| 73Q Music Videos | Vote On Clips | Submit | Login   |
Submitted Videos | Favorited Videos | Voting History | Comment History | Hopper History | Login to Compare
HarrietTubmanPI

Previous Next 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85
Comments
Seattle police officer punches a 17 year old girl
06/21/10, 00:01

One thing you never do is resist arrest. Everything will be videotaped. You will have your day in court. If you're calm and non-aggressive and do whatever the cop wants, chances are you'll stand to win your court case for wrongful arrest and you may even get a settlement from the city.

If you act like an asshole, then the judge will likely not side with you.

You have Miranda rights - and whether you like it or not you have the right to remain silent. You have the right to an attorney.

Don't escalate a bad situation into something worse.
Ron Artest gives thanks after winning the finals
06/20/10, 23:57

Sports psychiatry is a big business. Like it or not, but a lot of the pros use some sort of behavioral pills like Aderall or Beta Blockers - which are perfectly legal. When you're entire career can be determined by 3 seconds in front of 10,000 live screaming fans and millions on television, athletes take every edge they can get.
ABC Family presents: Huge!
06/20/10, 23:28

Idiots. Yes, there is no ideal body. But I guarantee you you won't be fat if you just fucking exercise and eat right.

If you classify yourself as a bit on the heavy side and want to be thought of as healthy, you damned well better be either a) Samoan, b) a Weightlifter, or c) a candidate for the worlds strongest whatever.
ABC Family presents: Huge!
06/20/10, 23:26

I think I should invest in a mobility scooter company.
Rascal Demonstration at Fat Convention
06/17/10, 23:37

I bet all the fat people were really taking the air out of the room. Also, did they instruct the people laying out the chairs to leave 10 inches between each chair?
Deer obliterates puppy
06/17/10, 23:30

I hope the dog was alright and that it got better owners after this happened.
General Foods International Coffees.
06/17/10, 16:36

I wasn't offended by it. But you were. Try some Metamucil.
More Portal 2 gameplay
06/17/10, 12:39

Little known fact, Isaac Neuton could sing really high and had no interest in women.
General Foods International Coffees.
06/17/10, 10:28

Yeah because being born in 1981 instead of 1980 warrants a mighty fuck you from the OP. May a Persian doctor sew your sister shut.
Parking spaces: Made in China
06/17/10, 10:23

They can't drive, but they can sure make parking spaces.
General Foods International Coffees.
06/16/10, 22:24

I remember this and I was born after 1980.
Song of the South Review
06/16/10, 19:09

Honestly I don't care about those who call me stupid without backing up why they called me that.

But to address the two people who I want to quickly address:

"None of that matters. The institution of slavery is and was 100% evil, no matter what the material conditions actually were."

That's a very dangerous statement. Why is something 100% evil? When you label anything 100% evil, you better have a damned good reason, and it better be that there are no good things about it. If you can find anything positive, then it's not 100% evil, is it?

That's the point I have (and yes ignoring my point doesn't mean I do not have one). When you label anything as 100% evil you brush it under the rug. You don't try to figure out why. You don't try to look at all aspects of it.

It's a way of prejudging a topic so that no matter what you find out you'll always have the same conclusion.

I also want to point out that it seems to people on Poe, that if you don't think something is 100% evil then you must obviously support it or think it's okay. I agree, it's mostly evil, but honestly I do not consider anything to be 100% evil. There are some things close to if not at 99% for me if I could have an objective way of putting it, but again, nothing in my opinion could exist as 100% evil - no matter the event, the deed, or person.

Evil is a relative definition to start with - and whether you like it or not what is evil to you may not be evil to someone else. There is no real objective definition for evil, just as there is none for good.

Why do I want to bring this up (in spite of people not understanding it or people not grasping this concept)? I knew the reaction I'd get the very minute I posted it, but I posted it anyway.

I brought it up because I wanted to question our labeling of something as evil. What is our bearing? What is our basis? Is it objective or emotional? Finally, can we label something as "100% Evil" with sound reason and evidential support?

