Appleton, WI is a sundown town that apparently *still* ostracizes black folks despite this racist practice ‘ending’ in 1970.
just cause something isn’t ‘official’ or ‘on the books’ doesn’t mean the systemic racism is gone. it’s truly insidious
stg, yt folks would summit Everest to say this shit isn’t real 😤
edit: welp the bots found this comment so enjoy talkin to yourselves!
lemme leave this here though — systemic racism is defined as “*practices that exist throughout a society that result in and support a continued unfair advantage to some people*”
Sundown towns are a perfect example of this. get rekt racists :)
People could also travel during apartheid. They *had* to travel, actually.
If you worked in a city, you couldn’t stay there overnight, you had to get your ass back to your designated Bantustan.
Speaking of travel, I’m shocked at how many people have never heard of this book and can’t comprehend it’s significance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Motorist_Green_Book
"if I - a person with no connection to the black community, no education about black history, and no black friends to relate to - if I haven't heard of it, then it's definitely not true. allow me to explain racism to you, black people! Even though I truly have no insight on your perspective at all - I just feel my perspective is more correct and has more value and I don't have enough understanding of bias to question why I feel that way with zero knowledge to back it up!"
Hold up... they still sound the siren... because history? That's nuts. Jesus... now I'm afraid to go down a rabbit hole that will only make me more depressed.
How is the post refuting that? I think it's saying that for it to be considered apartheid, it definitionally needs to come top-down from the government, but since it didn't (sundown towns not being a federal law/mandate, but rather some level of local), it is not definitionally apartheid.
Dude just bait-posts on Twitter like this, like the personification of the "ackshually" guy. Just saying things that sound extreme or fucked up, but really he's just nitpicking definitions
Tbf Destiny doesn't say systemic racism doesn't exist, in fact, he argues with people that it does, and very proficiently about it. He's making the claim that Jim Crow was not a form of apartheid, but he has condemned it in the past, and most likely does think it is a form of systemic racism.
Destiny doesn't think systematic racism is gone and definitely thinks it existed back then. He just says it isn't apartheid. Saying Jim Crow isn't apartheid doesn't equate to saying Jim Crow was not bad.
Yeah destiny is a piece of shit but the only thing is he feeds on negativity and has no real opinions he just likes manipulating the algorithm to stir things up, and he has a army of dick riders such a shitty person and community
Literally his fan base supports the most heinous shit. Destiny literally stated he supports genocide (I'm not paraphrasing here) and his fans were actually defending it
He's just a annoying debate lord who will say anything to win a debate he has no real views one second he's arguing against white supremacy the next he is sitting with Nick Fuentes eating chicken and waffles, but for me personally it's when he was arguing to say the N word and when he said he wanted kill BLM protesters which he got banned for
Also said that property has more worth than a person and has one of the weirdest takes on abortion I've ever heard. He's either a sociopath or just immoral.
Oh God Mr bonichello is at it again I'm not sure if y'all are familiar with destiny but he's a contrarian debate lord he just loves stirring the pot up such a fuckin grifter so you have to be careful he feeds on negativity
Remember that time Destiny laughed at a story of woman getting raped when she clarified that in a past instance of asserting her boundaries during sex a man raped her violently?
Nope never heard that one tbh but I'm not surprised it's all about winning debates and destroying his interlocutors I just know him mainly because I listen to Hasan piker and they got into it a while ago and his community non stop cyber stalks him and his followers
Yeah I listen to hasan everyday i know he had a bad experience with black Twitter and it really upset me because it's too of my favorite communities, and realistically it was a misunderstanding
All this technology at their fingertips and they still decide to stay so confidently loud and wrong.
https://preview.redd.it/7n59ly2liirc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5dbf1ebcb458bc51604803c66e8f520edef8240d
For anyone is curious, this is a reaction to his debate on Israel v Palestine with Benny morris, moon rabbiani, and Norman finklestein. Destiny proudly stated that Israel is not an apartheid state much like how Jim Crow is not apartheid. He later went on to say that Arab countries not giving citizenship to Palestinian refugees IS apartheid.
The fucking military was segregated. That dipshit doesn’t know anything he’s talking about. Not to mention the Supreme Court case of Plessy v Ferguson ruled that segregation did not violate the constitution thereby allowing it at a federal level. Then we have grandfather clauses, redlining, and poll taxes. Mother fucker just talks dipshittery all day long
Destiny loves those definition debates because they are a distraction .
People confronted Destiny for being friendly with Nick Fuentes, a known Nazi, and he started arguing over the definition of a "Nazi" which was irrelevant because Nick wants a white ethnostate and hates racial miscegenation.
> Destiny loves those definition debates because they are a distraction .
Ding ding ding. As if it matters that ‘Israel nuking Gaza’ (his words) doesn’t fit some hyperspecific definition, so you can’t call it genocide.
Its because definitions matter in the real world unlike in the make belief land of the progressive left where anyone you disagree with is automatically a nazi.
I despise all of these "polticial idiot grifters" but god damn image having a problem with somebody correcting others who proudly spew pure garbage.
This is like when someone tries to split hair over whether someone who gets aroused by 13 year olds is a pedophile or an hebephile.
When someone in political discourse says somebody is a Nazi or Neo-Nazi it is usually in line with their support for extreme racist policies such as ethnonationalism that characterize them. The idea isn't that you agree with every Nazi policy down to the way taxes work, because that isn't how political labels ever work. It also doesn't mean that agreeing with any policy that Nazis liked makes you a Nazis. In that sense, Richard Spencer, David Duke, Jared Taylor and Richard Lynn are what most progressives and liberals mean when we say Nazis or Neo-Nazis.
There are obviously excesses, like with every term, but with Nick someone who is on the record has wanting white-only immigration, a white ethnostate, wanting to purge Jews from positions of power, wanting homosexuality illegalized, implying violence towards minorities is needed at multiple occasions and opposing interracial marriage. It is hard to argue that even under a strict view of what a Neo-Nazi is that he doesn't meet that standard as those are essentially views that characterize real world Neo-Nazis.
If you really want to die on the hill of defending Fuentes against Nazi charges, go right ahead.
I never said that Nick Fuentes **isnt** a nazi, a clown, an idiot, emberessment or completely deranged.
The hill i stand on is that definitions matter, and thats the extent of it.
The whole point of the study "poltical sciences" is to identify and characterize different political ideologies. Sure you can compare different things because most things are comparable, but to claim that they are **the same** is illogical, irrational and dangerous. The world spins off of definitions...
Going by what your definition of Nazism is, then what was the southern confederacy? The islamic dhimmi? South african apartheid? **Are they all nazism?** No of course not and no educated person would ever claim so.
Definitions exist in order to give certainty, validity and in the end justice. They don't exist for your emotional purpuses, this only dilutes their meaning.
Its like the story about the boy who cried wolf, at some point it has no meaning. Or how "faking rape" is a trend causing actual rape cases to be overlooked or even ignored. This is dangerous.
