|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 06 2016 06:34 ErectedZenith wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 06 2016 06:29 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 06 2016 06:22 Plansix wrote:On March 06 2016 06:19 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Okay, cool, I see this has stopped being a discussion thread. When we have people claiming the racism doesn't exist for black people, but Asians face racism, you just have to accept all discussion is over. More like what happens when 5 individuals decided to talk over one another. His point is roughly correct, in that if you look at individual metrics for places like companies or universities, then the biases aren't nearly as large as people say it is (with variances on where you are, of course). When referring to cradle to grave, which I expect people like you are, then the systemic issues are far more pronounced. And then, of course, people like GreenHorizon who jump in talking about constitutional violations... Yeah they have been identified at every department that has been investigated, you want to just pretend like it doesn't happen? Because they haven't been identified at every departments.
Is that statement supposed to make sense?
|
On March 06 2016 06:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 04:35 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 04:21 ErectedZenith wrote:
[quote]
Xenophobic != racist. I think that most people consider race to be based on location/ nationality, and xenophobia is a dislike of people from outside countries. Barring a slight semantics argument at best, they're basically the same... And they're certainly both under the umbrella term of bigotry. I think most of the people are just scared of people blindly following books with unreasonable demands. But people that are big about "social justice" loves them because more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them. What's wrong with being an advocate for social justice? You make it sound like people who want equal and fair treatment for everyone are secretly hoping for the opposite. If their business model relies on having distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear, then absolutely. Their "business model"? That's a very cynical way of approaching people who are legitimately trying to make the world a better place. That's like saying that tutors don't want to actually help educate students- and in fact, will try to make them dumber- because that way, the tutors won't become obsolete and unemployed. It's partially paradoxical from a self-interest perspective, but it's not a matter of financial gain. Civil rights activists, much like educators, are pursuing their passion and vocation and expressing a purity of motive (barring the occasional nutjob or extremist that exists with any group of people). MLK Jr. wasn't fighting for civil rights because he was secretly in cahoots with screwing over blacks and profiting off it. You can also look at the kinds of people who are successful (financially, politically, etc.) by spreading messages of fear and hate. Donald Trump, for example, is pretty much the opposite of a sincere advocate for social justice, and his message is all about "distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear" and "more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them". Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days. And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear. Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA. While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Affirmative action would hurt Asians when it comes to college applications, but other minorities (especially blacks) also suffer from institutionalized racism and bigotry on a daily basis. They're not dichotomous.
No they don't.
There are plenty of well adjusted black people that looks out of this irrational fear and end up in extreme high positions.
The only institutionalized racism that you want to exist are the ones that are in your head.
On March 06 2016 06:35 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:34 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:31 GreenHorizons wrote:On March 06 2016 06:29 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 06 2016 06:22 Plansix wrote:On March 06 2016 06:19 WolfintheSheep wrote:
Okay, cool, I see this has stopped being a discussion thread. When we have people claiming the racism doesn't exist for black people, but Asians face racism, you just have to accept all discussion is over. More like what happens when 5 individuals decided to talk over one another. His point is roughly correct, in that if you look at individual metrics for places like companies or universities, then the biases aren't nearly as large as people say it is (with variances on where you are, of course). When referring to cradle to grave, which I expect people like you are, then the systemic issues are far more pronounced. And then, of course, people like GreenHorizon who jump in talking about constitutional violations... Yeah they have been identified at every department that has been investigated, you want to just pretend like it doesn't happen? Because they haven't been identified at every departments. Is that statement supposed to make sense?
Maybe not to you but to healthy people that does not want to be victimized and not be treated as babies.
|
What I don't understand is that everyone believe the success of Trump has anything to do with education / discourse (it's the left or the right), and not with reality/the economy. What about the fact that the poor white population is in a bad state and face a significant degradation of its life conditions ? I linked this a few month ago on the increasing death rates of the white men in the US.
That those real problems express themselves politically through the caricatural behavior of Trump and xenophobia is sad (and, to be fair, recurrent throughout history).
