saw and felt in that moment and I trusted her viewpoint.

I mean there's no video from behind the kids and facing the Native Americans, which would paint a clearer pic, but nobody seems to wanna point that out.

Yerac otm

Here's the clip in case anyone is interested. https://www.msnbc.com/hallie-jackson/watch/organizer-of-indigenous-peoples-march-responds-to-viral-video-1429414979995

Alright. Simon H is telling me in another window that mcardle is a libertarian. I don’t think it’s really relevant though.

― Trϵϵship, Wednesday, January 23, 2019 6:01 PM (sixteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Lmao @ “another window”

Is Mordy running a shadow ilx to evade the ilx leftist thought police

her: so, you got any hobbies?
me: not really. well...just this one ;)

*flicks on basement light revealing walls plastered with individual frames of the covington video and a 1/1000 scale diorama of the lincoln memorial*

— Osita Nwanevu (@OsitaNwanevu) January 23, 2019

Simon lives across the street from me and sends messages on paper airplanes between windows. Don’t be paranoid. xp

Trϵϵship posting a Megan McArdle article is really something

Um, it’s a tweet thread. Learn more about media dude.9

The fact that the right's best response to this is "an elderly man DRUMMED in his FACE" should really be the tell that there's no defense for these kids

that was one magic loogie

Yes, the extra videos exonerate the kids from the charge of storming an Indigenous People March and staring down someone while they played healing music, but they were still hooting around like the Lost Boys meeting the tribe in Peter Pan and committing a hate crime on an elderly man, with some crazy Twinkie Defense that they were all juiced up by being called faggots by black israelites or something.

So it got downgraded from a LEVEL 5 racism to a LEVEL 3 racism or something. Fuck out of here, defending these kids

wait mordy doesn't really live across the street from treeship?

Mordy is Treeship

mordy, treeship, and simon all live in different cities people. update your xls once in while jeez

Yes, the extra videos exonerate the kids from the charge of storming an Indigenous People March and staring down someone while they played healing music, but they were still hooting around like the Lost Boys meeting the tribe in Peter Pan and committing a hate crime on an elderly man, with some crazy Twinkie Defense that they were all juiced up by being called faggots by black israelites or something.

So it got downgraded from a LEVEL 5 racism to a LEVEL 3 racism or something. Fuck out of here, defending these kids

― ebro the letter (Whiney G. Weingarten), Wednesday, January 23, 2019 4:34 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

booming post

that thread is long and dumb and fucking terrible

I'm apparently an uninformed moron, because I've never heard of Megan McArdle, but she appears to be brain damaged. But I love when she says:

You get my point; I won't belabor it.

With eight tweets in and like 30 more to go.

This is my least favorite thread on ILX I have ever read.

Some "if you look past my gold chain, I'll look past the iron chain" shit

the kids had been bussed from their drives-gay-kids-to-suicide, can't-wear-blackface-anymore school in another state to shout abuse at women. who gives a fuck if your friends on a website dedicated to overthrowing democracy may have ERRONEOUSLY thought that the one who wasn't making "scalpy scalpy" motions might have been racist just because he was wearing a racist hat sold by a racist grifter

The important thing is to keep shining, if we’re talking jewelry.

With eight tweets in and like 30 more to go.

I admit I tapped out when it said "load 45 more tweets" after the first 30 or 60 or w/e

I read it in article format

I did it wrong and read the article and not the tweets.

Twitter is the true paper of record

Well more like read halfway then put on Hall and Oates

I'm apparently an uninformed moron, because I've never heard of Megan McArdle, but she appears to be brain damaged.

catching up on her now so I can fully appreciate why I should have loaded the rest of that thread

McArdle correctly acknowledges that Grenfell might not have claimed as many lives if regulators had required sprinkler systems in the tower, but then proceeds to brainstorm bizarre hypotheticals in which installing sprinklers might have actually killed more people. “Every dollar [the government] spends on installing sprinkler systems cannot be spent on the health service, or national defense, or pollution control. Would more lives be saved by those measures or by sprinkler systems in public housing? It’s hard to say,” she writes. It’s worth noting that this abomination of an opinion piece was published before many Grenfell victims were pulled from the smoldering rubble that was, literally, their entire lives. “It’s possible that by allowing large residential buildings to operate without sprinkler systems, the British government has prevented untold thousands of people from being driven into homelessness by higher housing costs.”

this is a position i often see articulated by people who have never been victims and have little to lose by provoking racist demagogues

― the late great

that's not a political strategy, that's a survival mechanism. people do what they need to survive and don't need my approval or disapproval, and therefore i have neither to offer.