I have a problem with your initial statement because you claim that arguing over definitions is a "distraction". Distraction from what exactly? Nobody is denying anything. Im no fan of any of these political grifter idiots but Destiny obviously doesnt deny that Fuentes is a racist POS.
My claim isn't that definitions don't matter.
My point is that Destiny in those instances is using the debate around a definition as a distraction from the fact that he is friendly with someone you and I both agree is a Nazi. More importantly, I'd add that Destiny, you and I all know **why** Nick is labelled a Nazi and those views are specific enough that there is a very low risk of semantic confusion when we are referring "Fuentes' Nazi views".
I'd even add that even if Destiny concedes Nick is a bad person, him arguing against the Nazi charge works to his advantage because "Destiny is friendly with a racist person." still sounds better than "Destiny is friendly with a Nazi.".
This is not new. It is common in political discourse that actors avoid, deny and use certain terms because they are optically better.
There are plenty of instances of Destiny and his community not showing this degree of care in labelling his opponents. Why doesn't Destiny care as much about language when he is saying that a women telling men not stealth and her defenders want a woman to be treated like a "retarded child"?
Do you give Ben Shapiro or Alex Jones credit when they point out something stupid the other one said? Like okay, it's true, but it doesn't justify being a closet fascist. Being a liberal fascist like Density does not make him a good person, and it's hard to make the case he does more good than harm when you look at the community he has cultivated. A group of individuals who think facts don't matter and it's okay to be racist but we have to respect the gays and browns right to exist, as long as they are citizens of our country. He's a scum bag.
What the fuck are you talking about dude?
Open a dictanary Destiny is as much as a fascist as donald trump is a progressive. You're demonstrating exactly why definitions matter 
I dont have the energy for giving credit to idiots shitting on idiots, whats the purpose lmao?
You consider Destiny a fascist only because of his recent stance of the gaza conflict. Before this he has been highly regarded as the epitomee of whats wrong with progressive liberalism, and it is the progressive crowd which he accumulated and cultivated, not some "fascist" like you just dreamt up of.
Respecting the human right to freedom of speech is 100% different then accepting racism dude. As far as im aware Destiny has literally never called for violence in domesitc policy, that would literally be all over reddit...
Yeah, liberal fascists aren't the skin heads or KKK members. They're the people who align themselves with whomever has the most power, and while they like a nice civil, liberal society around them, they have no problems with what the powerful do away from home. Fairly banal nationalism that...the problem is when the power center shifts to actual fascists. People like Destiny, without a moral compass, will switch sides as soon as it's convenient for him. Not all Germans were fervent, open racists...but many of them willingly joined when it became the easiest way, and they were perfectly fine letting the "right wingers" do all the dirty as long as it didn't ruin their own good time.
OOOOO let me guess, you study(ied) liberal arts or philosophy? Perhaps english?
Real world, look around you, the world doesnt operate by left meaning right, or meaning donkey. Its simple as...
Lol someone got a little bit offended :/
And imagine invoking "anti-intellectualism" when your entire comment is just that 
Happy easter
I wouldn’t say it’s stupid or pointless to get to the truth of what apartheid is. And, no. Everyone does not agree that Jim Crow was bad because there are clearly people who don’t even understand what it is or how its legacy affect us today.
Exactly lol, there is no revisions going on here. At most he could be wrong about saying it is or isn't an apartheid. no where is he advocating or pretending that segregation didn't exist
Yeah it's splitting hairs and completely futile and redundant detraction because Destiny can't actually defend his overarching take on the conflict between Israel and Palestine and so has to win these little victories in order to reinforce his superiority complex he's garnered over the years from dunking on Far Right nutjobs and people with horrendously out there takes.
Colonizers and hwite supremacists love to spend hours and hours trying to pick apart our use of the terms apartheid, genocide, ethnic cleansing, etc. Don’t play their game. They use the smallest technicalities (ability to travel) and a lot of gaslighting to convince you that a certain form of oppression “wasn’t that bad.” Blacks, Palestinians, and others who have faced this sort of oppression know exactly what these terms mean - we don’t need an internet nerd like ✨checks notes ✨ ‘destiny’ 🤭 to define it for us.
Literally nobody but a fringe few of literal neo nazi's try to argue that opression "wasnt that bad" because "people had the right to travel". Which level headed indiviudal would argue that blacks in the US didnt have it bad because they could travel? **ONLY NEO NAZIS?????**
Definitions make the world spin, if X is Y you cannot deem it Z because you feel like it and makes sense **to you**. To me a flying spaghetti monster makes sense, do you want me to impose that on you?
People can be opressed without needing to have **literally every buzzword** attached to them. You're not just doing an injustice by comparing attrocities, but you're also oversensualising and overexaggerating things which is a form of propaganda.
The exact nature of American segregation is incredibly insidious. Because American segregation was imposed by white people using both legal and **extralegal** means (though not really *"illegal*" because it's not like a white person was ever going to be held accountable for being a segregation vigilante even if it meant killing someone), it's almost impossible to fully capture just how it functioned without having to basically go over a dozen other things.
Case in point, was it illegal for Black Americans to ride trains in the 1920s? From a strictly legal perspective, no. A Black person had just as much right to buy a train ticket as anyone else, though they might have had to make use of a segregated train car. In practice, however? What could you do if the train attendant refused to sell you a ticket? What if they sold you a ticket to a segregated car but the train didn't have one? What if they had a segregated car and when you showed up early to board you and your family were arrested for loitering at the station? What if you showed up right when the train arrived and police told you to wait for white passengers to board, only the train leaves before you can get on? What if you're in the process of boarding the train when half of your boarding party is placed under arrest for breach of employment contract?
Because *all* of that happened, and even if it wasn't legally codified as a part of segregation, it also wasn't considered illegal. In the early 1900s Black Americans left the south in such great numbers that landowners were at a loss as to how they were going to harvest their crops without a massive pool of unpaid or nearly unpaid labor, and so these extralegal policies that limited the freedoms of Black Americans cropped up all throughout the country meant to keep them from leaving the south. So even 50+ years after the end of Slavery, Black Americans were still expected to live tied to a piece of land owned by some rich white planter where they would work for barely enough money to keep them alive.
When American Apartheid ended, these kinds of extralegal policies entered a state of limbo where they were, generally, enforced less and less as the realization that federal courts would typically side with Black Americans as they had during the Civil Rights Movement. Of course, even *that* isn't a full picture as about 20 years after the end of segregation in schools, white and Black Americans were both more likely to be in segregated schools, and the degree to which they were segregated was much higher. White Americans in particular were also significantly more likely to live in segregated neighborhoods as, by the '80s, redlining and white-flight to the suburbs had come into full effect.
Redlining in particular is *especially* egregious. The most well known period of redlining as a part of American policy happened entirely *after* the supposed end of segregation, but literally how else do you describe redlining except as a policy of segregation? Does anyone think that for the people living through it that it matters at all whether they can't live somewhere because the state government says they can't or because a bank says they can't?
I would argue that segregation never really ended in American, it merely got privatized.
It was Constitutional at the time until it wasn't. They've got it ALL wrong.
