In the news

You are reading a single comment by @Eseman and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.

•

itsbruce in reply to @Eseman

I think you and @hugo7 are talking at cross purposes. Because your post was a lot more ambiguous than you think.

Here's what sumo said:

My point is I think it's less excuseable to spout racist shit in 2008 than 1980 because it's less prevalent.

To which you said

I think it's the other way round.

I think @hugo7 read "I'd argue it's the other way round" as meaning "It was actually less excusable to spout racist shit in 1980". I certainly wasn't sure what you meant, but left it. Now it looks as if you meant "It's less prevalent in 2008 because it's less excusable".

Hope that clears things up. Unless I got one or both of you wrong, in which case it's less clear than ever.

•

Eseman in reply to @itsbruce

Ah right, I didn’t pick up on that possible 1st interpretation. ‘It's less prevalent in 2008 because it's less excusable’ is what I meant.

•

itsbruce in reply to @Eseman

OK, while I'm on a roll, you're describing why racism was less (openly) prevalent in the society of 2008 than in 1980, but sumo was saying that an individual in 2008 had less excuse in a society where racism was less prevalent, not talking about how society got there. Cross purposes again.

About

Avatar for Eseman @Eseman started