Tuesday, December 11, 2007
shut up
i was watching during this. apparently theres a controversy about fried chicken. how stupid are people? theyre so readily searching for a fight theyre taking shots at arthur blank. arthur blank is willing to take vick back if he cleans up. that was the leg all the people who were supporting vick had to stand on. now everyones ready to forgive if he can clean his ass up, and they look for someone else to bother. i actually laughed when they played the clip on nfl live. if its worth being talked about, i think its worth saying that its funny; stereotypes like black people liking fried chicken are comically below adults, and especially a clearly not racist guy in arthr blank. i mean the guy is imbeded in atlanta in tons of different kinds of charities including inner city education; any racism that kind of man exudes is probably deserved. huh, such as dog fighting. dog fighting is stereotypical of stupid southern people. often stupid black southern people. if it was a racist comment, blank had every right in saying it because vick out himself in a position where he is reduced to an idiot, because he made idiotic decisions. when you kill dogs, you open yourself up to as many immature insults anyone can think of. with that said, blank is so above this, and expects the public to be as well, that he can say things like that without worrying about it. fried chicken racist jokes are for 7th graders. not affluent adults. he knows this. the idiots who are making a deal of this apparently didnt get what they needed to out of the rest of their school. maybe if we stop worrying about people who are doing more than we could ever dream of for our communities and their possibly racist comments, and do something ourselves, our kids who grow up to be nfl superstars will know better because they grew up in a better environtment.
and a last thing. given that blank is a generous philanthropist in the city of atlanta, mainy in the poor and inner city; who cares if he hates everyone besides himself because they dont look exactly like him. because theyre black or red or yellow or blonde or whatever. hes done so much more for society than the self righteous idiots who complain about his possible racism he can do whatever the hell he wants. if he is a racist, thats his own shit, he doesnt show it whatsoever in his actions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
eh. i dont think the fact that he throws money at Atlanta charities give him a free pass to say stupid shit. from a kantian perspective blank is most likely giving to charity for the benefit of not coming off as a stingy motherfucker. he isnt giving to charity because it is his duty and he has no immediate inclination. his inclination is that it saves face in the long run when he does stupid shit. plus it makes people like you respect him, no to mention the huge tax break. kant's theory kind of falls apart with people like blank because they have so much wealth that any thing they do with it will not be seen as having no immediate inclination. maybe people shouldnt have so much money.
kant was duly influenced by the customs of his time like any great mind. in the 1700's the wealthy were all born into money and the image of the aristocracy was quite important. kant may never have dreamed that a practically operating country like america would be possible, let alone virtuous people who are actually wealthy and willing to be philanthropic. formalists need slight change over years to adapt to new conditions, unfortunately kant died early in the 19th century, and has had no such opportunities to adapt to the 21st century.
furthermore, i didnt ask kant. if i wanted to hear his opinion, it would be too bad for me, hes dead. i asked for peoples opinion. people who are actually aware that blank is a legitimately compassionate and philanthropic personality. arthur blank didnt suddenly have an epiphany that hed follow immanuel kants archaic opinions of wealth in his actions because he's void of his own mind. whether he is actually a genuinely caring person or self-interested i suppose is of interest to some, but as far as i know about him he is, and as far as the money he's given the people who are bitching about his comment; theyre the beneficiaries of his charities, whatever their motivations be.
a distant (that is, not close relation) philanthropic personality, who fulfills all and more of his duties and responsibilities to the community, is an 'it' to me. i dont seek to know him, nor will i ever, he is providing me with services, and furthermore, i care not for the motivations inside of him, for he could easily exude whatever he pleases and i would never know if he were being honest; as long as hes contributing, what the hell do i care what he believes, its his right to do so. and its also his right to say fried chicken on national television. fried chicken is a particularly fattening food. that he said it proves that he is not a racist anyway, because he knew he was in the public eye, and if he wished to be prtrayed as one he would be, and if not he wouldnt; the matter is below him, and he knows it. my point is that people should stop worrying about it, whether hes a racist or not is clearly irrelevant to the actions he takes.
i heard a story the other day that foucault admitted on his death bed that he was a heideggerian, which was compromising thing for a french philosopher, yet he was still a huge figure in french philosophy, despite this. that he was a heideggerian at heart made no difference to the french philosophic community directly, it was irrelevant, just like blank; his deeds do not represent racism, so why the hell should anyone care thats his bussiness, if we start worrying about other shit than a philanthropists demons well do a lot more than worrying about his use of the "slur" 'fried chicken'...
the kant arguement was kinda a tool to help me study for my final...
Post a Comment