So I never really got this one. It seems like she is a polarizing figure here, but why is that? Also, what's the joke behind the "amber" bot?
Pretty sure it's because her takes are often the hottest, most controversial takes, and because of that, mentioning Amber (Amber) in any post became a meme in and of itself. I think.
Ah, ok. Can you give me an example of something she said that rustled feathers? Just trying to put things into context
About a month ago she went off on the idiots who thought COVID-19 was airborne. They were overreacting like they do to everything regarding it. It being airborne was one of the big discoveries of the month prior and her bad take may as well been anti-masker shit.
This is the pattern I've seen the most of. She'll talk about touchy idpol topics without hesitation -- and usually in a way that's far from unreasonable -- and then people will play telephone with it until it turns into a vague accusation of her being bigoted somehow.
So are Amber stans just gonna pretend ep 435 never happened? lol that's fuckin hilarious
Amber stans
This doesn't exist, at least not in a place where everyone routinely jokes about not even listening to the podcast. No idea what episode you're referring to, either, or what supposedly irredeemable thing she said on it.
If there's anything of value to be mined from a who-fucking-cares-about-this internet drama, it's that accusations aimed at anyone even broadly on the left should at the very least be specific.
Amber stans absolutely do exist, I should know, I was one of them, and I literally wrote Episode 435 so what do you mean "what episode I'm referring too?" and if you're so concerned with the non-"specificity" of accusations against left figures then maybe you should take a listen to the episode and judge for yourself instead of just reflexively defending some rich cocaine-addled hipster with dogshit politics
Vague, ill-defined accusations of misconduct are cop shit. Period, full stop.
If someone's job was to wreck leftist groups, whisper campaigns like that would be high on their list. Anyone making such accusations should be aggressively pressed to state specifically what the problem conduct is, and should be shouted down if they keep reverting back to "no trust me bro it's really bad you wouldn't even believe it."
I literally wrote Episode 435
That conveys near zero information about what the supposed misconduct is. It doesn't even tell you where to find it; it just tells you where to start looking -- it's "sift through this 90-minute audio recording with no transcript for... something; trust me bro, it's there and you'll know it when you hear it."
A specific accusation would be "she said X, which you can find here at Y, and that's bad because Z." "Episode 435" is about half of that middle part, and the number alone doesn't even clue you in to the general topic of the episode.
Here's an example: "Felix said he'd have sex with his clone, which you can find in the first maybe 20 minutes of episode [whatever number, or give the topic], which is bad because being gay with your clone is a discount Cumtown bit." That's fine; vague accusations like "Felix has said some sus stuff about gay sex" is not.
"Shitting on me is akshually a cop move" is one of the dumbest debate tactics this forum has come up with.
It's literally what you're doing right now. This is not an organisation, she is not some kind of important leftist or whatever the fuck, no one is talking about "misconduct" or anything, this about some lame podcaster on some shitpost forum and shit things said podcaster may have said/done. The "cop shit" move is tiring. Just answer to what they're asking you.
no one is talking about “misconduct”
Accusing another leftist of racism is accusing them of misconduct; what world do you live in
Just answer to what they’re asking you
You can't answer a vague accusation of misconduct -- that's the whole point here. You can respond to "here's an actual sentence someone said, where they said it, and why it's bad." You can't respond to "so-and-so is racist," or anti-semetic, or similarly ill-defined accusations. That's why whisper campaigns are effective as smears: there's nothing specific to latch onto and discuss, it's just the specter of misconduct being used to force someone to prove a negative about themselves.
Accusing another leftist of racism is accusing them of misconduct;
Yes, if you and the other leftist are part of the same organisation, which you aren't. This is like the "court of law" shit people pull off. What you linked to isn't even part of the same thread you are replying to, which is pretty ironic from someone complaining about non specificity. They brought up an episode, just look up what was discussed, I did, I found it in like 0 minutes. Say "is this what you take issue with? I don't because x and y". The "cop shit" act is useless.
Yes, if you and the other leftist are part of the same organisation
There is zero justification for this distinction. We shouldn't be doing whisper campaigns against any leftist, anywhere.
What you linked to isn’t even part of the same thread
Don't know how you define "thread," but you can scroll up and see that comment for yourself.
There is zero justification for this distinction.
There is, just like there is a difference between a court and some random person criticising you. Misconduct within an organization means you will be punished or suspended. Else it doesn't mean shit. Now did you find it?
Are accusations within a courtroom the only ones that have consequences?
Can non-legal accusations be used to wreck leftist groups?
Have you followed any Jeremy Corbyn news lately?
