Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
@Soban: Insisting that people take a strictly utilitarian viewpoint on issues that are so deeply affecting, like racism, just isn't going to get you anywhere.
Yes, in the grand scheme of things, morality and ethics are relative, not writ into the fabric of reality. We invent these concepts so that our society can function. At the ground level, standing in front of a person who is being threatened with rape and murder because they dared to claim that they should get a vote, you do not pull out a utilitarian or tribalism argument and expect to be heard.
Edited by Fighteer on Mar 22nd 2019 at 12:22:15 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"@Soban: "No because tribalism is about the mindset, not the accuracy of the criticism." You really should remember what you wrote better or wrote it better in the first place because this sentence pretty much means it doesn't matter what the argument is since the only thing that matter is who make that argument.
I'm not as witty as I think I am. It's a scientifically-proven fact.I'm not sure how good one thinks HF is is relevant to whether or not it should be taught in schools.
It is subjective for one, and for another, well correct me if I'm wrong, but the reason these books are taught is because they left a huge cultural impact, correct? If so, they don't stop being culturally important just because not everyone loves them or think they're the greatest think since white bread.
Not that I disagree that there are probably better books to teach kids about racism, in fact I think there should be if not a law at least something saying that any book used to teach about the subject should be by a minority author.
Personally I liked Tom Sawyer better...Huckleberry Finn really lost me with the whole family feud story. (Btw, is that in any way realistic? Did that really happen back in the day?).
In any case I agree that "there are those really great books which have a lot of merit which should be put on the curriculum and why not remove the book everyone knows about through pop culture anyway and hey, then we also don't have to use the word "nigger" in the class room" would be a great approach. "This book is racist" is a terrible approach considering the history of trying to remove this particular book from public awareness.
Well, there are books which stay well-known exactly because they are constantly taught in school. Huckleberry Finn isn't one of them. A good litmus test is always "is this oh so important book also still well-known and popular in countries which DON'T have it as part of the curriculum".
Edited by Swanpride on Mar 22nd 2019 at 9:30:37 AM
![]()
Books aren’t necessarily chosen for cultural impact; nor is that necessarily a good criteria for quality or usefulness of a text.
The canon of “great” books is heavily biased by centuries of Western, white, male centrism. In elementary, middle and high school, we read maybe one book by a woman every couple of years, and maybe one book a year by someone non-white. I’m not sure we read anything that wasn’t from England or America. So I’m very skeptical of the idea that certain books are Great and Essential.
Edited by wisewillow on Mar 22nd 2019 at 12:32:50 PM
placating my enemies with niceties.
Huh? It does often work, depending on the motives of the enemy in question. A lot of people do draw a difference between disagreeing with you and hating you.
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman![]()
My congresswoman is very genteel and polite. She’s also lied to my face and supported every awful policy Trump has proposed. Being nice to her will not change that. It doesn’t matter if she disagrees with me or hates me; the result is the same.
Being a well-written book that has an insight into the human condition and is approachable for the relevant age group.
Edited by wisewillow on Mar 22nd 2019 at 12:35:21 PM
I was actually gonna ask that: what are the criteria that should be used, and why HF (or any other book, really) falls short of it?
Honest question, I want to make sure I'm on the same page with everyone.
Isn't that a bit vague?
BTW I agree with your criticism of Western Canon being pretty "white sausage", which is why I think schools should be legally enforced to pick at least a single book by a minority author every year.
Not that it should stop there, but it is a start.
Edited by HailMuffins on Mar 22nd 2019 at 1:38:47 PM
I had to read Huckfinn in High School and it didn't leave much of an impression on him. I imagine a lot of "classics" are the same way, the term isn't an objective marker of quality or applicability. I'm sure it could easily be replaced by other required reading, but I haven't actually found the arguments here particularly convincing, but the whole thing is becoming obnoxious.
So I wouldn't really care much either way.
>Insisting that people take a strictly utilitarian viewpoint on issues that are so deeply affecting, like racism, just isn't going to get you anywhere.
I tend to look at things from a bit more abstract perspective, not a ground level one. The reason for this is that the abstract perspective informs the ground level perspective. When someone is screaming at you and threatening you with rape and murder because they dared to claim that you should get a vote, the options that are available to you are constrained by these things. It is a very natural human reaction to threaten and scream back, but if you want a discourse where people don't threaten and scream, it's not an option.
If we want a system where politicians aren't harassed, we can not at the same time want to be able to harass the other side's politicians.
>My congresswoman is very genteel and polite. She’s also lied to my face and supported every awful policy Trump has proposed. Being nice to her will not change that.
And do you think being mean to her will get her on your side, to reconsider what you have said in a positive light?
Two wrongs don't make a right, and three lefts don't mean you are going in the correct direction.
When these things happen, when someone is harassed and wants to stop being harassed, the right answer is not harassing someone else. Someone else's bad behavior does not justify your own.
Edited by Soban on Mar 22nd 2019 at 12:43:44 PM
I can't speak for her, but personally I doubt that it makes a difference either way. GOP congress people are bound to the party platform.
And honestly your viewpoint seems a bit naive. If getting social justice was as easy as being nice and patient then we would have solved it a long time ago.
Edited by Draghinazzo on Mar 22nd 2019 at 12:52:27 PM
@Soban: "I tend to look at things from a bit more abstract perspective, not a ground level one." I see, no wonder your argument tend to come off from cloudcuckooland, so that's the reason. When my people become the victims of colonialism, if only they know to ask nicely to their oppressors, then maybe their oppressors will leave us alone just like that.
Edited by SteamKnight on Mar 22nd 2019 at 11:53:43 PM
I'm not as witty as I think I am. It's a scientifically-proven fact.

I enjoyed Huck Finn, as I remember, but I was an avid reader in school. Some parts, anyway. It lagged a bit in later chapters.
Edited by Fighteer on Mar 22nd 2019 at 12:14:00 PM
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"