search results matching tag: distrust
» channel: learn
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (16) | Sift Talk (4) | Blogs (0) | Comments (235) |
go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds
| Videos (16) | Sift Talk (4) | Blogs (0) | Comments (235) |
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
Barack Obama interviews creator David Simon of The Wire
GenjiKilpatrickInteresting anecdote, I'm mixed. Black & Hispanic.
I love Jamaican Beef/Chicken/Veggie patties. Spicy & delicious!
However, the one spot around here that's owned & run by Jamaican folks has shitty service.
There's always an line & an attitude.
One day, I waited in line for like 20 minutes just to get a Spinach pattie.
When I got to the front, I order .. but of course.. THEY'RE OUT!
As I leave, the owner says. "Next time, just call ahead."
Like it's my fault.
WTF! Are you serious?! That's like me calling Taco Bell to make sure they have chalupas.
All I could think was "WHY ARE JAMAICAN PEOPLE SO SHITTY!?"
I was shocked by my own bigoted thought.
My father - a black man - told be a long time ago "I don't like Jamaicans. Don't trust them"
I thought he was just being his usual bigoted self.
But nope, ten years or so later and here I find myself distrusting ALL Jamaican people.
I'm black & hispanic.
I'm sorta racist toward Jamaicans. ..and white people.
Full Disclosure:
I live in the south so.. I assume any old white person with a drawl is just barely holding back from saying something racist as fuck.
I'm also aware that the rate of police shootings of young black males is the same as the rate of lynchings of black males in the Jim Crow era.
So of course I don't trust cops. Yes, even black ones.
In conclusion -
People are racist. Cops are People. Cops are racist.
Barack Obama interviews creator David Simon of The Wire
GenjiKilpatrick@lantern53
But seriously, cops are racist.
Yes Black Cops, Asian Cops, Hispanic Cops.
Being a police officer makes you racist.
Because the culture of law enforcements preys on the poor and minority groups.
So if you're told as a rookie "Go to the poor neighbor and patrol the streets"
Eventually you're going to come across desperate, uneducated people FROM ALL BACKGROUNDS.
You'll see gangsters, addicts, thieves, whores, etc.
If you mostly patrol poor black or white or asian or hispanic neighborhoods, you mostly begin to distrust any black or white or asian or hispanic person.
Being a cop eventually makes you distrust everyone who looks a certain way.
Those stereotypes about all black males being scary savage thugs starts to ring true.
A Message for the Anti-Vaccine Movement
Digitalfiend says...Yep, I understand and agree with your comment.
I think part of the problem is that people aren't going to the source for their information regarding the outcomes of studies, etc. I think many people see click-bait and end up getting linked to sites that seem legit but almost invariably tout homeopathic remedies, have a "flu beating" supplement or book to sell you or harbour some other ulterior agenda. These sites often quote studies but fail to provide citations.
I'd further argue that since many people have a distrust of corporations/government and most have an instinct to protect themselves and their children, there is a tendency towards confirmation bias when they are doing their research.
With that said, we still need to be aware that new information from studies is surfacing all the time and questions about safety or efficacy should not be ignored.
The thing is, even with the mistakes, you're still better off trusting the system.
...
(My post is written to the world at large, I'm pretty sure Digitalfiend understands my point. I just used his post as a bit of a jumping off point for my rant!)
Would You Take This Bet?
radx"For those who are wondering, I convinced my interviewees that the bet was not a scam: they could inspect the coin, flip it themselves, use their own coin etc. I explained that the experiment was intended to explore their approach to risk. It was fear of losing $10, not distrust, that led them to decline the bet."
And here I was just about to point out that any bloke on the street offering me a similar bet is a con artist by default. Sometimes it is good to check YT comments first.
Mr. Plinkett Reacts to the Star Wars: Force Awakens Trailer
SagemindLoosing my head every time someone says, "What, a black guy? What happened to the clones?"
The production of clones stopped after Order 66. The clones died off rapidly with their accelerated aging. Once the Empire took over, Storm Troopers were made up of people from concurred planets. All Troopers were human because of the Emperor's distrust of Alien races.
There were no living clones left in Episodes 4-6
CNN anchors taken to school over bill mahers commentary
scheherazadeJews have the old testament.
Christians have the old testament and new testament.
Muslims have the old testament, new testament, and yet a newer testament.
All 3 share the old testament.
The 'violence promoting' scriptures are found in the old testament - which all 3 have in common.
Reza is right.
If people want peace, the religious of them simply ignore the violent edicts of their religions.
If they want to be violent, the religious of them legitimize it with excuses from their religions.
