Current Events > southerners are taking this alabama thing too far man

(+) Yeah! (+)

averagejoel posted...

not sure what people are discussing in the rest of the topic up until now, but unless I'm missing some key context, that post in italics in the OP is spot on

obviously the rest of the country being a racist shithole doesn't mean the south isn't, but it never claimed otherwise

She doesn't just talk about race. And you know it's bullshit, you just want to shit on the US.

For instance, union power in the south is much less meaningful in the south than the rest of the country.

NO, the rest of the country isn't great, but southern stereotypes aren't just to hide northern deficiencies either.
---

I got @averagejoel and @The_Admiral to agree against me ITT which feels good, especially because neither of them are southerners afaik
---

Addy always goes to bat for the south so it's not exactly a huge accomplishment.
---

A_Good_Boy posted...

Addy always goes to bat for the south so it's not exactly a huge accomplishment.

He's been down on Alabama for Moore recently it seems to me, and he never agrees with literal socialists that I've seen
---

Balrog0 posted...

averagejoel posted...

not sure what people are discussing in the rest of the topic up until now, but unless I'm missing some key context, that post in italics in the OP is spot on

obviously the rest of the country being a racist shithole doesn't mean the south isn't, but it never claimed otherwise

She doesn't just talk about race. And you know it's bullshit, you just want to shit on the US.

For instance, union power in the south is much less meaningful in the south than the rest of the country.

NO, the rest of the country isn't great, but southern stereotypes aren't just to hide northern deficiencies either.

I'll gladly shit on Canada - my home country - if there's an appropriate context to do so. this isn't that.

the south is not solely to blame for the conditions in the US. the other regions tend to pin the blame on them while ignoring their own role in creating these conditions.

the northern states are not less racist - they're just less open about it

the relative weakness of unions in the south, if it's a thing (it does seem feasible, but I haven't read any literature pertaining to this issue and will need to see some citations), is not the fault of the vast majority of people living there. it's a few rich schmucks who ruin it for everyone else.

you seem to be reading issues into the post that aren't there - is there some larger context with the person who posted it?
---

averagejoel posted...

Balrog0 posted...

averagejoel posted...

not sure what people are discussing in the rest of the topic up until now, but unless I'm missing some key context, that post in italics in the OP is spot on

obviously the rest of the country being a racist shithole doesn't mean the south isn't, but it never claimed otherwise

She doesn't just talk about race. And you know it's bullshit, you just want to shit on the US.

For instance, union power in the south is much less meaningful in the south than the rest of the country.

NO, the rest of the country isn't great, but southern stereotypes aren't just to hide northern deficiencies either.

I'll gladly shit on Canada - my home country - if there's an appropriate context to do so. this isn't that.

the south is not solely to blame for the conditions in the US. the other regions tend to pin the blame on them while ignoring their own role in creating these conditions.

the northern states are not less racist - they're just less open about it

the relative weakness of unions in the south, if it's a thing (it does seem feasible, but I haven't read any literature pertaining to this issue and will need to see some citations), is not the fault of the vast majority of people living there. it's a few rich schmucks who ruin it for everyone else.

you seem to be reading issues into the post that aren't there - is there some larger context with the person who posted it?

The post is more expansive than you're saying it is my man. That's all. There is more context, but it's not pertinent to the topic.

What do you think I'm. reading into it?
---

Balrog0 posted...

The post is more expansive than you're saying it is my man. That's all. There is more context, but it's not pertinent to the topic.

What do you think I'm. reading into it?

from your first post:

like, the south is objectively terrible towards minorities and the poor, let's not pretend there is a parity here between the rest of the country and the south w/r/t poverty, unemployment, and prejudice

you're literally proving the point of the post.

it's disingenuous to say that any one region of the US is "worse" than any other when it comes to racism or poverty - the tension is more open in the South, but that doesn't mean it's worse, despite the stereotype often painted by people from other regions.

people from other regions often scapegoat the south while ignoring the problems that exist in their own region; if I may take a shit on Canada for a second here, this is a huge problem here - Canadians tend to look at Americans the way people from other regions of the US look at the south. Canada is saturated with news of shitty things happening in the US, and Canadians tend to have an unwarranted sense of superiority when it comes to related social issues.