i lost track of this thread because i had other things to do, people were trying to defend rage as a viable political strategy? and then started talking about civility? are the two related because i don't think they are

love you, but I won't do what you tell me

ok right this thread is officially all talking and no listening, i'm going to switch over to slaughterchrist's "reflections of things to come", it's on youtube if anybody elese is interested

two of my favorite things

love you, but I won't do what you tell me

― fuck the NRA (Neanderthal)

actually this is great, somebody needs to rewrite all of ratm from angry white-boy posturing into songs of loving but principled resistance, or possibly pizza, because songs about pizza are always funny

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayd-a44Nca4

really like that WGW post upthread

WGW may refer to:

Wagawaga language (New Guinea) – former ISO 639 code WGW; later split into codes YLB (Yaleba) and WGB (Wagawaga)
Whitby Goth Weekend, a goth music festival in North Yorkshire, England
Wigan Wallgate railway station, Greater Manchester, England (station code WGW)
WorldGenWeb, genealogy project

lol, I meant Whiney G. Weingarten

everyone dogging into the thread is right about why the ppl itt are wrong but wrong about it being a bad thread it is in fact a good thread

WGW may refer to:

Wagawaga language (New Guinea) – former ISO 639 code WGW; later split into codes YLB (Yaleba) and WGB (Wagawaga)
Whitby Goth Weekend, a goth music festival in North Yorkshire, England
Wigan Wallgate railway station, Greater Manchester, England (station code WGW)
WorldGenWeb, genealogy project

― Trϵϵship

"what god wants", the first single from roger waters' acclaimed 1992 album "amused to death"

That’s what i thought at first, but roger water(face) hasn’t posted in some time

that's not a political strategy, that's a survival mechanism

fair enough i guess

i think TLG's point is pretty legit as a counterbalance to overconfident white progressives that there are unintended consequences to unexamined radical ideological positioning fwiw ... that said i do think the blowback to ppl wishing death on some teens while bad for leftist optics or whatever is still kind of a red herring / distraction from the way the system actually *worked* in this instance, which was to move to protect the positions of the kids when they were forced to face some consequence

the thing about 'wishing death on teens' is, anybody who is outed in social media for doing anything, heinous or imagined-heinous, is typically subjected to death threats. Which doesn't make it not fucked up, but it means the average friend of yours that was roaring over this story wasn't sending Sandmann messages like "Peek a boo, you are doomed".

I haven't seen anybody in my social sphere wanting to John the Baptist the little fuckers

OTM:

I admit I jumped the gun when I said those MAGA kids should have their lives ruined. Now that more info about the students and their school has come to light, I believe their families should also have their lives ruined, and Covington Catholic should be bulldozed to the ground.

— Bryan🌹 (@superlancerboy) January 22, 2019

So this is kind of hilarious. This thread reminded me to call out a friend of a friend (who was manpearlclutching at length about the maga kids being vicitms) about him posting bullshit about David H0gg like a month after the shooting. His response. "Hogg is an opportunist who sought and made personal gain from a tragedy."

Rationalization, it's not just a river in Egypt.

i lost track of this thread because i had other things to do, people were trying to defend rage as a viable political strategy? and then started talking about civility? are the two related because i don't think they are

IMO you are 100% wrong about almost everything you've posted about in these threads over the last few days, and I utterly reject your entire value system.

sorry, I'm just tired of the second-guessing of tactics. I support all the tools in the toolbox, all the time.

is sleeve really 52 and how do i get to shadow ilx

xp yeah sleeve I agree with that

the last statement about supporting all measures

Interesting the bullshit account (@2020fight) that edited/popularized the MAGA kid video hasn't been mentioned. Sounds like the story would have trended even if it had to rely on bot accounts following that account. Everyone ate it up, so... moot?

lol hoos

also I conflated this thread with the alt right thread w/r/t discussion of tactics, I apologize for that vehemence there rusho - death threats are not cool, "public shaming" seems to be very complex in the social media age and I shld read that book

Relevant: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/jan/23/conspiracy-theories-internet-survivors-truth

NBC looked into the twitter account, and found that it was probably not 'bullshit': https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/twitter-account-amplified-covington-catholic-d-c-march-video-appears-n961981 Again, the overcorrection has been absolutely insane.

this is a little off topic, but I think this is a great example of the internet's fascination with breaking down every tiny detail of everything - explainer videos, 10 things in star wars that you never noticed and will BLOW YOUR MIND, YouTube dildos and their "response" videos - really poisons the dialogue and our reaction to things

the initial reaction people had was totally correct, the kid's a smug racist little piece of shit, but then the internet has this compulsion to make simple things complex, let's see what happened 10 minutes before 10 minutes after for "context" oh wait they aren't bad the black Israelites are, oh wait they are bad they harassed a girl earlier in the day, oh wait they aren't bad the guy with the drum walked up to them first.... just insane, like people aren't that complex most of em are super simple and 9x out of 10 it's really easy to understand exactly who they are

And as is so commonly the case, the more intently the minutia is pored over, the more easily the big picture and any sense of context is lost.

ie how many of the people engaged in public shaming of teenage choads are willing to expend the same energy in seeking out and combatting the structural problems that turn teens into choads?

