US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2185

On August 10 2015 12:54 Danglars wrote:

Quickly, cite your statistics or he'll level that racist charge again! You must hate black people to even bring up candidate exposure and likelihood to vote!

It's getting to the point that merely holding opinions in politics opens you up to these racist/sexist charges. And drat, I was already beaten to it on that point.

On August 09 2015 05:19 lastpuritan wrote:
I'd like to hear your thoughts on this.
In my amateur opinion, Bernie Sanders is correct about open borders being a Koch wet dream. That the far-left also wants open borders is regardless. It is a question of outcome, intent, and context. Different intents can pursue the same means if they believe the outcome will be in their favor. Depending on the context, both of them can be right at different times; but, for now, one of them just has to be wrong.
When destroying well-paying industry at home to chase cheap, unregulated labor abroad isn't enough, you can let the cheap, unregulated labor come to you. In both instances, you play the working class against itself, and their consciousness becomes instead one of nationalism -- another end-game of the far-right. The idea of international labor is dead if workers in one country are primarily concerned with protecting their piddling slice of the pie from poorer workers somewhere else. One mission of the corporate class is to profit financially from cheap labor while profiting politically from the xenophobia it produces.

It strikes me as a dangerous game, because, if the nationalism goes too far, it will produce protectionist policies, perhaps via a nationalist candidate or movement that, like a marionette, grows too big for its strings. Protectionism was the old weapon of choice before the corporate class went global. Companies no longer need borders to protect their profits -- borders are in the way of profits -- but workers, in an odd way, do need borders. An irony for me to study further; along with the essential question: how can borders be transcended in a way conducive to the happiness of the working class? Under a neoliberal economy, both nationalism and protectionism have to be shoved aside for talk of unity, deregulation, and the kind of globalization for the 1% that leftists do not like.
And then we come full circle. The far-left believes in globalization, as does the far-right, but they believe in it in different contexts, and want it at different times in the hopes it will achieve different things. So if someone on the left says they oppose open borders, do not confuse that for opposing the rights of immigrants to travel and work (though, don't assume of them any sense of internationalism, either). In the ever-shifting dialectic of economies, the rights of immigrants to travel and work, without the necessary privileges and protections of the nation-state, are but rights to further exploitation, striding fully with the xenophobic paranoia the corporate class at once wishes to foment and control -- distinctions I imagine they would start a war over.

The open borders of the left are ones which afford equal protection under the law. The open borders of the right look very, very different.

On August 10 2015 14:35 GreenHorizons wrote:
I love this debate it's like a secret window into the semi-public white perspective.

Keep it up. Plan, keep fighting the good fight. America needs you to.

I invite danglars to legal mutual combat if he ever is interested (drunk post).

You're probably not criticizing me here (but if you are, feel free to expand), but commenting anyway; you have an annoyingly high frequency of making posts in this thread that amount to "look at all the white people saying dumb things."

On August 10 2015 15:28 Danglars wrote:

I must repeat Plansix's warning about any race-based or demographic-based charge. Talking about windows into white perspectives might be borderline racist unless you provide some citations.

If this is the character of your drunk posting, keep it up (I mean, borderline racism aside. I don't mean to support your semi-racist rhetoric. The following should not be construed as support of you slandering racial groups while drunk.)

On August 09 2015 07:24 WhiteDog wrote:

If both the Koch and Bernie Sanders desire to "open borders" it just means that they are both liberals. You can be a liberal from an economic standpoint or from a political standpoint, but in practice the both are oftentime really similar - which also explains the inhability of the "far left" to clearly oppose capitalism (the term left was a joke and an insult in Marx's familly, as pointed out by Jenny Marx's letters).

On August 10 2015 15:30 GreenHorizons wrote:


Nope, no one in particular really.

I'm just enjoying the insight. the whole "PC" argument obviously comes from white privilege and possibly a little bit of internalized racism, but it is helpful in understanding how people arrive at the conclusions they do.




That's cute, invitation stands though

EDIT: We could stream it, for TL to watch too.

On August 10 2015 14:12 cLutZ wrote:
No evidence submitted by the "PC" crowd. As usual.

On August 10 2015 14:12 cLutZ wrote:
No evidence submitted by the "PC" crowd. As usual.

On August 10 2015 14:32 Slaughter wrote:


You didn't either until prompted so why are you taking the flippant route? You didn't even post any evidence yourself supporting your assertion about women in science.

But here ya go.

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0102172

http://blogs.nature.com/soapboxscience/2014/09/04/nature-vs-nurture-girls-and-stem

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0131613

http://m.chronicle.com/article/The-Myth-That-Academic-Science/231413/?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en

http://www.researchgate.net/publication/234248257_One_Woman's_Life_in_Science

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/half-black-latina-scientists-mistaken-janitors-assistants-n388151?cid=sm_fb

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2015/07/01/tim_hunt_nobel_laureate_s_comments_about_girls_and_science.html?utm_campaign=trueAnthem: Trending Content&utm_content=5593d89b04d301076e000001&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

http://www.aauw.org/2015/06/11/john-or-jennifer/

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/sex-and-race-discrimination-in-academia-starts-even-before-grad-school/

https://theconversation.com/most-people-think-man-when-they-think-scientist-how-can-we-kill-the-stereotype-42393

http://www.dailylife.com.au/news-and-views/news-features/scientists-have-paper-on-gender-bias-rejected-because-theyre-both-women-20150430-1mxi6t

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/07/girls-stem-scientist-entrepreneur_n_7005614.html?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000047

http://othersociologist.com/2015/04/16/myth-about-women-in-science/?hc_location=ufi

http://phys.org/news/2014-11-anthropologist-uncovers-issues-gender-inequality.html

http://discov-her.com/en/article/five-stereotypes-negatively-affecting-women-in-science

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-selvidge/pushing-women-and-people-_b_5840392.html?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000043&ir=Science

On August 10 2015 19:28 kwizach wrote:

Your use of "PC" is very telling. Apparently the people who do not subscribe to a sexist worldview, and even more so those who actively denounce and fight against sexism, are "the PC crowd". No, see, there's already a name for that: not being sexist. If you get called out for your sexist prejudices, the other person is not being "PC" - he or she is simply calling you out for your sexism. It's funny how many of the complaints about there being too much political correctness actually translate into "we'd like to be able to spout sexist/racist nonsense without being criticized for it".

Your ridiculous assertion that gender disparities in STEM fields have "nothing to do with culture" has been debunked by decades of scientific research in sociology and other disciplines (anthropology and social psychology, for example). Do take the time to read some of the links posted by Slaughter, because you clearly do not know what you're talking about here.

On August 10 2015 19:56 Plansix wrote:

Rekt. Also, I would point out that this isn't some ground breaking revelation. Any group homologous group/culture is, be it gender or race, will have these problems. Racism exists in both China and Japan towards people not from those countries. Sexism exists in the military because it has been made up of men for centuries and made the same "biological predisposition" arguments. Every profession that has women break into has to deal with sexism. STEM and the Tech industry are no different.



There is a great chrome extension that chances PC and Politically Correct into "treat people with respect." It makes the internet and posts like that one very funny.