He's also right about the national hypocrisy. Al-Qaeda at the time of 9/11 was a pet organization of members of the Saudi royal family.
But instead of going after the Saudis (who also today finance ISIS), we go after 2 countries that are unrelated to the attack.
Look at today's irony. Assad in Syria (who we wanted deposed because he was friendlier to Russia than the U.S., and allowed Russian bases on Syrian soil [in the middle east]) is now fighting ISIS, while we ally with the Saudis who are supporting ISIS.
We also didn't mind supporting the Mujahedin (Jihadi fighters) in Afghanistan when they were fighting our enemy. We had no problem throwing Afghanistan into the dark ages when it suited us.
Ultimately, extremist Islam is a foil, meant to rouse western people's emotions. As national policy, we don't _actually_ do anything to stop it, we just use it as an excuse to do whatever else is of national interest.
Who would be the boogey man if extremist Islam was gone? We need a boogey man if we want to keep excusing and paying for a large military. People simply don't have the foresight and patience to maintain a strong military without someone scaring them into support. Particularly now, when we don't have the manufacturing capacity to quickly build a large military.
However, Reza is ignoring Turkey's and the Pacific islander's Muslim problems. Indonesia and the Philippines have extremist Muslim organizations doing attacks home (Philippines also has Christian terrorists). Turkey is a large source of Muslim fighters pouring into Syria.
The various related religions also have historical developmental differences.
Jews were for a long time in such minorities that they did not have the political capability of waging any campaign of violence. They were either too small, or too busy being occupied by European powers (Rome, etc).
Christians did have a long period of majority, starting around 400ad when Rome decided that a good way to control/pacify any dissent within the empire was to make the empire 1 religion and make Rome the head of that religion. They elected Christianity as the state religion, forced everyone in the Roman empire to convert, and you had a continent's worth of Christians.
This included north Africa and Middle East - and is when Jews (by now called Palestinians) were forced to convert from Judaism to Christianity (**and few hundred years later forced to convert from Christianity to Islam).
Although, Christians had the benefit of the Inquisition(s) to temper their enthusiasm for Christianity. A large part of the population was killed for consorting with the devil. Once it got so bad that everyone knew someone who had been convicted and killed - and everyone was sure that those killed were innocent, it cast a large doubt on Christianity as whole. People questioned if the devil even exists, or if it's all a sham. The distrust and resentment paved the way for the eventual birth of Deism and Empiricism. A time when the scientific method and physical observation started to take over.
Islam is still a young religion. They still have to experience their religion becoming all powerful, and the inquisitions that inevitably come from absolute power. The one good thing about Islamic extremism is that it makes the people living under those conditions more likely to suffer. Once the suffering becomes so pervasive that everyone is suffering, the people will start to dislike/distrust their religion, and the extremism will resolve itself from the inside out - like it did with Christianity.
The bigger problem would be if things are 'too tolerable', and the religion grows more extreme (no one is inclined to say 'no'). The biggest problem would be if the religious leaders 'solve' the balance issue, and manage to stabilize the oppression at a level that is as extreme as it can be while still being permanently sustainable. Then the religious leaders can live the life of power without the threat of deposition.
-scheherazade
Jon Stewart Goes After Fox in Ferguson Monologue
newtboyIs this as new development as of this morning? Because what I've read from you is nearly all divisive, inflammatory rhetoric from an 'us VS them' mentality, and you nearly always divide people by race, and then degrade the other people's race. It's so ingrained in you that you don't seem to see it, but you automatically distrust those of color and trust those in blue, if not only those that are white wearing blue.
If that's not right, you certainly write that way.
You people are the racists because you think minorities need your help, they can't make it without you. They must be treated differently. They have to be excused because of (fill in the blank).
I treat them the same I treat everyone else, with respect if that's appropriate, and with restraint or distrust if that is appropriate.
Jon Stewart Goes After Fox in Ferguson Monologue
lantern53 says...You people are the racists because you think minorities need your help, they can't make it without you. They must be treated differently. They have to be excused because of (fill in the blank).
I treat them the same I treat everyone else, with respect if that's appropriate, and with restraint or distrust if that is appropriate.
the outlaw josie wales and ten bears
timtoner says...Based on the book The Rebel: The Outlaw Josie Wales, written under a pseudonym by Asa Earl Carter, a White supremacist. There was a This American Life (http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/527/transcript) which goes into AEC and The Education of Little Tree. It's interesting how, based on that, AEC's pecular point of view comes across quite clearly in this clip--the distrust of Blue Coats, the disdain for government, and even viewing the Native American as a "Noble Savage".
Huckabee is Not a Homophobe, but...
newtboyI must say I find your sentiment is correct, but not couched fully in reality.