Human history is a litany of good things that happened from very bad things and vice versa. You can't simply wish away or ignore something you think is very bad and pretend it never happened or that nothing good ever came from it. Dig deep enough in the good and you will find bad. Dig deep enough in the bad, and you will find good.
Song of the South Review
06/16/10, 15:11

"Your argument is like saying we should morally re-evaluate drunk driving because people will often have a pint and then drive a half mile home an hour later without incident."

No. It's not.

Drunk driving isn't having a pint and then driving home. It's becoming drunk, then driving home. Not everyone who drinks a pint will get drunk off of it - and not everyone immediately drives after they have a pint. Most people usually are at the bar eating dinner or listening to whatever live music is there for a while before they go home.

That's kind of why we have BAC levels that signify what is drunk and what isn't.

Drunk driving is also not an issue that was as overreaching and complex as slavery.
Song of the South Review
06/16/10, 14:12

"Saying you oppose slavery was humorously unneccesary the first time, but is just getting ridiculous now."

Why is it unnecessary? Why is it ridiculous?

"Do you see what you did there? You again denied several things you were never accused of, then accused me of two things I never said. There's an important difference between "everything" and "anything" and between "abuse was systemic" and "all slaves were treated equally bad". That, along with Godwining, means abandoning rational argument."

But you made that case, not me. As for Godwining it, invoking WWII doesn't automatically invalidate the argument if the point is valid. The reason for Godwin's law is that often it is brought up for an irrational point - but in this case I feel my point is perfectly rational.

By your logic, a full documentary on WWII would be irrational because the whole thing is Godwined.

"Defending an anachronistic work of art is a perfectly valid point of view. To put it in an anecdote, when James Baskett played Remus it was a breakthrough positive performance by an African-American in cinema, but he wasn't allowed to attend the premier because the hotel banned blacks. The NAACP both praised and criticized it. But your argument involves "we can't know how bad slavery was" and that this unbelievably unlikely scenario was at least possible, therefore the film is justified."

No. I never added 'therefore the film is justified'. I also never said that we can't know how bad slavery was. I said that we can't know if 100% of all slave owners abused their slaves. You're saying things that I never said. You're making up a strawman argument.

"I'm not going to do your research for you on a topic as exhaustive as American slavery, but here's the wiki, and a good book. I sincerely hope you benefit from it."

I'm well aware of that book. It actually shows that in spite of the terrible things that slavery did, there were things that made up the fabric of history that weren't all completely bad.

History is a tapestry of both good and bad threads - you cannot simply remove all the bad ones and expect the tapestry to be intact.

I think we probably agree on more things than you'd care to admit - but again, this is a topic that evokes a lot of emotion and so it's easy for either of us to jump to conclusions or make up things either one of us may have never said.
Song of the South Review
06/16/10, 13:25

"You're not helping your argument."

Only because it's one issue we've all made up our minds about and because of it we refuse to learn anything else about it. For things that we perceive as very bad, we often do not take a fair and unbiased look at them.

This is why it's easy to jump to conclusions, easy to jump to name calling, etc. This is why when we see some particularly offensive video on Poe or Youtube that we immediately call the maker of the video x, y, or z, or come up with a snap judgement, because once an emotional response is produced, it's much more difficult to come up with an objective evaluation.

I know slavery was not good overall and like I said I wish it never happened. But it's a fact of life. We can't change history. We can't turn back the clock. We can't undo it. We have to live with it.

When we have a strong emotional response to something like this, we often do NOT see it for what it really was, but see it for something else. We add things. We introduce bias. We see things that aren't there. We make things out that weren't so. The more emotional we become about any issue, the easier it is to deceive ourselves about it.

Part of being intellectually honest is challenging yourself to find a positive and negative thing about anything.
Song of the South Review
06/16/10, 13:18

"How's this for Godwinning: you are at least as bad as a Holocaust denier when you imply that lynching stories were just some cruel propaganda that the North created. Here's your fucking citation:"

Where the fuck did I imply this? I love how you say 'imply' but you never said I actually said it. You're probably seeing things that aren't there in what I typed.