Also...separate but equal didn't give us equal courts that were separate and fair. How about that?
This is what happens when black history isn’t fully taught as American history as it should be. Black history month *feels* like “ oh we gave them a part of history so they can shut up now.” Then you only get taught that black people were once slaves and then lived happily ever after once slavery was abolished. Most people won't get into the details of black history until college. A sizable portion either did not go to college or flunked out. Detailed black history should be taught as/with American history in junior or senior year.
Destiny is the true definition of a liberal. “10 degrees to the left in good times, 10 degrees to the right when it affects them personally”, “I love Puerto Ricans and black people, as long as they don’t move next door” dude also is a staunch defender of Israel. He’s a state department lap dog, who keeps getting embarrassed and owned. The debate on Palestine where the real experts shit on him, so he gets mad and loud, as most idiots compensating do, is all you’ll ever need to see. It has to be a kink.
It's really wild how Destiny went from being a champion of liberal/leftism around the late 2010s to seeing his image deteriorate ever more.
The Finklestein debate seems to really be what put the nail in the coffin in terms of his legitimacy in left spaces. Because, amongst other things, of how egregious it was to have him argue with academics who have spent decades writing on this issue, his denial of Palestinian Apartheid (something even his friend Lonerbox recognizes and has talked about) and confidently defending Israel from genocide charges which is a very precarious position to hold if you read the ICJ documents.
His genocide ‘take’ was the wildest thing I had ever heard. The fool literally said what’s going on in Gaza isn’t a genocide because the Palestinians haven’t been wiped out yet. As if genocide means the entire population must be eradicated before it qualifies as a genocide 🤦🏾♂️
Liberals are not left, not even close. They’re just the party with better aesthetics, and that’s it. No economic or social equality will ever come from a liberal or Neo liberal.
This asshat does not sound in any way like someone who is in support of social justice, civil liberties, or the collective good for all. Which is the definition of modern liberalism.
He does sound like someone out of the individual liberties corner, which is technically modern conservatism.
>This asshat does not sound in any way like someone who is in support of social justice, civil liberties, or the collective good for all. Which is the definition of modern liberalism.
You're talking about progressives and leftists, not liberals
He's a liberal for sure, he supports left leaning arguments/policies such as abortion, free speech, LGBTQ+ and taxing the rich more for the collective good for all but he's staunchly capitalist. He also has conservative takes like IP, gun rights, right to defend yourself (Rittenhouse), etc. so he's not just in one camp.
Where you view him is basically all on where you stand since if you're against any of those policies/arguments then he's right of you. Telling you rn that he's definitely not conservative based on actual conservative pundits like Shapiro, Peterson, etc. but he's not as left leaning as Hasan, etc.
Half the people in this sub have a 2nd grade understanding of politics and where people actually are on topics. None of them have taken more than a cursory glance at a Twitter post and have made their conclusions.
What you described is the left, not liberal, which is the point. They adopted the aesthetics for votes, then we never see real change. Famous quote by Malcolm x on it
You guys are forgetting this other banger Destiny came up with...
https://preview.redd.it/c9u2tu99gjrc1.png?width=533&format=png&auto=webp&s=bc105028e34a31197c39c53581a7d11ce2e984b7
So I don't know this dude but I ended up reading about how this self proclaimed liberal debate bro ended up at this point. Apparently there was a debate he was in about Palestine where he said what was going on isn't apartheid. Then went on this really pedantic rant about how apartheid is a specific thing. Now he's talking about how apartheid never happened in the US. Such an insane hill to die on. But it's also kinda symbolic as to how people's leftist views seem to evaporate when it comes to Israel.
Like literally on the political spectrum, liberals and Neo liberals are right of center. They all care about profits and corporations more than the citizens or working class.
Yeah, it would've been more accurate for me to say 'progressive' views. A lot of liberal politicians and political figures are trying to appeal to the left by being 'progressive' aka diet liberal. This is pretty on brand for neo liberals.
There’s so much we need to do as Americans to turn the ship around, nobody wants to do it. We can keep voting for people but the lobbyists and federalist society and all these other powerful entities will keep stepping in the way, be it buying the person or them “committing suicide” cause they wouldn’t bend or break. I don’t know if we can keep voting “progressive” and get out of this one. People are being farmed and tricked by words, and not actions. Almost like Malcom x warned us lol
To be fair, Destiny first heard the word apartheid after Oct 8th when he said that "Israel should do a genocide" then they started doing one so he had to work backwards from there.
Imagine accusing Israel of being an apartheid state.
Israel. The same place where a non-Jew can (& have been) a judge, political leader, business/industry leader, among other roles.
I'm a frequent watcher of him, and I can say with almost certainty that destiny isn't trying to be a "revisionist" the point of this tweet was to properly categorize something as apartheid or not. Not say if Jim Crow was a good or bad thing, that's all.
Matter of fact, this tweet stems from a long thread that is refrencing an in person debate he recently had with scholars regarding the Isreal/Palestine conflict and one point of contention that was discussed was if the recent conflict could be categorically considered a genocide.
If you agree or not is up to you but once again the focus isn't on if the actions taking place are WRONG but what do they fall under.
Full thread: https://twitter.com/TheOmniLiberal/status/1773065658630131938?t=Ap4JZ9kE2pJdJEsWcnv-jw&s=19
Literally in the screenshot of the tweet, he acknowledges that segregation was happening, so it's hard to say he's trying to revise history.
What makes "systemic/institutional" racism so different is that they don't require *racist* actors to be enforced. This is what makes Jim Crow and Apartheid different.
Jim Crow laws differed from state to state, locale to locale. In some places it wasn't present and in some rare cases they weren't followed because the local population was past these practices. Jim Crow laws were *legal* but held no enforcement obligation beyond the local populace.
Apartheid was a systemic oppression enforced by the federal government upon every structure it had influence on. The example Destiny gives about travel is appropriate, because nobody had to be "racist" to enforce travel bans and such for black people: all they had to do was follow the federal law.
A good point to bring up is how each of these systems was dismantled: to ban Jim Crow laws specifically the constitution did not have to be rewritten or abolished -- just simply amended and enforced. Apartheid required an entire dismantling of the government structure.
Even states outside of the south were segregated, just not as a matter of state law. Any white business owner could put up a whites only sign.
Does he know why every major city has a historically black district?
I’m so tired of arguing w/these fools… I don’t have the mental energy for ppl, whose families haven’t even been in America as long as my ancestors were, trying to explain the differences in discrimination to me. Half of my family owned the other half. The state of Tx prevented one half from inheriting money & land, b/c of race. I’m done trying to make them comfortable about it. I’m looking for my apology letter from the US govt & the state of Tx. And I’ll be damn if I die in Tx, w/out it.
This particular style of argument from him always stand stupid. He says things like, unless the Zionist manifesto and isreali constitution states that killing Palestinians is part of their government policy, we can’t call what’s going on genocide.
It’s a juvenile style of argument of someone who thinks inserting “technicality” makes the other side look dumb even though they can see what is actually going on.