Most people use religion as a tool to foster distrust and hate of others, not love. If more 'Christians' would follow the teachings of Jesus (of inclusion, tolerance, and living by the 'golden rule') rather than couch their arguments and feelings of intolerance in the old testament, there would be far less need for laws to force their proper behavior and fairness. Sadly, that does not seem to be the case. Not only do more people use it to judge others rather than love them, rarely do we see that behavior called out by other Christians, making all of them somewhat guilty of it by complicity.
(I only single out Christians because 1)it's the major religion here and 2) it's the one being discussed here...not because I'm implying they have a monopoly on bad behavior).
Are you suggesting that religious marriage should no longer be legal marriage? If so, that's quite an interesting position to take as a preacher, one I applaud. I feel that if a church wants to remain 'separate' from government, it should not try to share ANY duties with it. If it wants to do things with legal civil implications outside religion, I think it's taking a dangerous road that puts it in bed with the current government, a road that may at some time force them to violate their conscience to remain 'compliant'.
I am guessing that I was one of the first pastors, if not the first, in my community not in opposition to gay marriage. I don't say this with any sense of accomplishment of having wrestled through some sort of epic moral struggle, because I never have opposed gay marriage as sanctioned by the State. I don't believe there is any Constitutional basis for opposing it. . I also see no issue with a business serving the gay community. By default, our family business has happily done so for decades. One of my favorite mottoes is, 'live and let live.' I am confident that people around me, including those gays that call me 'friend' know this about me already. Although I am a part of the Christian community where I live, not one of my gay friends has exited our relationship due to that, nor have I ever been considered a homophobe. My views on marriage are exactly that: conclusions I have come to with the resources at my command. And whether or not I disagree with you, I believe that I have no right whatsoever to impose my view of marriage on anyone. In the same breath, after considering my own failings, I have no right to judge how someone else chooses to live their life. I have concluded that whatever path they choose was never between me and them, but between them and God anyway.
The solutions to this common struggle today (the question of religious conscience living side by side with gender liberty) cannot be solved by enacting more law. Americans are, as always, legislating the soupe du jour. The trouble is, in a society where that kind of 'might makes right,' the pendulum can and does swing the other way to deleterious effect. I think that our common issue can be solved by a simple but powerful idea: a stronger community. Like it or not, we are in this together and only together can overcome the vitriol on either side.
I remember an incident many years ago when my Muslim ex-Uncle showed up at my grandparent's house for dinner. On the menu: pork. In one of the most despicable acts of imposition that I can remember happening in our family, my Grandfather decided that serving pork that day would give him some kind of twisted self satisfaction; a victory, of sorts. He decided that he would attempt to get our Uncle to violate his religious conscience and, if that not be possible, at the very least, offend my Uncle as much as possible within his power. I don't think anyone would argue that it wasn't within my Grandfather's rights to serve whatever meal he wanted in his own home. But was it morally right? If he had loved my Uncle, he would have put aside his own rights and made a way to foster community. That is what living together is about.
In the same vein, I don't believe any one of my gay friends would ever ask me to perform their wedding. Even given that right legally, they wouldn't ask because they love me and they would not attempt to get me to violate both my conscience and my own understanding of marriage. While we agree to disagree, we remain friends out of love. Love is what binds. The law divides. The law is a foreigner to community, the enemy of community, when it says, 'we can live together only when you do as I want you to do in order to satisfy me or my sense of offense for another." While laws are necessary in society, they are superfluous when love will do. But we don't want to work that hard. So we make rules. We call people names. We stereotype. We divide, condescend, and foment bitterness toward our neighbors, gay and straight alike.
I had a friend confess to me once, "My whole family is racist. I was racist. But I'm not racist any more." That didn't happen because of legislation. It happened because he got to know some black people and found out that he had some love in his heart for them. Wouldn't you have liked to have been there when he shook a black man's hand for the first time in his life? Yeah, me too.
Just once, I'd like to see someone brew some iced tea, walk across the street to that gay neighbor or that Christian neighbor and sit down and find some commonality. I read above (can't remember who wrote it) that the Bible's morality is trumped by today's morality. I say that the epitome of morality exists in the words of Jesus when he says, "Love your enemies." That, to me, is the fulfillment of what it means to be human.
In related thoughts, I think the Church needs to tell the State, 'Goodbye. We are not going to act as your agent any longer in arena of legal marriage. We will not sign your documents. You have the legal authority over marriage in our society but the Church has the spiritual authority as the Church sees fit." That leaves room for some congregations to perform gay weddings and others to not as they see fit. It leaves room for live and let live. It leaves room for love.