Today, my anti-Trump, very liberal history teacher friend, a normally level headed guy who has for whatever reason, lost his mind defending the Covington kids, just shared a Daily Caller article attacking Phillips. Seemingly unaware of the publication's history, founder, and reputation. 2019 is trippy

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2019/01/23/nathan-phillips-man-standoff-with-covington-teens-faces-scrutiny-his-military-past/?utm_term=.851630fab66b

A group representing Nathan Phillips wrongly said he served in Vietnam. Then came the accusations.
There’s no evidence that he’s ever claimed to have served in Vietnam, a representative said
By Dan Lamothe January 23 at 3:11 PM
Nathan Phillips, the U.S. veteran whose standoff with high school students on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial captured viral attention online, has often discussed his military past.

The Native American activist, seen beating a drum Friday as teens from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky surrounded and mocked him, has referred to himself as a “Vietnam-times” veteran. He described in interviews getting spit on and called a baby killer by a “hippie girl” and told the Detroit Free Press on Saturday that “I’m a Marine Corps veteran, and I know what that mob mentality can be like.”

The sight of him surrounded by a group of teens wearing red baseball hats emblazoned with President Trump’s “Make America great again” campaign slogan and the shifting narratives about the incident afterward have prompted political outcry from conservatives and liberals alike.

Nathan Phillips, center, with other Dakota Access Pipeline protesters in February 2017 near Cannon Ball, N.D. (Mike McCleary/Bismarck Tribune/AP) (Mike Mccleary/AP)
The incident also has led to scrutiny of Phillips’s service record after an organization representing him, the Lakota People’s Law Project, described him as a Vietnam veteran in a news release and numerous media reports identified him as one afterward. Several, including The Washington Post, have since issued corrections.

In reality, Phillips served from June 1972 to May 1976 in the Marine Corps Reserve, a service spokeswoman, Yvonne Carlock, said Wednesday. He did not deploy, and he left the service as a private after disciplinary issues. From October 1972 to February 1973, he was classified as an antitank missileman, a kind of infantryman, Carlock said. He then became a refrigerator technician for the majority of his service.

Daniel Paul Nelson, a leader in the Lakota People’s Law Project, said in an interview that his group made the error and that Phillips never told the group he served in Vietnam. The group, Nelson said, “trusted what we had seen” in previous stories about Phillips, some of which also referred to him erroneously as a Vietnam veteran.

“We were trying to do the advocacy work that we do,” Nelson said.

Phillips, who turns 64 next month, is not old enough to have deployed to Vietnam as a Marine infantryman, prompting accusations that he was lying about his service.

The military will typically provide basic details about a person’s military service within a day, but the situation with Phillips was complicated because he enlisted under another name associated with a family that raised him, Nelson said. He provided Phillips’s full Social Security number to The Post with Phillips’s permission to help clear up the confusion.

On Tuesday night, Donald Shipley, a Navy SEAL veteran who investigates military service records, published a video in which he showed excerpts of Phillips’s service record.

“This is all going into that Native American guy that everybody keeps labeling as a Vietnam vet, and he is not,” Shipley said in the video. “A lot of these news outlets are using that claim of ‘Vietnam vet’ to kind of beef that story up and make it look even worse.”

Shipley, who did not respond to an interview request Wednesday, noted that Phillips enlisted under another name and spent the majority of his time in the military as a refrigerator technician. He questioned how that squares with an April report by Vogue magazine in which Phillips is quoted saying that he was a “recon ranger,” a position that does not exist in the military.

“I have a relative here who said he’d lead the way and scout ahead for us,” Phillips said in the article, which describes a protest at the Standing Rock Sioux reservation in North Dakota. “You know, I’m from Vietnam times. I’m what they call a recon ranger. That was my role. So I thank you for taking that point position for me.”

Nelson said that Phillips’s comments at Standing Rock were taken out of context and that Phillips actually was referring to the work they were doing at the time on the reservation.

In other interviews, Phillips has consistently described being a veteran of “Vietnam times.”

In 2000, he told The Post that he was a patriot who had served as “a Marine Corps infantryman” in the 1970s. He did not claim to have served in Vietnam and did not mention leaving the infantry after a few months to become a refrigerator technician.

In 2015, he described himself in a video interview with MLive as “a Vietnam veteran times” and stated that he served from 1972 to 1976.

Nelson said he did not know Phillips before the uproar but has “incrementally learned about this man’s integrity, and I have not been disappointed.”