I said abuse, rape, murder, etc. happened.

But again, thanks for proving my point. Funny how things that we broadbrush as 100% awful are easy to jump to conclusions about. It isn't and wasn't a cut and dried issue. If it was, why was it allowed in the original constitution? Why did it take a civil war to stop it?
Song of the South Review
06/16/10, 12:51

I'm going to need citations for your statements IrishWiskey.

As far as claiming that 'we can never know everything' is creationist bunk - that's not true. That's how science works actually. In science, nothing is 100% proven. We don't have every single fossil or record of every species that has ever lived, but Evolution best fits the current evidence.

But I kind of knew I'd be shat on for trying to show that we can't make something that was bad into the thing that was the worst thing ever because we lose track of everything that went on. When we get too emotional over history, we start making things up that aren't true.

Did I say 'Song of the South' was true? No. Did I say Roots was? No.

Did I even say that there was no abuse or bad things that happened? No.

But you can't at all say that all slaves were treated equally bad because you cannot possibly know this.

It's not a conservative trick. I'm not even conservative. It's not a trick. It's a fact of life.

I mean how dare I say that slavery wasn't 100% bad? After all, if I try to look and see if there was a positive thing about anything that is always 100% terrible I must obviously support it!

I'd also like to thank everyone for proving something else about an extreme event that everyone thinks is 100% bad - that we're all quick to jump to conclusions about it and to make absolute statements about it in spite of the fact that when we do we often don't see it for what it really was.

I'd hate to Godwin this thread - but it's kind of like the Nazis. Yes, they killed millions and they did some horrible things. But without them we wouldn't have had a lot of rocket technology for at least another 10 years, a serviceable and usable highway system, etc. Just like in WWII we can't say all Allieds were good - because we were the ones who bombed Japan. We were the ones who firebombed Dresden.
Song of the South Review
06/16/10, 11:16

I'm going to really be shat on for saying this, but I did a bit of research into this movie (since I had seen it a long time ago but wasn't that familiar with it) and why it was controversial, etc.

It was controversial because it portrayed a slave owner as being nice and caring to the slaves.

I don't have a time machine, so I can't go back in time and survey all of the slave owners before the Civil War - and we all know there is evidence of them being punished, tortured, raped, and even murdered. So, we know that they were abused.

What we don't know is if every owner abused their slaves. Slaves were expensive, only a small people in the south could even afford them, and there very well could have been a few owners who were very nice to their 'property'. In fact, most of the south before the war was dirt poor and couldn't own a slave if they wanted to. My heritage is from the south, and we never owned slaves. My ancestors were poor farmers for at least 130 years until the 1930s. There are a lot of stereotypes about slavery and the south before the civil war - mostly made up by those who never lived in the south before the civil war.

I honestly couldn't tell you if most slave owners abused their slaves, or if only half did, or some, and I couldn't even give you a percentage. I do know that it couldn't have been all because we'd have to survey every single slave owner to know that. Was it most? Again, we don't have enough evidence to know what the percentage was.

I'm definitely not condoning the ownership of people for work, and I honestly wish slavery never happened. Nevertheless, it is a part of history and we have to take an honest look at it and not assume we know everything about what happened. That's the only way we can prevent history from repeating itself.

History is often written and re-written and then re-written again by biased people - or by the winners of a war, or even by the oppressed.

You always have to have a grain of salt when looking at Song of the South OR when reading Roots and realize that in both you're probably not getting the whole picture.

There are very few absolutes in History.
Zelda on the accordion - Boba Fett
06/15/10, 18:15

That's a pussy accordion. Diatonic accordions are for the real pros.
Happiest duck in the world
06/15/10, 12:51

This should be related to the cosby ducks.

Previous Next 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85




Video content copyright the respective clip/station owners please see hosting site for more information.
Privacy Statement