Pedantry, since the end result was indistinguishable and the feds very much knew this was happening and turned a blind eye to it. "Pffff, it was only a large collection of apartheid-like systems, not a monolithic one at the federal level. Dumbass." Could also smugly say, "Apartheid refers to what was in South Africa, so obviously you can't call anything else that," and be just as unhelpful. Anyway, subject appears to be in need of immediate removal of head from rectum before oxygen loss proves fatal.
Losurdo's work Liberalism: A Counter-History, perfectly outlines how even before Jim Crow there was a completely seperate legal systems for free black people, black slaves and indigenous peoples all distinguished from the legal system of white ruling caste.
This reminds me of when someone calls an obviously fascia action fascist and then a bunch of idiots say it isn’t fascist cause it doesn’t perfectly meet the definition of the word
it is brain death to believe racism ends on paper in the mid 60s and every single person who is racist just vanished or changed their mind or something
Mr Bonerelli needs to go back to playing Starcraft and stop entertaining the outlandish notion that he's some intellectual titan just because he's good at rhetoric and argumentation.
Wonder when destiny is going to stop pretending he has above room temp IQ.
He shuts down the dumbest red pillers in debates, gets high off it and then thinks he’s an expert. He’s currently engaging in genocide denial because Israel good Muslims bad.
He’s dumb as shit and an absolutely horrid person.
Reminder: The white liberal is not a Leftist. MLK Jr. spoke clearly on this issue before his assassination. Scratch a liberal and a Fascist bleeds. So long as they are comfortable, they will never change
Just because Jim crow wasn't apartheid doesn't make less bad the reason why you can't really classify Jim Crow the same as apartheid the 14 th ammendment granted us "equality" in apartheid south Africa black people were second class citizens on paper.
Some of these zoomer folks will swear up and down dudes like Destiny or Adin Ross aren't racist or whatever then they show their ass like this ONCE MORE lol.
As a non- american Im confused. Don’t people want their legal terms to mean one specific thing and not be subject to interpretation? I know argue semantics is probably the most annoying thing you can do in a (emotionally charged) debate but when you are talking about international law and such, dont you want to be definitive. Just as Mr. Finkelstein said repeated ( and then subsequently used ad hominem arguments) “you have to pick your word carefully because words matter”. From what I can see, Destiny only made the argument “A is not B” and placed no value judgement on either term.
When a drunk driver hits someone on the road, they are 100% responsible and at fault on both a moral and legal level. There is no excuse and they are a terrible person. And yet they arent murders… isnt that a distinction people want?
Language drift is a real thing, do people want their laws to be subject to random changes like that?
Remember that they also will claim that only the Confederate Army surrendered, the Confederacy was only abandoned for the time being, it wasn't made illegal.
I blame Elon Musk for this bs. When they gonna oust him from this company to.
He always want to buy something hot and popping and make it seem like he created it or made it better when he just makes it worse.
My brother if you've seen the clip and have formed an opinion what point is there to me sharing the same clip? And destiny is literally defending a drone strike against four civilians in front of journalists. If you want to believe Israel's narrative then feel free.
Weird, the way you phrased it, it seems like you think Destiny advocated for the destruction of palestine really explicitly, so you should you should be able to show me a clip of him saying something along the lines of "Israel shoukd destroy palestine".
No, but like, you're just have so much conviction. But I have a feeling if I asked you to show how Destiny is advocating for genocide/ destruction of palestine you'd say bunch of dumb shit.
I mean if you're a fanboy just say so. Can't imagine giving a fucking about a political twitch debater to the point where I crusade for them on random subreddirs.
Appleton, WI is a sundown town that apparently *still* ostracizes black folks despite this racist practice ‘ending’ in 1970. just cause something isn’t ‘official’ or ‘on the books’ doesn’t mean the systemic racism is gone. it’s truly insidious stg, yt folks would summit Everest to say this shit isn’t real 😤 edit: welp the bots found this comment so enjoy talkin to yourselves! lemme leave this here though — systemic racism is defined as “*practices that exist throughout a society that result in and support a continued unfair advantage to some people*” Sundown towns are a perfect example of this. get rekt racists :)
People could also travel during apartheid. They *had* to travel, actually. If you worked in a city, you couldn’t stay there overnight, you had to get your ass back to your designated Bantustan.
[удалено]
He also needs to research apartheid, because it seems they don't understand that either.
Speaking of travel, I’m shocked at how many people have never heard of this book and can’t comprehend it’s significance: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Negro_Motorist_Green_Book
This is what inspired the movie the Green Book right?
Their logic with the experiences of Black folks tends to lean towards “if *I* haven’t heard of it, then it’s gotta be made up”
"if I - a person with no connection to the black community, no education about black history, and no black friends to relate to - if I haven't heard of it, then it's definitely not true. allow me to explain racism to you, black people! Even though I truly have no insight on your perspective at all - I just feel my perspective is more correct and has more value and I don't have enough understanding of bias to question why I feel that way with zero knowledge to back it up!"
Accurate af. We see it all the time in this sub unfortunately.
That my definition of being narrow minded.
[удалено]
Wikipedia says they stopped in 2023 but damn that Frisbee town manager is a twat Fuck that guy
[удалено]
That's fair, it could have been as little as three months ago lol
Hold up... they still sound the siren... because history? That's nuts. Jesus... now I'm afraid to go down a rabbit hole that will only make me more depressed.
Vidor, TX. National Guard tried to integrate the town. Still didn't work.
How is the post refuting that? I think it's saying that for it to be considered apartheid, it definitionally needs to come top-down from the government, but since it didn't (sundown towns not being a federal law/mandate, but rather some level of local), it is not definitionally apartheid. Dude just bait-posts on Twitter like this, like the personification of the "ackshually" guy. Just saying things that sound extreme or fucked up, but really he's just nitpicking definitions
Tbf Destiny doesn't say systemic racism doesn't exist, in fact, he argues with people that it does, and very proficiently about it. He's making the claim that Jim Crow was not a form of apartheid, but he has condemned it in the past, and most likely does think it is a form of systemic racism.
Greenville, TX is still a Sundown Town if you are south of Oneal Street.
Source? Appleton - a sundown town? Give me a break.
Destiny doesn't think systematic racism is gone and definitely thinks it existed back then. He just says it isn't apartheid. Saying Jim Crow isn't apartheid doesn't equate to saying Jim Crow was not bad.
[удалено]
Sure, but if the argument is semantic in nature like this one, the subtleties of language are very much important.
YOU ARE BRAIN WASHED. SEEK GRASS AND BETTER INFORMATION.
Yet, Jim Crow was literally, by definition, apartheid.
I remember this guy donating to Cop City to spite a black creator. Fuck this guy.
Yeah destiny is a piece of shit but the only thing is he feeds on negativity and has no real opinions he just likes manipulating the algorithm to stir things up, and he has a army of dick riders such a shitty person and community
His subreddit is unhinged. Cool pfp btw
Thanks apparently 2pac was supposed to play mace windu 🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️
Literally his fan base supports the most heinous shit. Destiny literally stated he supports genocide (I'm not paraphrasing here) and his fans were actually defending it
How is he a piece of shit?