Man Escapes 5 Yr Sentence After Dash Cam Footage Clears Him
bmacs27 says...@lantern53 Honestly, you are coming across as very reasonable right now, and clearly you come from a position of direct experience. I'd like to know a bit more about your opinion.
What do you think the police could do to strengthen their public image? Clearly, the institution is not as respected as it should be (that is, it is widely maligned), and I agree, good cops too often get ignored. Do you suppose their poor public image has more to do with a few bad individuals, or is there a more systemic problem possibly with the organization of local departments? I suppose it could also have to do with the laws they are asked to enforce, e.g. marijuana prohibition is notoriously unpopular potentially breeding distrust of law enforcement more generally.
As a follow up, how do you feel concerns about a crooked PD should be handled? Do you trust IA to handle these sorts of allegations for the most part, or are concerns about the "blue wall" justified? Can you think of a better mechanism for enforcing good behavior among officers? Should we just tolerate violent criminal activity in law enforcement because it is rare, and we should "take the bad with the good?"
Man Escapes 5 Yr Sentence After Dash Cam Footage Clears Him
ChaosEngineExcept there's only one referee to a game, they have absolute authority, everything they see is in public and calling interference on a fellow referee will not see them ostracized and potentially harmed by another ref who, let's not forget, has the ability to call fake interference on them
I get what you're saying. Of all the people they deal with, cops should be most watchful for illegal activity in other cops. In an ideal world, they would be (hell, in an ideal world, we wouldn't need cops).
But in the real world, policing is a tough job. I don't know how it is in the US, but in NZ the pay is crap, the hours are long and most people inherently distrust you. It's not surprising that when you spend your days dealing with the worst of society you form an "us vs them" mentality. Not to mention the politicking and other bullshit you have to deal with.
I think most cops are like most normal people; most of them are fundamentally decent, and just trying to get by and do their job as best they can. Maybe they're not happy about certain things in their job, but they feel powerless to do anything about it for fear of retribution.
Obviously the difference is that the stakes are higher. If I fail to point out an uncomfortable truth to my boss, some software doesn't work as well as it could. They're dealing with peoples lives.
I don't know the answer. Cops absolutely should be held to a high moral standard. They are a necessary aspect of modern society. But I don't think the answer is this kind of black and white thinking of "all cops have turned a blind eye to something, therefore they're all complicit". The world is more complex than that.
Cops get singled out because it is their JOB, which they are paid decently for, garner respect for (warranted or not), and get many other perks because of, to be a "rat" as you put it, or a cop as others would put it. When that's your job, to police people, it's ridiculous to single your group out to not "rat on" or police, especially when some of them are not acting like 'police'.
I understand it, most people won't call foul on their own 'team', I simply disagree that it's acceptable or defendable, especially when that is who and what you are, a 'police' person. It's kind of like being a referee, but refusing to call interference on another referee that catches the ball, to me. Their culture is already set apart in many ways, I only wish they were set apart by a higher moral standard as well (that they live up to).
Oakland CA Is So Scary Even Cops Want Nothing To Do With It
TrancecoachIf these folks can afford guns, then the good, hard-working people in Oakland can most certainly afford guns.
In fact, this small Mexican town really understood the meaning of the "consent of the governed." They disarmed the police!
One thing I think gets missed by most people is that people aren't saints. But nor are they devils. If empowered, they won't let a minority of criminals take over their community. Even when this drug cartel tried to take over this Mexican town, the residents eventually said "Enough" and took matters (and arms) into their own hands. (And of course, the police tried to stop them.)
In addition, few people grasp how the belief/faith in the need for a police force in order to "protect" us from our neighbors, implicitly engenders a tacit distrust among those with whom we share community -- all in the name of some faceless, unnamed "third party" called The State.
I don't know about you, but between the police and my friends, I will invariably trust my friends more than any cop. Every. Single. Time.
10. to the idea that everyone in Oakland should just be armed to reduce crime, is anyone offering the free guns to them? I guarantee you, most hard working upstanding people in Oakland can't afford a gun.
This Cannot Be Described (wait for it)
SDGundamXLyrics (found the translation on this site, which is definitely worth visiting to learn more about the group) are below. I've removed the original Japanese and Romanji transcriptions so that it is easier to read:
Title:
え・い・り・あ・ん
e i ri a n
A - L - I - E - N
Words and lyrics by Maximum the Ryo-kun
Flattering government
Deceiptful presentation
Fabricated details
Danger enterprise
Praise and censure creed
Jumbled up truth
All of Japan deploring
Has nihilism come?