Canada is racist. Canadian racism just doesn't look the same as US racism, because the two countries don't have identical histories. it's hypocritical to have this sense of superiority about social and economic issues when we struggle with those same things.

in the same way, it's hypocritical for other regions of the US to feel the sense of superiority that they often do in issues pertaining to the south - whether or not it's actually worse is besides the point, because those issues still exist elsewhere.
---

^The point you are missing is that an echo chamber begets more radical opinions (neogaf would be an example), thus why otherwise level headed people would be more racist or ignorant in the south.
---

averagejoel posted...

you're literally proving the point of the post.

it's disingenuous to say that any one region of the US is "worse" than any other when it comes to racism or poverty - the tension is more open in the South, but that doesn't mean it's worse, despite the stereotype often painted by people from other regions.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm not basing it in stereotypes at all. The national outrage over something small like Flints water crisis due to one administration's corporate greed is pretty petty when compared to the absolute deprivation in much of the delta and the black belt. Open sewage is, like, a fact of life and always has been there. That's just one example, the poverty is much more absolute than relative. Especially for black and brown people, though not exclusively.

averagejoel posted...

in the same way, it's hypocritical for other regions of the US to feel the sense of superiority that they often do in issues pertaining to the south - whether or not it's actually worse is besides the point, because those issues still exist elsewhere.

i think there's a stronger claim here than that, though. The social and racial structures just simply aren't 'the same' -- I actually agree with you, they are different because places are different.

If I'm reading you right, here, though, you're saying you shouldn't feel superior even if you actually are, unless you are perfect. If that's true, I just disagree with you.
---

P4wn4g3 posted...

^The point you are missing is that an echo chamber begets more radical opinions (neogaf would be an example), thus why otherwise level headed people would be more racist or ignorant in the south.

An excellent point. In the northwest, skinheads start separatist colonies in the woods or get beat up at punk shows.

In Arkansas they controlled the governorship and made the feds bring military into the state so 9 black kids could go to a white school. Then the governor just canceled schools.
---

Balrog0 posted...

If I'm reading you right, here, though, you're saying you shouldn't feel superior even if you actually are, unless you are perfect. If that's true, I just disagree with you.

if not "perfect", then at least "good", which still disqualifies... certainly everywhere in the US
---

averagejoel posted...

Balrog0 posted...

If I'm reading you right, here, though, you're saying you shouldn't feel superior even if you actually are, unless you are perfect. If that's true, I just disagree with you.

if not "perfect", then at least "good", which still disqualifies... certainly everywhere in the US

Lol fair enough
---

Balrog0 posted...

I've lived in San Jose, California, Cabot, Arkansas, Little Rock, Arkansas, and Washington, DC

there are definitely racists in all those places, but you're delusional if you think it's equal. For one thing, to your rural point, the south is much less urbanized than NE overall, though Maine and Vermont are outliers.

Not really. Connecticut and RI are pretty much all urban, as is eastern mass, but the rest of NE sure ain't. Whether its small towns in east texas or the middle of nowhere maine, to kentucky, idaho, washington, california and all the other places I've been in this country, I've never thought to myself, "Gee, this place sure is RACIST". You might find a bad apple here and there but a whole town, or county, or state? *shrugs*
---

averagejoel posted...

it's disingenuous to say that any one region of the US is "worse" than any other when it comes to racism or poverty

why is it disingenuous

be specific and explicit

do you view these phenomena as purely qualitative?
---

Darkman124 posted...

averagejoel posted...

it's disingenuous to say that any one region of the US is "worse" than any other when it comes to racism or poverty

why is it disingenuous

be specific and explicit

do you view these phenomena as purely qualitative?

conditions for marginalized people are bad everywhere in the US.

there are struggles specific to each region that similarly marginalized people might not have to deal with elsewhere, or at least not to as great an extent. most of the time, there isn't really any objective way to measure how bad these things are relative to each other.

for example: San Francisco is often thought of as a fairly progressive city, but gentrification is extremely bad there. not to mention that some areas literally have robots patrolling to keep homeless people away (http://read.bi/2jDwpAb - it's a Business Insider article - link was too long)

it reminds me a bit of the Murder vs. Rape issue - it's pretty much impossible to say that one of them is worse without sounding like you're justifying the other one. it's sufficient to say that they're both bad and leave it at that. one doesn't have to be worse than the other.
---

averagejoel posted...

