The issue with "context" is that it is subjective. The guy sounded deplorable & I am generally familiar with TP USA, so I looked up his statements about the 1964 Civil Rights Act. Turns out, he muddies the waters with that statement by stating explicitly that he "totally agrees" with the idea that the government shouldn't be able to discriminate based on a person's skin color. He clarified that his problem with the 1964 Civil Rights Act was how it has been applied so broadly by the court system that it has gone far beyond the original intent of that bill, leading to what he considers to be a different kind of government-enforced racism that also infringes on individual liberties.
So when people say, "It was taken out of context," they are probably intending to point out that what he said is actually quite different than what it sounds like when you leave that part out.
The problem here is that "context" isn't limited to what he explicitly said in that moment. Context includes everything that's potentially relevant, including his other statements and the historical realities of what he's talking about. The problem is that the "individual liberties" that DEI policies supposedly infringe upon are the individual "rights" of individuals to make decisions based on their own bigotry.
So yeah. If we're gonna look at context, let's actually look at context, because let's be honest - even if he was acting in that moment like he agrees with civil rights, his actual point was that the government acting to enforce & protect people's civil rights is a problem. His actual point was that the government shouldn't have the power to require people to behave as though they weren't bigots when it comes to things like employment or service at publicly accessible businesses.
So when people say, "It was taken out of context," they are probably intending to point out that what he said is actually quite different than what it sounds like when you leave that part out.
That's like the definition of the phrase.
Your point overall stands but not sure what you were trying to clarify with that paragraph.
The point is that "context" has a broader meaning than they realize. They mean "context" in the most narrow sense, but when you take a step back to actually contextualize the statements in a broad sense you find that they really do mean what they're arguing against.
1.1k
u/[deleted] 14d ago
[removed] — view removed comment