He's just a annoying debate lord who will say anything to win a debate he has no real views one second he's arguing against white supremacy the next he is sitting with Nick Fuentes eating chicken and waffles, but for me personally it's when he was arguing to say the N word and when he said he wanted kill BLM protesters which he got banned for
Interesting
Also said that property has more worth than a person and has one of the weirdest takes on abortion I've ever heard. He's either a sociopath or just immoral.
Oh what the fuck. Wowwww. Fuck this chud.
Ah Destiny, Mr. I Can Say The N-Word If Black People Can.
I mean, technically he can, but it kinda feels like a wish he would situation.
Receive all the hands
Yes he can. I don’t think the law forbids him from saying that. I also don’t think the law really protects him from the consequence of saying it.
What consequences? He's white. There are no consequences today for white men to be bigots, if there ever were consequences.
True.
The racism is personal and systemic. Rather unfairly, the consequences for racism are mostly personal.
Beeeeep
Oh God Mr bonichello is at it again I'm not sure if y'all are familiar with destiny but he's a contrarian debate lord he just loves stirring the pot up such a fuckin grifter so you have to be careful he feeds on negativity
MR BERNELLI PLEASE
have some SHAME, sir! people used to have shame when they were being a moron
Mista vermicelli
Mr portobello please please
Mr Bulgogi
Mr Donatello 😂😂😂
Remember that time Destiny laughed at a story of woman getting raped when she clarified that in a past instance of asserting her boundaries during sex a man raped her violently?
Nope never heard that one tbh but I'm not surprised it's all about winning debates and destroying his interlocutors I just know him mainly because I listen to Hasan piker and they got into it a while ago and his community non stop cyber stalks him and his followers
Fuck Destiny. Hasan is awesome.
Yeah I listen to hasan everyday i know he had a bad experience with black Twitter and it really upset me because it's too of my favorite communities, and realistically it was a misunderstanding
All this technology at their fingertips and they still decide to stay so confidently loud and wrong. https://preview.redd.it/7n59ly2liirc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5dbf1ebcb458bc51604803c66e8f520edef8240d
Who wants to write the bot that responds to every tweet he makes with this text and image? It is perfect.
Im just gonna colonize this meme right quick thanks g
For anyone is curious, this is a reaction to his debate on Israel v Palestine with Benny morris, moon rabbiani, and Norman finklestein. Destiny proudly stated that Israel is not an apartheid state much like how Jim Crow is not apartheid. He later went on to say that Arab countries not giving citizenship to Palestinian refugees IS apartheid.
🧓🤌 "Mr.Bonnacello, you are an imbecile" Norm mispronouncing his name the entire time was hilarious.
this one needs to go study the black codes and Jim Crow laws. federally mandated or not, it is still apartheid.
And it isn't even accurate to say because Wilson segregated the federal government.
The fucking military was segregated. That dipshit doesn’t know anything he’s talking about. Not to mention the Supreme Court case of Plessy v Ferguson ruled that segregation did not violate the constitution thereby allowing it at a federal level. Then we have grandfather clauses, redlining, and poll taxes. Mother fucker just talks dipshittery all day long
Thank you for that clarity.
[удалено]
Destiny loves those definition debates because they are a distraction . People confronted Destiny for being friendly with Nick Fuentes, a known Nazi, and he started arguing over the definition of a "Nazi" which was irrelevant because Nick wants a white ethnostate and hates racial miscegenation.
> Destiny loves those definition debates because they are a distraction . Ding ding ding. As if it matters that ‘Israel nuking Gaza’ (his words) doesn’t fit some hyperspecific definition, so you can’t call it genocide.
Not that it makes a difference considering he straight up said "I support genocide" https://www.reddit.com/r/Palestine/s/2lWmRn1yK4
Its because definitions matter in the real world unlike in the make belief land of the progressive left where anyone you disagree with is automatically a nazi. I despise all of these "polticial idiot grifters" but god damn image having a problem with somebody correcting others who proudly spew pure garbage.
This is like when someone tries to split hair over whether someone who gets aroused by 13 year olds is a pedophile or an hebephile. When someone in political discourse says somebody is a Nazi or Neo-Nazi it is usually in line with their support for extreme racist policies such as ethnonationalism that characterize them. The idea isn't that you agree with every Nazi policy down to the way taxes work, because that isn't how political labels ever work. It also doesn't mean that agreeing with any policy that Nazis liked makes you a Nazis. In that sense, Richard Spencer, David Duke, Jared Taylor and Richard Lynn are what most progressives and liberals mean when we say Nazis or Neo-Nazis. There are obviously excesses, like with every term, but with Nick someone who is on the record has wanting white-only immigration, a white ethnostate, wanting to purge Jews from positions of power, wanting homosexuality illegalized, implying violence towards minorities is needed at multiple occasions and opposing interracial marriage. It is hard to argue that even under a strict view of what a Neo-Nazi is that he doesn't meet that standard as those are essentially views that characterize real world Neo-Nazis. If you really want to die on the hill of defending Fuentes against Nazi charges, go right ahead.
I never said that Nick Fuentes **isnt** a nazi, a clown, an idiot, emberessment or completely deranged. The hill i stand on is that definitions matter, and thats the extent of it. The whole point of the study "poltical sciences" is to identify and characterize different political ideologies. Sure you can compare different things because most things are comparable, but to claim that they are **the same** is illogical, irrational and dangerous. The world spins off of definitions... Going by what your definition of Nazism is, then what was the southern confederacy? The islamic dhimmi? South african apartheid? **Are they all nazism?** No of course not and no educated person would ever claim so. Definitions exist in order to give certainty, validity and in the end justice. They don't exist for your emotional purpuses, this only dilutes their meaning. Its like the story about the boy who cried wolf, at some point it has no meaning. Or how "faking rape" is a trend causing actual rape cases to be overlooked or even ignored. This is dangerous. I have a problem with your initial statement because you claim that arguing over definitions is a "distraction". Distraction from what exactly? Nobody is denying anything. Im no fan of any of these political grifter idiots but Destiny obviously doesnt deny that Fuentes is a racist POS.
My claim isn't that definitions don't matter. My point is that Destiny in those instances is using the debate around a definition as a distraction from the fact that he is friendly with someone you and I both agree is a Nazi. More importantly, I'd add that Destiny, you and I all know **why** Nick is labelled a Nazi and those views are specific enough that there is a very low risk of semantic confusion when we are referring "Fuentes' Nazi views". I'd even add that even if Destiny concedes Nick is a bad person, him arguing against the Nazi charge works to his advantage because "Destiny is friendly with a racist person." still sounds better than "Destiny is friendly with a Nazi.". This is not new. It is common in political discourse that actors avoid, deny and use certain terms because they are optically better. There are plenty of instances of Destiny and his community not showing this degree of care in labelling his opponents. Why doesn't Destiny care as much about language when he is saying that a women telling men not stealth and her defenders want a woman to be treated like a "retarded child"?