Darkman124 posted...

averagejoel posted...

it's disingenuous to say that any one region of the US is "worse" than any other when it comes to racism or poverty

why is it disingenuous

be specific and explicit

do you view these phenomena as purely qualitative?

conditions for marginalized people are bad everywhere in the US.

there are struggles specific to each region that similarly marginalized people might not have to deal with elsewhere, or at least not to as great an extent. most of the time, there isn't really any objective way to measure how bad these things are relative to each other.

for example: San Francisco is often thought of as a fairly progressive city, but gentrification is extremely bad there. not to mention that some areas literally have robots patrolling to keep homeless people away (http://read.bi/2jDwpAb - it's a Business Insider article - link was too long)

it reminds me a bit of the Murder vs. Rape issue - it's pretty much impossible to say that one of them is worse without sounding like you're justifying the other one. it's sufficient to say that they're both bad and leave it at that. one doesn't have to be worse than the other.

Some things are quantifiable though.

A city's funding can make a huge difference. A state alone can be the deciding factor on issues.

It's not even about justifying.
---

Right. The thing is, as bad as the struggle is in places like SF or LA, the density of and access to institutions in these places acts as a protective factor that shields people from some of the worst aspects of poverty.

Though I did purposefully leave housing out of my comments because it is an area where liberal places are largely worse than the south (though even here I would argue this ignores other factors, such as the generally higher transit costs in sprawling southern areas)

Of course in another sense, states aren't a super meaningful category per se, much less regions, since city and subcity (like household) level factors are dominant in lots of these areas. Idk I think it's an interesting discussion, but kind of a cop out as a defense of the south.
---

Just to clarify, when I mentioned the states I was only doing so in relation to the laws.

I feel like that's a big aspect of the stereotype too. That can be argued the main stereotypes are outdated laws but I don't know enough about the individual ones myself.

I completely agree it's a cop out too.
---

Balrog0 posted...

Right. The thing is, as bad as the struggle is in places like SF or LA, the density of and access to institutions in these places acts as a protective factor that shields people from some of the worst aspects of poverty.

Though I did purposefully leave housing out of my comments because it is an area where liberal places are largely worse than the south (though even here I would argue this ignores other factors, such as the generally higher transit costs in sprawling southern areas)

as I said - different locations, different struggles

Of course in another sense, states aren't a super meaningful category per se, much less regions, since city and subcity (like household) level factors are dominant in lots of these areas.

that's fair I suppose, but this was, at the start, a discussion about "the south", or "southerners"

I think it's an interesting discussion, but kind of a cop out as a defense of the south.

and therein lies the misunderstanding - it's not really a defense of the south, and neither was the italicized bit in the OP. it's more about calling out the hypocrisy of the regions that tend to look down on the south
---

Balrog0 posted...

Blitz4532 posted...

According to people I've spoken to, Alabama is the reason why the south is still treated like the US' whipping boy. There is still a lot of progress to be made there, but it is getting better. I think this whole topic is proof of that personally.

Please elaborate

Okay, according to my wife (who went to colleges in Columbus GA, right near the Alabama border), the communities there are a lot more insular and enclosed. Society there is very much revolvant around Sunday church and the group you see each Sunday.

Not dragging religion into this, I'm just saying that the only social interaction a lot of communities get there is from the same people seeing each other week after week with little variation.
---

averagejoel posted...

and therein lies the misunderstanding - it's not really a defense of the south, and neither was the italicized bit in the OP. it's more about calling out the hypocrisy of the regions that tend to look down on the south

It is more of an attack on the rest of the US, but it's a defense of the south in that sense. It's not hypocrisy, but saying it is uplifts the south and/or discounts how shitty it is by pretending everywhere else is equal to it, and therefore have no standing for criticism.

But, they do. Because the south as a region is particularly bad to it's poor, especially it's poor brown people. There are some issues you can cherry pick that are worse elsewhere, but your likelihood of going to jail, dying early, living with untreated chronic conditions, are all worse. The tax and budget systems in southern states are generally much more regressive and punishing to e poor and public assistance programs less generous and expansive.

Pretty much the only thing that other regions do worse is housing and even then most of the country that isn't two or three metros areas don't have that problem, either.
---

Just saying they are 'different' is the cop out, to be clear, whether you intend on defending it or not. It's intellectually lazy, which is weird cuz the post I quoted is trying to sounds intellectual and smart
---