- There is no comparison between Corbyn who is an actual leader that emerged from the left in a country and some random brooklynite podcaster, 2) there is no comparison between some post on Chapo.chat and a mass campaign by the media, 3) Corbyn was literally part of a party and he was accused of misconduct and he was literally suspended as a result of that, which is exactly what I am talking about and distinguishing from what is happening here, 4) I never said anything about legal/non legal accusations except as analogy, and 5) calling people cops or accusing them of cop behavior or whatever the fuck just because they said something bad about a podcaster is every bit as damaging as whatever they may have said against said podcaster.
Also we're not a "leftist group" in any meaningful sense, it's so cringey when people overestimate what this forum is.
Also we’re not a “leftist group”
I thought we had covered the thing about you responding to things I never said. "We shouldn’t be doing whisper campaigns against any leftist, anywhere" could not be more clear.
calling people cops or accusing them of cop behavior or whatever the fuck just because they said something bad about a podcaster is every bit as damaging
This is a "killing Nazis is just as bad as Nazis killing"-level take. Calling out wrecker behavior is not the same as engaging in wrecker behavior.
Or you can listen for yourself and make your own judgments....like a grown up
lol "cop shit" that's ironic considering 435 is famous for being the unironic 'pro-cop episode'
Yes, whisper campaigns -- which you keep doubling down on -- are cop shit. Make a specific accusation or shut the fuck up. This should be the way accusations are handled in leftist groups.
This isn't me making an "accusation" it's me handing you a video tape of the crime scene with the defendant getting caught red-handed and you refusing to watch it, so either get informed about what the rest of us are talking about or shut the fuck up
Here you can listen to it free RIGHT NOW https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackWolfFeed/comments/hoh1ts/435_cancel_crisis_feat_matt_taibbi_7920/ I double dog dare you to listen and then defend their pro-cop shit takes
This isn’t me making an “accusation”
I never said you made anything up. I'm saying if you're going to accuse someone on the left of any sort of serious misconduct (and you make an accusation of racism elsewhere in this thread), it better be a specific accusation, because vague whisper campaigns are often used as smears.
Give an actual full sentence that you think is beyond the pale. "Pro-cop shit take" doesn't communicate a thing about what anyone actually said, much less the bare minimum context it's in.
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackWolfFeed/comments/hoh1ts/435_cancel_crisis_feat_matt_taibbi_7920/
Give an actual full sentence that you think is beyond the pale
No need, plenty of specific time stamped quotes right there in the thread, so buckle up and click that play button, we wouldn't want to think you're being pedantic ass uninterested in actually getting informed, now would we?
If by "plenty of specific time stamped quotes" you mean one, sure:
Matt (Taibbi): "To jump straight from, yanno seeing an episode like the George Floyd killing to All Cops are White Supremacists murderers, that's unsupportable"
Amber "You have to grapple with just a few complications to that statement"
Amber "there's a lot of non-white cops"
Matt: "and being a cop is a working class job"
Whatever you think of the politics of those statements, "racist" is a fucking stretch at best. There are, in fact, non-white cops. Many working class people do, in fact, look at a police job as a path to a decent life that doesn't have all the barriers to entry a lot of other jobs do. Try out "all cops are white supremacist murderers" on anyone outside the terminally-online left and these are two of the first responses you'll get. The discussion around this quote makes that exact point, too -- that polling shows how a lot of black people actually want more cops in their neighborhoods, which is a pretty big complication to someone with the approach of "all cops are white supremacist murderers and our position should be calling for no cops whatsoever."
This is why it's so important to make accusations specific. If you just throw out "they're racist!", you never get into a discussion about what anyone actually said or did. You never get any surrounding context. The person you're accusing is forced to prove a negative (e.g., they aren't racist) or ignore the accusation. It's a smear tactic, which is a cop tactic, and it's no way to treat fellow leftists.
And then in another part of the episode she refers to blm and the protesters as "minoritarians" for advancing the Abolish the Police concept, I mean it's really fuckin funny how you continually talk of "specificity" and "context" but refuse to actually listen to the episode that has the full context
And you're full of shit bro talking about "cop tactics" while defending a pro-cop takes, ALL COPS ARE WHITE SUPREMACTISTS, they all uphold the systematic, skin color in this regard is irrelevant, lol you'd think miss working class whisperer would understand something as basic as the structural and historical underpinnings of the justice system
Also I didn't call her a racist for pointing out there are non-white cops, so get your facts straight you crypto-bootlicker
I didn’t call her a racist for pointing out there are non-white cops
Another reason why accusations need to be specific: if they aren't, you end up with whack-a-mole shit like this. "Oh I wasn't actually talking about that comment you dug up and responded to; I was talking about something totally different, guess you wasted you time lol." You're doing a cop's job if you engage in this sort of time wasting wrecker behavior.