With all the scrutiny of Phillips’s military record, he has now been victimized twice, Nelson said.

“It’s definitely a distraction,” he said. “It’s a diversion, in fact. I’d like to make the point that these papers being released demonstrate the most important fact, which is that he was in the military. He did not lie about that, and there are a lot of people who have been in a very irresponsible and vicious manner targeting him without being able to prove that.”

is your liberal history teacher friend a white guy?

Both sides, man. Both sides.

Man randomly stabbed in park may have bounced a check in the '80s. Was he as innocent a bystander as we'd been led to believe?!??!?

Yerac yup

There was a thing recently about why there is that rush to overly defend with all the sexual assault cases that have multiple victims and Kavanaugh, etc. It's easier to identify and feel that that could've been you, you've made that mistake in the past etc etc.

And I recently saw someone in the black community who explicitly did not care about this incident, change his mind. Because if he expects a level of equality and respect of his feelings and viewpoints who is he to say the indigenous community should feel differently or minimize their experience.

also I conflated this thread with the alt right thread w/r/t discussion of tactics, I apologize for that vehemence there rusho - death threats are not cool, "public shaming" seems to be very complex in the social media age and I shld read that book

― sleeve

no worries, i think we're basically in agreement (especially re: using all the tools in the toolbox), when i speak out against rage as a political strategy i'm mostly speaking of my ongoing efforts to reject my white male rage, i don't feel like i have the knowledge or experience to comment on other forms of rage. the thread just started moving so fast that it wasn't really possible, for me at least, to consider what i or other people were saying. another of the many reasons i avoid twitter - also the scale issue ums alludes to, you get 50 million people in a room together and nobody is going to get anything useful out of that.

We allocate more time to writing over each other than we do to reading, that's for sure.

post yeah^^^ and when I talk about rage and anger I am thinking of when I tell other women they should be angrier. Their lack of anger and complacency, such good and civilized behaviour, with how things are directly affects other women who aren't fine. There is the stereotypical picture of the angry feminist "consumed by rage" that circulates, in hope I guess, that women won't want to be seen as not attractive to men, number one priority. I haven't read Rebecca Traister's "Good and Mad" yet. I probably should.

White dude rage is almost always more like loud + demonstrative petulance. Imagine us in a Little Lord Fauntleroy outfit, it's easy if u try.

or when they murder their spouses, partners, strangers...

I'm saying qualitatively. It's not often a righteous expression of anger. I'm not forgetting the thing where the sum of western history is replete with destruction born of that petulance.

when I talk about rage and anger I am thinking of when I tell other women they should be angrier.

i understand -- however
being shamed (see thread title) into demonstrating my anger more publicly so people can see it doesn't seem like a good solution. in fact, it feels divisive (and even a little cruel) considering the effect that anger has on me in particular. i am plenty righteous but expressing it publicly is something i only do irl where people can see and hear my physical self. i don't express anger and rage very much online because it is unproductive and not good for me, like taking a rage pill that gives me a monster hangover.

i am not into public shaming in general tbh

Anger is a human emotion that shouldn’t be repressed. It simply is. Violent, abusive expressions of anger are always wrong (this doesn’t include self defense) but that’s not the same thing as anger itself.

xpost yeah i think we got sidetracked off the original topic. I was probably speaking more generally. And more about real life because I think having an opinion on the internet as a woman, using your real name, is too dangerous.

The issue is never people should be “less angry” about injustice or watch their “tone” or try not to alienate people or whatever—that’s not the issue. People should express themselves.

Public shaming is a separate issue. It’s a tactic that sometimes is necessary—cf. metoo many named in #metoo that weren’t otherwise being held to account—but can sometimes also be ugly and gratuitous and just another case of bullying, completely disconnected from the initial motive of fighting inequality. So it’s situational.

I think I actually sound a lot angrier in writing than I appear in person. It's probably the same amount of anger, but everyone physically handles it/compartmentalizes a different way.

It seems like a lot of ppl come across differently online. Unperson seems to think I am a college freshman.

haha! everyone is envisioning you in your dorm trying to make your first meal. yeah, i mean I would say the same things in person but seeing a person and hearing tone makes all the difference.

My big regret with ilx is that my jokes don’t come axross as well as irl. That or irl people laugh politely.

I mean it's so obvious that it hardly seems worth mentioning and yet also so consistently overlooked that it bears incessant repeating, but so much of the trouble stirred up by contentious online interactions is instantiated by the inability to see other people as like fully-formed people who have a whole existence beyond the typed words you're reading.

Feel like the story of Lindy West confronting her troll may be hella germane wrt this general topic of conversation.

so is public shaming good or bad?

we actually got that sorted ages back

its good when you like it and bad when you dont

i think you mean, 'is it Classic or Dud'