Self-contradiction, loop of complaints
Fall into dilemma, many cases of depression
Swarming around rights, self-important men in suits
Coveting usury, some group or other
Self-interest slave loaded with empty arguments
Money disappears as vain expenses
Embracing distrust, discord arises
Standing idly on the side, discover indignation
Ego? Freedom? LOL. / Fart stench, sinister / “Why don’t you…?” Selfish
Ego? Freedom? LOL. / Fart stench, sinister / “Why don’t you…?” Selfish
Save me!! Treatment is yet to come!! / Throw it away!! Treatment is yet to come!! / Take it off! Treatment is yet to come!!
Save me!! Treatment is yet to come!! / Throw it away!! Treatment is yet to come!! / Take it off! Treatment is yet to come!!
Twenty years old, head to the election!!
The elected official will not be allowed into office!
A judge determintes eligible voters / Discretely and delicately / Straight to the future
Believe in the Force...Jedi
Believe in the Force...Jedi
Believe in the Force! Era!!
“I get it I get it I get it! You idiots!”
“Later Later Later I’ll e-mail you later”
“Your whiny whiny whining is noisy, idiot! Stop going out of your way to be so annoying”
“Chopper, go! Futoshi!”*
*Translator’s note: Futoshi is MTH’s bassist
Brother rescue
Brother let’s go
We are brothers, WE!!
You’re my brother, YOU!!
Cunning dependence / More frozen / Next season / Revived rhythm
Cunning dependence / More frozen / Next season / Revived rhythm
Cunning dependence / More frozen / Next season / Revived rhythm
Cunning dependence / More frozen / Next season / Revived rhythm
Booing, at you! A touch of abusive language! Booing! At that! STOP! Conspiracy!
Booing, at you! A touch of abusive language! Booing! At that! Prevent! Conspiracy!
Whose ally??? Whose ally???
Only your way of life cannot be taken by anyone
Vaaaaaaaaaa!!! Vaaaaaaaa!!! GO!!!
Every day meaning scrutiny / Every day meaning scrutiny / Every day meaning scrutiny
Alien, alien, kidnap me like in a movie...
Alien, alien, I am no match for eternity
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!!
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!!
*Translator’s note: Winny was a p2p pirating software like napster that was very popular in Japan but isn’t really used anymore. In an interview, Ryo-kun (who does hate when his music is pirated, I think) was asked why he used such an old reference, he mentioned that he wanted to have a catchy “STOP” phrase where other stuff like “STOP NUKES” could be replaced.
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!!
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!!
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!!
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!! STOP WINNY!
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!!
STOP! STOP WINNY UPLOAD!!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP! STOP! STOP! STOP THE WINNY!
STOP STOP! STOP STOP!
STOP STOP! STOP STOP!
STOP STOP WINNY!
STOP STOP WINNY!
PV spoken ending:
D: We will not forgive use of WINNY under any circumstances! Anything but WINNY!
N: People aren’t even using WINNY these days. And there are plenty of other things we have to say “STOP!” to. So there’s no point in raising your voice like that. All the kids have left.
D: But, we can’t allow any more uploads...
N: No, I know, but look at the one kid left, about to cry.
D: (to kid) You think so too, don’t you?
N: No no no! She definitely has no idea. And now the last kid has left. You hate WINNY too, don’t you? I said, no one uses WINNY anymore.
Look at you, over there looking like Mitsue (Daisuke’s mom)...
D: What?!
N: Get that Mitsue look off your face.
N: It's one thing to talk bad about me...!
End
The Many Faces of Guilty Dogs
A10anisYour comment is not strictly true.
It has been discovered that many animals -especially primates - share many of our emotions. Love, hate, empathy, memory, trust/distrust, fear etc. I do agree that the word "guilt" is a misnomer. However, the dog does, certainly, remember the act. It certainly knows it was wrong. And, as such, will fear the consequences. They do not just live in the "now."
I was brought up with farm dogs, had 2 German Shepherds, and currently have a Tamaskan (mighty Wolf), whose intelligence is scary sometimes. I would agree that many people treat their pets as humans and, as such, anthropormorphise too much. But there is certainly no doubt that, in particular, dogs are far more cognisant than many give them credit for.
Dogs don't feel "guilt". That's human anthropomorphism.
Dogs DO however, feel "expectation of punishment". They live in the now. The "guilt" people attribute to them is explained by the owner's actions and behaviour.
Unless you catch them in the act, you're just abusing the dog. It knows not what you're angry about.
They can notice the ripped pillow and go OMFG!!! A RIPPED PILLOW!!! OWNER IS GONNA SHIT ON ME!!! The fact they did it is moot to them, the pillow wasn't ripped, then it was. You have to catch them ripping it or the lesson is lost.