she refers to blm and the protesters as “minoritarians” for advancing the Abolish the Police concept
As someone else has already pointed out to you, total abolition of the police is in fact a minority position. Pointing out that radical solutions aren't widely popular isn't even close to racism, and rejecting the reality of that will get us nowhere.
if they aren’t, you end up with whack-a-mole shit like this
lol little shit you know perfectly well why I called her a racist and it wasn't because of some random time stamp quotes you hand selected from a thread
As someone else has already pointed out to you, total abolition of the police is in fact a minority position
And as I pointed out to that garbage comment, socialism is a minority position, communism is a minority position, marxism is a minority position, in a vacuum this criticism is politically meaningless, trends shift, opinions change, that's the goal of engagement and advancing ones position over time to new people, what's important is the context of Amber's usage of the word. Which wasn't as you claim to "point out something obvious" of course you'd already know that if you bothered to actually review the episode
Her take was an attack meant to shut down other leftists, uncritically using the concept of the black monolith (a monolith that apparently ignores 20% of black people who already agree with the Abolish Police concept) and instead presents the monolith as an unchanging and static force immune to leftist agitation, not only is this defeatist pro-cop horseshit, it's racist and shuts the door on the 20% who are already convinced and the other 80% who are unconvinced but nevertheless many of whom are open to leftist alternatives
How's that for a "specific" accusation
you know perfectly well why I called her a racist
Holy fuck, without a specific accusation you don't know this. How could I possibly spoonfeed this to you any more gently
and you make an accusation of racism elsewhere in this thread)
That's you, you wrote that, you said yourself you saw my first comment in this thread where I called her a racist for referring to protesters as minoritarians "Calling blm protesters minoritarians isn’t just some “off the cuff cowboy hot take on the fly” it’s fuckin racist, and she can eat shit" there's no comment where I called her a racist for pointing there are non-white cops
So shut the fuck up about "not knowing" the context of my racism accusation, lol why you playing dumb?
You made that comment after our conversation started you fucking clown. And you linked to a thread that referred to the "time stamped comment" I quoted above. Like I said, this is whack-a-mole style, time wasting wrecker shit.
Dumb fuck that was literally my first comment in this thread, click my name and scroll down, lol
Yeah, ya shit yourself huh? That's what happens when you get in the Cage with a Killa
jokes about not even listening to the podcast
it isn't a joke, the podcast is genuinely shit and i do not understand why anyone would listen to it
The point is that there's really no one here worth calling an Amber "stan," and the fewer people who listen to the podcast the more true that becomes.
Smoking is cool and good and you should blow secondhand smoke into baby faces or something.
https://twitter.com/cenkuygur/status/1333172294626074627?s=19
Same kind of people who think this tweet is 100% heartfelt and sincere.
She's being hyperbolic but she's also being serious.
If that's the interpretation, what's there to be upset about?
The obliviously hyperbolic bit (blow smoke in a kid's face) is a joke, and whatever your impression of the serious part is (probably something like "no one likes a Puritanical anti-intoxicant scold") isn't so far out in left field that anyone should have a real issue with it.
I thought it was pretty clear she was gainsaying secondhand smoke concerns, and while she's being hyperbolic about intentionally exposing babies, she also thinks she should be able to smoke where-ever she likes regardless of what anyone of the scolds think.
That's might not be unambiguously the case, but it does fit with her aloof misanthrope aesthetic.
she also thinks she should be able to smoke where-ever she likes regardless of what anyone of the scolds think
This seems like reading the worst possible intentions into a statement that we both agree was not meant to be 100% serious.
I'm not doing exegesis here, I don't even remember exactly what was said and I'm not going to do the legwork to dig up the quote verbatim. I'm just reporting what I took away from the exchange as a possible explanation to the OP's question.
My friends also tell me they don't know when I'm being serious about things or not as well because I also have a lot of fun with post-irony and meta-irony, but I also keep it relatively anodyne, as opposed to her aloof misanthropy.
she spins up nuclear takes on the fly, like a true cowboy poster. sooner or later, we all get burnt by the heat... but wokescolds and pearlclutchers can't handle the furnace and make it out like she's a no-goodnik.
in contrast, i've found her longform articles on sensitive topics to be some of the most thoughtful, insightful and gentle political pieces ive ever read.
in conclusion, amber is a land of contrasts.