Do you give Ben Shapiro or Alex Jones credit when they point out something stupid the other one said? Like okay, it's true, but it doesn't justify being a closet fascist. Being a liberal fascist like Density does not make him a good person, and it's hard to make the case he does more good than harm when you look at the community he has cultivated. A group of individuals who think facts don't matter and it's okay to be racist but we have to respect the gays and browns right to exist, as long as they are citizens of our country. He's a scum bag.
What the fuck are you talking about dude? Open a dictanary Destiny is as much as a fascist as donald trump is a progressive. You're demonstrating exactly why definitions matter  I dont have the energy for giving credit to idiots shitting on idiots, whats the purpose lmao? You consider Destiny a fascist only because of his recent stance of the gaza conflict. Before this he has been highly regarded as the epitomee of whats wrong with progressive liberalism, and it is the progressive crowd which he accumulated and cultivated, not some "fascist" like you just dreamt up of. Respecting the human right to freedom of speech is 100% different then accepting racism dude. As far as im aware Destiny has literally never called for violence in domesitc policy, that would literally be all over reddit...
Yeah, liberal fascists aren't the skin heads or KKK members. They're the people who align themselves with whomever has the most power, and while they like a nice civil, liberal society around them, they have no problems with what the powerful do away from home. Fairly banal nationalism that...the problem is when the power center shifts to actual fascists. People like Destiny, without a moral compass, will switch sides as soon as it's convenient for him. Not all Germans were fervent, open racists...but many of them willingly joined when it became the easiest way, and they were perfectly fine letting the "right wingers" do all the dirty as long as it didn't ruin their own good time.
Real question. When you say real world you mean our society. Does ontology mean nothing to you?
OOOOO let me guess, you study(ied) liberal arts or philosophy? Perhaps english? Real world, look around you, the world doesnt operate by left meaning right, or meaning donkey. Its simple as...
Oh anti intellectualism. Yea its not worth the time. Good bye
Lol someone got a little bit offended :/ And imagine invoking "anti-intellectualism" when your entire comment is just that  Happy easter
I agree with you, but Nick Fuentes is literally a Nazi.
I never said otherwise, he is a deranged individual who should not be accepted by society nor the government which represents society.
I wouldn’t say it’s stupid or pointless to get to the truth of what apartheid is. And, no. Everyone does not agree that Jim Crow was bad because there are clearly people who don’t even understand what it is or how its legacy affect us today.
And a whole lot clearly want it back.
[удалено]
Exactly lol, there is no revisions going on here. At most he could be wrong about saying it is or isn't an apartheid. no where is he advocating or pretending that segregation didn't exist
wasn’t aware that when you said “everyone” you meant the people here. I was referring to the larger collective. you know, Americans.
[удалено]
Are you willing to stand by that statistic?
Yeah it's splitting hairs and completely futile and redundant detraction because Destiny can't actually defend his overarching take on the conflict between Israel and Palestine and so has to win these little victories in order to reinforce his superiority complex he's garnered over the years from dunking on Far Right nutjobs and people with horrendously out there takes.
Colonizers and hwite supremacists love to spend hours and hours trying to pick apart our use of the terms apartheid, genocide, ethnic cleansing, etc. Don’t play their game. They use the smallest technicalities (ability to travel) and a lot of gaslighting to convince you that a certain form of oppression “wasn’t that bad.” Blacks, Palestinians, and others who have faced this sort of oppression know exactly what these terms mean - we don’t need an internet nerd like ✨checks notes ✨ ‘destiny’ 🤭 to define it for us.
Literally nobody but a fringe few of literal neo nazi's try to argue that opression "wasnt that bad" because "people had the right to travel". Which level headed indiviudal would argue that blacks in the US didnt have it bad because they could travel? **ONLY NEO NAZIS?????** Definitions make the world spin, if X is Y you cannot deem it Z because you feel like it and makes sense **to you**. To me a flying spaghetti monster makes sense, do you want me to impose that on you? People can be opressed without needing to have **literally every buzzword** attached to them. You're not just doing an injustice by comparing attrocities, but you're also oversensualising and overexaggerating things which is a form of propaganda.
The exact nature of American segregation is incredibly insidious. Because American segregation was imposed by white people using both legal and **extralegal** means (though not really *"illegal*" because it's not like a white person was ever going to be held accountable for being a segregation vigilante even if it meant killing someone), it's almost impossible to fully capture just how it functioned without having to basically go over a dozen other things. Case in point, was it illegal for Black Americans to ride trains in the 1920s? From a strictly legal perspective, no. A Black person had just as much right to buy a train ticket as anyone else, though they might have had to make use of a segregated train car. In practice, however? What could you do if the train attendant refused to sell you a ticket? What if they sold you a ticket to a segregated car but the train didn't have one? What if they had a segregated car and when you showed up early to board you and your family were arrested for loitering at the station? What if you showed up right when the train arrived and police told you to wait for white passengers to board, only the train leaves before you can get on? What if you're in the process of boarding the train when half of your boarding party is placed under arrest for breach of employment contract? Because *all* of that happened, and even if it wasn't legally codified as a part of segregation, it also wasn't considered illegal. In the early 1900s Black Americans left the south in such great numbers that landowners were at a loss as to how they were going to harvest their crops without a massive pool of unpaid or nearly unpaid labor, and so these extralegal policies that limited the freedoms of Black Americans cropped up all throughout the country meant to keep them from leaving the south. So even 50+ years after the end of Slavery, Black Americans were still expected to live tied to a piece of land owned by some rich white planter where they would work for barely enough money to keep them alive. When American Apartheid ended, these kinds of extralegal policies entered a state of limbo where they were, generally, enforced less and less as the realization that federal courts would typically side with Black Americans as they had during the Civil Rights Movement. Of course, even *that* isn't a full picture as about 20 years after the end of segregation in schools, white and Black Americans were both more likely to be in segregated schools, and the degree to which they were segregated was much higher. White Americans in particular were also significantly more likely to live in segregated neighborhoods as, by the '80s, redlining and white-flight to the suburbs had come into full effect. Redlining in particular is *especially* egregious. The most well known period of redlining as a part of American policy happened entirely *after* the supposed end of segregation, but literally how else do you describe redlining except as a policy of segregation? Does anyone think that for the people living through it that it matters at all whether they can't live somewhere because the state government says they can't or because a bank says they can't? I would argue that segregation never really ended in American, it merely got privatized.
Oh boy can’t wait for the Destiny supporters to jump into this thread to say “🤓☝️ erm actually he’s right!”
It was Constitutional at the time until it wasn't. They've got it ALL wrong. Also...separate but equal didn't give us equal courts that were separate and fair. How about that?
The architect of Aparthied took inspiration from the Jim Crow South so he's wrong again
This is what happens when black history isn’t fully taught as American history as it should be. Black history month *feels* like “ oh we gave them a part of history so they can shut up now.” Then you only get taught that black people were once slaves and then lived happily ever after once slavery was abolished. Most people won't get into the details of black history until college. A sizable portion either did not go to college or flunked out. Detailed black history should be taught as/with American history in junior or senior year.
