[AFAIK]

The definition is quite problematic. Any drunken sexual encounter is sexual assault where both parties are victims, as neither of them had the capacity to consent. If a definition leads to an absurdity it's not really a good definition.

Is that a fair assessment? Drunk drivers are held responsible and a violent rape performed at knife point would clearly be a rape. I think the problem is that cases are ruled via a 'preponderance of the evidence', which requires 50% certainty that something happened. Just reporting the event reaches that threshold more often than not.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

From my perspective there are very few moderates, what passes for moderate is really just radical centrist like the Brookings neoliberal/neocon elitists. A real moderate position would be like an egalitarian social democratic capitalist sans the gun grabbing, the identity politics, the carbon tax, open borders, and multiculturalism. There's not many of those.

Both left and right have a fascistic streak and identitarian factions. The left has gulagists, eco-nazis, and deranged SJWs, and the right has talibangicals, racists, and market fundamentalists. Neither is doing a very good job of keeping their fanatics in check.

The right has distanced itself from its radicals for a long time with the exception perhaps of the free market radicals. You just need to look at the trend of what is considered acceptable or polite discourse.

I'm not only talking about the US here but the western world/developed countries in general.

Is that a fair assessment? Drunk drivers are held responsible and a violent rape performed at knife point would clearly be a rape. I think the problem is that cases are ruled via a 'preponderance of the evidence', which requires 50% certainty that something happened. Just reporting the event reaches that threshold more often than not.

I agree the main issue is the implementation. Still, going by the definition, the people involved can be both the victim and the perpetrator, or put differently there can be mutual rape, which is an absurdity. I cannot think of a situation where this would make sense in the real world.

[Sivad]

The right has distanced itself from its radicals for a long time with the exception perhaps of the free market radicals.

and the religious fanatics.

You just need to look at the trend of what is considered acceptable or polite discourse.

The right has toned down the rhetoric but it still does rely on the dog-whistle messaging.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

and the religious fanatics.

In the US maybe, but even there they've been losing ground.

The right has toned down the rhetoric but it still does rely on the dog-whistle messaging.

The right has denounced and distanced itself from the far right in all its variations loudly and explicitly for decades. If you have to resort to dog-whistling, you've lost.

[Sivad]

If you have to resort to dog-whistling, you've lost.

Trump won with it. Even if the shit Trump says isn't intended as thinly veiled racism, racists definitely read it that way.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Trump won with it. Even if the shit Trump says isn't intended as thinly veiled racism, racists definitely read it that way.

He won the election, but whether Trump constitutes a change in the overall trend remains to be seen. Same goes for the right wing populists in Europe.

[Sivad]

He won the election, but whether Trump constitutes a change in the overall trend remains to be seen. Same goes for the right wing populists in Europe.

That movement is getting bigger all the time, and the bigger it gets the more explicit the racism becomes. I think the left definitely goes way overboard with the accusations of racism, it's just their bullshit political tactic, but it's hard to deny that real racism is fairly prevalent on the right.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

That movement is getting bigger all the time, and the bigger it gets the more explicit the racism becomes. I think the left definitely goes way overboard with the accusations of racism, it's just their bullshit political tactic, but it's hard to deny that real racism is fairly prevalent on the right.

I'm not sure if the right has more racists than the left to be honest. However, the left can be freely racist and bigoted today without repercussions and get published in the most respectable media outlets. They haven't reined in their extremists for a long time.

[Sivad]

I'm not sure if the right has more racists than the left to be honest. However, the left can be freely racist and bigoted today without repercussions and get published in the most respectable media outlets.

Yeah, I agree. And a lot of what the left calls racist, like assimilationism and nationalism, isn't inherently racist, although I think much of it is motivated by racism.

[Kaiserschmarrn]

Yeah, I agree. And a lot of what the left calls racist, like assimilationism and nationalism, isn't inherently racist, although I think much of it is motivated by racism.

I doubt that racism is that great a motivator, although we might be using different definitions of racism. For instance, stereotypes that a person holds might be motivated by racism/prejudice or they may just be opinions based on the person's experience over time. The latter is not clear cut and the stereotypes might actually be useful for the person to navigate his surroundings. I'm also not fond of elevating racism so far above other prejudices, although I understand why that has happened. US influence in Europe was rather unhelpful in that respect.

To get back to where I started, I think the rise of the far right is the only way to get back to something resembling balance. If one side lets its extremists speak freely and influence discourse and even policy to some extent, the other side can't win when it suppresses its own radicals. That said, this two sided model may be on the way out anyway and we might be seeing new and different alliances in the future.

[One Degree]

Harvard had a separate graduation for Blacks only. A few short years ago this would be considered racism, now it is suppose to be acceptable as ‘something’. Racism seems to be a meaningless term applied to whatever you want to get your way. I agree it is no different than other prejudice except it is used today to promote racism rather than curtail it.

[Suntzu]

It only follows that since Harvard has a separate standard for Black admission that they should have a separate graduation ceremony for Blacks.