Calling blm protesters minoritarians isn't just some "off the cuff cowboy hot take on the fly" it's fuckin racist, and she can eat shit
She didn't say that you dumb asshole she said that full police abolitionism is a minoritarian position (which is just reality whether you like that or not). It isn't fucking racist to point out that many poverty stricken black neighborhoods actually do want more policing either (look at how they vote for expanding police budgets). Manifold reasons why both of those things are the way they are but if you're trying to have a discussion on a podcast about US police and the racial violence they administer then you actually SHOULD address them. Ignoring salient data to not piss off illiterate wokescolds actually sucks and if hearing that upsets you then you aren't really interested in winning jack shit.
Anyways Amber is based.
Her take and yours is garbage because it pretends Abolish the Police advocates haven't already grappled and addressed the fact that black communities obviously want security alongside the elimination of police brutality, it's also racist for assuming black people don't have nuanced takes on the subject of policing or aren't open to alternative concepts when advanced, it assumes the black monolith exists and is eternally static and intentionally misinterprets polls concerning police and security in black communities, especially in regards to black youth
So of course you dumb fuck stupidpol reducts would latch on to that shit, "hurr durr black people arne't woke, suck it wokescolds" eat shit bootlicker, socialism and the elimination of capitalism are also "minoritiarian" positions, or did that just not occur to you? lol
Well no actually. No one was insinuating that black people are incapable of nuance or that moving funds from police depts to social workers etc is impossible or bad. Of course people are down with alternatives to policing when given the option, but the efficacy of promoting that through the phrase "abolish the police" is in question. If people have immediate material public safety concerns in their neighborhood how are abolitionists going to convince them that security personnel aren't going to be as brutal as cops but just as effective? How would you convince them that this isn't just reforming the existing police depts? If people are desperate how are you going to convince them to not cede any power to cops and begin a drawn out process that might make their already dangerous neighborhoods even worse before they get better? No one is saying that our current model isn't racist and doesn't suck, but the rhetoric from abolitionists is unconvincing for many people as it stands. There are a multitude of approaches to decreasing police presence and violence that don't have to contend with the phrase "abolish the police" just like how marxists will advocate for socialism before they advocate for communism. Also one of Amber's main points is that "abolish the police" is as nebulous a movement as BLM in that it isn't highly organized and is more of a label for many different organizations with different goals and tactics. If you were involved in Occupy like she was I can see why you'd be skeptical. Reformist began coopting "abolish the police" just like they coopted "abolish ice" and M4A, so it is actually really unclear what someone actually means when they say they're supportive of police abolition. I've not just armchair posting warrioring this topic. Try talking to people who are just tired of their neighborhoods being unsafe first about disarmament and come back and tell me how well the word abolition tracks. Also I see you editing "bitch" to "bootlicker" u fucking coward fuck you.
Police abolition is not some new concept that emerged this year out of nowhere completely unformed and lacking any theoretical or practical structure, it's a body of theory that has been developing for decades and already has 20% of black people polled backing it, you and Amber's ignorance and isolation from the movement and your illusionary static racist conception of black opinion is the fuckin problem, not the theory behind the concept or its amazing successful but limited advancement
If you were involved in Occupy like she was I can see why you’d be skeptical
lol simp
Also I see you editing “bitch” to “bootlicker” u fucking coward fuck you.
Bootlicker sounded better, but I'll call you bitch right here BITCH
I'm not ignorant to the fact that it's not new and you aren't any more correct because you keep repeating yourself on that front. Anarchism is hundreds of years old and still doesn't have a proven methodology to reach its goals. I'm with police and prison abolition on its end goals but you're naïve if you think full abolition is possible without a generation or two of global socialism and delusional to try and jump to it in 2020 US. Your refusal to even engage with even the lightest good-faith criticism of the movement is why people are skeptical and indicates that you (you personally CyborgMarx) have a lot of work to do it you're going to convince anyone who isn't already 110% uncritically in your camp.
Anarchism isn't backed by 20% of black people, so let's not compare apples and oranges
I’m with police and prison abolition on its end goals but you’re naïve if you think full abolition is possible without a generation or two of global socialism and delusional to try and jump to it in 2020 US.
Good thing prison abolitionists never believed in that strawman you just made up, and "two generations of glObal sOciaLsim" well that's sure convenient, that social position of yours must be real comfy huh?
Your refusal to even engage with even the lightest good-faith criticism
You're not engaging in good faith criticism you patronizing puke, and I could give less of a fuck about "convincing" any milk colored neanderthal on the internet, as long as you wreckers are side lined in the larger DIVERSE movement I'm happy
It's funny how in English every "neutral" insult is male-coded.
Here, have some gender neutral insults:
- Asshole
- Fucker
- Shitbag
- Piece of shit
- Bastard
- Dumbass
- Dumbshit
- Shitstain
listen to the episode they did with matt taibbi about cancel culture and you'll start to get it