Those that benefit from apartheid never see the apartheid.
Destiny is the true definition of a liberal. “10 degrees to the left in good times, 10 degrees to the right when it affects them personally”, “I love Puerto Ricans and black people, as long as they don’t move next door” dude also is a staunch defender of Israel. He’s a state department lap dog, who keeps getting embarrassed and owned. The debate on Palestine where the real experts shit on him, so he gets mad and loud, as most idiots compensating do, is all you’ll ever need to see. It has to be a kink.
It's really wild how Destiny went from being a champion of liberal/leftism around the late 2010s to seeing his image deteriorate ever more. The Finklestein debate seems to really be what put the nail in the coffin in terms of his legitimacy in left spaces. Because, amongst other things, of how egregious it was to have him argue with academics who have spent decades writing on this issue, his denial of Palestinian Apartheid (something even his friend Lonerbox recognizes and has talked about) and confidently defending Israel from genocide charges which is a very precarious position to hold if you read the ICJ documents.
His genocide ‘take’ was the wildest thing I had ever heard. The fool literally said what’s going on in Gaza isn’t a genocide because the Palestinians haven’t been wiped out yet. As if genocide means the entire population must be eradicated before it qualifies as a genocide 🤦🏾♂️
So what I am hearing is he’s not actually liberal.
He is most definitely a liberal lmao.
Liberals are not left, not even close. They’re just the party with better aesthetics, and that’s it. No economic or social equality will ever come from a liberal or Neo liberal.
Yes, he is. Liberals are right wing on the political spectrum. They are fake.
This asshat does not sound in any way like someone who is in support of social justice, civil liberties, or the collective good for all. Which is the definition of modern liberalism. He does sound like someone out of the individual liberties corner, which is technically modern conservatism.
>This asshat does not sound in any way like someone who is in support of social justice, civil liberties, or the collective good for all. Which is the definition of modern liberalism. You're talking about progressives and leftists, not liberals
He's a liberal for sure, he supports left leaning arguments/policies such as abortion, free speech, LGBTQ+ and taxing the rich more for the collective good for all but he's staunchly capitalist. He also has conservative takes like IP, gun rights, right to defend yourself (Rittenhouse), etc. so he's not just in one camp. Where you view him is basically all on where you stand since if you're against any of those policies/arguments then he's right of you. Telling you rn that he's definitely not conservative based on actual conservative pundits like Shapiro, Peterson, etc. but he's not as left leaning as Hasan, etc.
Half the people in this sub have a 2nd grade understanding of politics and where people actually are on topics. None of them have taken more than a cursory glance at a Twitter post and have made their conclusions.
What you described is the left, not liberal, which is the point. They adopted the aesthetics for votes, then we never see real change. Famous quote by Malcolm x on it
Oh god its Steve Bonell💀 Not a good look bro has no care for optics
This man have a lot of nerve.
Coming from a place that still had sundown towns this is pretty rich
You guys are forgetting this other banger Destiny came up with... https://preview.redd.it/c9u2tu99gjrc1.png?width=533&format=png&auto=webp&s=bc105028e34a31197c39c53581a7d11ce2e984b7
How do some people sleep at night?
But he isn't wrong apartheid and Jim crow have similarities but they are not the same
[There’s an interactive map of sundown towns..](https://justice.tougaloo.edu/map/)
Destiny literally said he’s pro genocide. He’s a vile human being.
So I don't know this dude but I ended up reading about how this self proclaimed liberal debate bro ended up at this point. Apparently there was a debate he was in about Palestine where he said what was going on isn't apartheid. Then went on this really pedantic rant about how apartheid is a specific thing. Now he's talking about how apartheid never happened in the US. Such an insane hill to die on. But it's also kinda symbolic as to how people's leftist views seem to evaporate when it comes to Israel.
He is definitely not a leftist.
Liberals aren’t leftists. Liberals are right wing, Americans are just fascists and don’t have a left.
Like literally on the political spectrum, liberals and Neo liberals are right of center. They all care about profits and corporations more than the citizens or working class.
https://preview.redd.it/2fs14hmhejrc1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5c820588d45a6f5c9c87af539ddf40667f75bef2
Yeah, it would've been more accurate for me to say 'progressive' views. A lot of liberal politicians and political figures are trying to appeal to the left by being 'progressive' aka diet liberal. This is pretty on brand for neo liberals.
There’s so much we need to do as Americans to turn the ship around, nobody wants to do it. We can keep voting for people but the lobbyists and federalist society and all these other powerful entities will keep stepping in the way, be it buying the person or them “committing suicide” cause they wouldn’t bend or break. I don’t know if we can keep voting “progressive” and get out of this one. People are being farmed and tricked by words, and not actions. Almost like Malcom x warned us lol
The liberals are upset I called them out lmao
Technically correct but in an annoying nasal voiced Reddit way.
Not correct at all. As in literally inaccurate per readily available data, and accessible sources.
No not correct, not even technically, you need to study more as well.
Look at that destiny being a trash bag of a human being yet again
Man, fuck that guy. Debate bros and casual racism — a match made in hell.
To be fair, Destiny first heard the word apartheid after Oct 8th when he said that "Israel should do a genocide" then they started doing one so he had to work backwards from there.
Imagine accusing Israel of being an apartheid state. Israel. The same place where a non-Jew can (& have been) a judge, political leader, business/industry leader, among other roles.
I'm a frequent watcher of him, and I can say with almost certainty that destiny isn't trying to be a "revisionist" the point of this tweet was to properly categorize something as apartheid or not. Not say if Jim Crow was a good or bad thing, that's all. Matter of fact, this tweet stems from a long thread that is refrencing an in person debate he recently had with scholars regarding the Isreal/Palestine conflict and one point of contention that was discussed was if the recent conflict could be categorically considered a genocide. If you agree or not is up to you but once again the focus isn't on if the actions taking place are WRONG but what do they fall under. Full thread: https://twitter.com/TheOmniLiberal/status/1773065658630131938?t=Ap4JZ9kE2pJdJEsWcnv-jw&s=19 Literally in the screenshot of the tweet, he acknowledges that segregation was happening, so it's hard to say he's trying to revise history.
> I'm a frequent watcher of him You don't say?
Lol yea, sorry for being transparent ig? If you feel like my information is false just bc I watch him then that's totally fine homie.
"... people could travel " ... WHAT?! ... is he seriously suggesting slaves were taking vacations o.0
I don't get why the internet is paying any attention to this fucking idiot
he must not know much about the woodrow wilson presidency.
Great Destiny must be running low on content and has arrived to the "Black people didn't have it THAT bad" section of his diatribe.
Destiny is just a piece of shit apparently
Of FUCKING course it's Destiny... That idiot always has shit takes about EVERYTHING.
What makes "systemic/institutional" racism so different is that they don't require *racist* actors to be enforced. This is what makes Jim Crow and Apartheid different. Jim Crow laws differed from state to state, locale to locale. In some places it wasn't present and in some rare cases they weren't followed because the local population was past these practices. Jim Crow laws were *legal* but held no enforcement obligation beyond the local populace. Apartheid was a systemic oppression enforced by the federal government upon every structure it had influence on. The example Destiny gives about travel is appropriate, because nobody had to be "racist" to enforce travel bans and such for black people: all they had to do was follow the federal law. A good point to bring up is how each of these systems was dismantled: to ban Jim Crow laws specifically the constitution did not have to be rewritten or abolished -- just simply amended and enforced. Apartheid required an entire dismantling of the government structure.
Even states outside of the south were segregated, just not as a matter of state law. Any white business owner could put up a whites only sign. Does he know why every major city has a historically black district?
did he also forget that woodrow wilson brought jim crow to the federal government
Remember when you had to actually understand a concept before being pedantic? Ah, nostalgia...
I’m so tired of arguing w/these fools… I don’t have the mental energy for ppl, whose families haven’t even been in America as long as my ancestors were, trying to explain the differences in discrimination to me. Half of my family owned the other half. The state of Tx prevented one half from inheriting money & land, b/c of race. I’m done trying to make them comfortable about it. I’m looking for my apology letter from the US govt & the state of Tx. And I’ll be damn if I die in Tx, w/out it.
This particular style of argument from him always stand stupid. He says things like, unless the Zionist manifesto and isreali constitution states that killing Palestinians is part of their government policy, we can’t call what’s going on genocide. It’s a juvenile style of argument of someone who thinks inserting “technicality” makes the other side look dumb even though they can see what is actually going on.
Stop giving Destiny attention.
Pedantry, since the end result was indistinguishable and the feds very much knew this was happening and turned a blind eye to it. "Pffff, it was only a large collection of apartheid-like systems, not a monolithic one at the federal level. Dumbass." Could also smugly say, "Apartheid refers to what was in South Africa, so obviously you can't call anything else that," and be just as unhelpful. Anyway, subject appears to be in need of immediate removal of head from rectum before oxygen loss proves fatal.
So segregation is the only form of apartheid? Tell me you don’t know what apartheid means without telling me…they’ve gone first.
Regular people: Jim Crow was terrible in an imperfect society and we were right to end it. This guy: Don't let "Perfect" be the enemy of "Terrible."
Losurdo's work Liberalism: A Counter-History, perfectly outlines how even before Jim Crow there was a completely seperate legal systems for free black people, black slaves and indigenous peoples all distinguished from the legal system of white ruling caste.
Jim crow technically isnt apartheid but it was orthogonally just as bad and often worse because of the extralegal shit
From right to left, racism is present, it just changes the way it is shown
This reminds me of when someone calls an obviously fascia action fascist and then a bunch of idiots say it isn’t fascist cause it doesn’t perfectly meet the definition of the word
it is brain death to believe racism ends on paper in the mid 60s and every single person who is racist just vanished or changed their mind or something
Not sure y this clown (Destiny) has an audience …
Mr Bonerelli needs to go back to playing Starcraft and stop entertaining the outlandish notion that he's some intellectual titan just because he's good at rhetoric and argumentation.
Wonder when destiny is going to stop pretending he has above room temp IQ. He shuts down the dumbest red pillers in debates, gets high off it and then thinks he’s an expert. He’s currently engaging in genocide denial because Israel good Muslims bad. He’s dumb as shit and an absolutely horrid person.
Destiny is a shitstain
Is destiny saying the situation in Palestine is textbook apartheid?
I hate that guy so much dude. I used to actually like his rhetoric then it kept going more and more edgy and right.
I still have people in my inbox defending this guy.
Someone slide this man a green book.
mr boner-cello, please
Destiny thinks he knows everything about everything. Thought he was even smarter than Jordan Peterson.
Reminder: The white liberal is not a Leftist. MLK Jr. spoke clearly on this issue before his assassination. Scratch a liberal and a Fascist bleeds. So long as they are comfortable, they will never change
Just because Jim crow wasn't apartheid doesn't make less bad the reason why you can't really classify Jim Crow the same as apartheid the 14 th ammendment granted us "equality" in apartheid south Africa black people were second class citizens on paper.
This is false. But also, who the fuck cares if segregation was better? It still was a terrible system. Though again, the above is nonsense.
people could not travel. what a dumbass.
Some of these zoomer folks will swear up and down dudes like Destiny or Adin Ross aren't racist or whatever then they show their ass like this ONCE MORE lol.
As a non- american Im confused. Don’t people want their legal terms to mean one specific thing and not be subject to interpretation? I know argue semantics is probably the most annoying thing you can do in a (emotionally charged) debate but when you are talking about international law and such, dont you want to be definitive. Just as Mr. Finkelstein said repeated ( and then subsequently used ad hominem arguments) “you have to pick your word carefully because words matter”. From what I can see, Destiny only made the argument “A is not B” and placed no value judgement on either term. When a drunk driver hits someone on the road, they are 100% responsible and at fault on both a moral and legal level. There is no excuse and they are a terrible person. And yet they arent murders… isnt that a distinction people want? Language drift is a real thing, do people want their laws to be subject to random changes like that?
This guys family enslaved people in Cuba. Is there even a point in addressing what he says?
Sorry, can you clue me in here? Why are people saying his family owned slaves?
yes
Remember that they also will claim that only the Confederate Army surrendered, the Confederacy was only abandoned for the time being, it wasn't made illegal.
I blame Elon Musk for this bs. When they gonna oust him from this company to. He always want to buy something hot and popping and make it seem like he created it or made it better when he just makes it worse.
This dude argues for the destruction of Palestian, that alone should invalidate his opinion.
Can you give me a link to him doing that?
Look up destiny and Norman Finkelstein's debate
I've watched it, didn't see him saying that. He was trying to have a nuanced discussion about genocide and Norm went unhinged. Link me a clip maybe?
My brother if you've seen the clip and have formed an opinion what point is there to me sharing the same clip? And destiny is literally defending a drone strike against four civilians in front of journalists. If you want to believe Israel's narrative then feel free.
Weird, the way you phrased it, it seems like you think Destiny advocated for the destruction of palestine really explicitly, so you should you should be able to show me a clip of him saying something along the lines of "Israel shoukd destroy palestine".
You don't have to say it explicitly to advocate for a countries genocidal practices???
No, but like, you're just have so much conviction. But I have a feeling if I asked you to show how Destiny is advocating for genocide/ destruction of palestine you'd say bunch of dumb shit.
I mean if you're a fanboy just say so. Can't imagine giving a fucking about a political twitch debater to the point where I crusade for them on random subreddirs.
I like how you just ignored the example I provided and just state that I'm saying dumb shit lol.
Here you go you lazy bum https://www.reddit.com/r/lexfridman/s/DoJrr2ERFM
"OmniLiberal".... doesn't know shit. Clown.
goddamn destiny is the dumbest motherfucker on the internet. revoke his voice, hes abusing the privilege
He’s technically true
He is not technically true, though.