But you can't just wash away Trump by saying his supporters are stupid and that's it. There are people that actually need help and that could welcome another solution, less caricatural and xenophobic than Trump's.
|
On March 06 2016 06:25 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 04:35 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 04:21 ErectedZenith wrote:
[quote]
Xenophobic != racist. I think that most people consider race to be based on location/ nationality, and xenophobia is a dislike of people from outside countries. Barring a slight semantics argument at best, they're basically the same... And they're certainly both under the umbrella term of bigotry. I think most of the people are just scared of people blindly following books with unreasonable demands. But people that are big about "social justice" loves them because more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them. What's wrong with being an advocate for social justice? You make it sound like people who want equal and fair treatment for everyone are secretly hoping for the opposite. If their business model relies on having distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear, then absolutely. Their "business model"? That's a very cynical way of approaching people who are legitimately trying to make the world a better place. That's like saying that tutors don't want to actually help educate students- and in fact, will try to make them dumber- because that way, the tutors won't become obsolete and unemployed. It's partially paradoxical from a self-interest perspective, but it's not a matter of financial gain. Civil rights activists, much like educators, are pursuing their passion and vocation and expressing a purity of motive (barring the occasional nutjob or extremist that exists with any group of people). MLK Jr. wasn't fighting for civil rights because he was secretly in cahoots with screwing over blacks and profiting off it. You can also look at the kinds of people who are successful (financially, politically, etc.) by spreading messages of fear and hate. Donald Trump, for example, is pretty much the opposite of a sincere advocate for social justice, and his message is all about "distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear" and "more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them". Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days. And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear. Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA. While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Not for BLM, these people are violent as fuck. And wage gap only exists if you add up the income of both male and female and count it that way instead of dividing it up by sector/hrs/jobs. But ofc in that case women will make less money because most of them need to take care of their kids instead of working. So wage gap exists in a complete fair fashion. Nothing to protest there. The people protesting these things are either trolls that wants sane people to explain these concepts or they are in this for the money because many of these things can be easily researched. The motives of self-interest among regressive leftists in academia and professional "SJWs" are definitely strong. They have to perpetuate their own relevance for the sake of their careers and create spaces where the ideology can lead to profit.
Can you please elaborate on what you're referring to with the phrase "regressive leftists in academia"? Thanks.
|
On March 06 2016 06:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:25 oBlade wrote:On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 04:35 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
I think that most people consider race to be based on location/ nationality, and xenophobia is a dislike of people from outside countries. Barring a slight semantics argument at best, they're basically the same... And they're certainly both under the umbrella term of bigotry. I think most of the people are just scared of people blindly following books with unreasonable demands. But people that are big about "social justice" loves them because more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them. What's wrong with being an advocate for social justice? You make it sound like people who want equal and fair treatment for everyone are secretly hoping for the opposite. If their business model relies on having distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear, then absolutely. Their "business model"? That's a very cynical way of approaching people who are legitimately trying to make the world a better place. That's like saying that tutors don't want to actually help educate students- and in fact, will try to make them dumber- because that way, the tutors won't become obsolete and unemployed. It's partially paradoxical from a self-interest perspective, but it's not a matter of financial gain. Civil rights activists, much like educators, are pursuing their passion and vocation and expressing a purity of motive (barring the occasional nutjob or extremist that exists with any group of people). MLK Jr. wasn't fighting for civil rights because he was secretly in cahoots with screwing over blacks and profiting off it. You can also look at the kinds of people who are successful (financially, politically, etc.) by spreading messages of fear and hate. Donald Trump, for example, is pretty much the opposite of a sincere advocate for social justice, and his message is all about "distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear" and "more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them". Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days. And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear. Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA. While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Not for BLM, these people are violent as fuck. And wage gap only exists if you add up the income of both male and female and count it that way instead of dividing it up by sector/hrs/jobs. But ofc in that case women will make less money because most of them need to take care of their kids instead of working. So wage gap exists in a complete fair fashion. Nothing to protest there. The people protesting these things are either trolls that wants sane people to explain these concepts or they are in this for the money because many of these things can be easily researched. The motives of self-interest among regressive leftists in academia and professional "SJWs" are definitely strong. They have to perpetuate their own relevance for the sake of their careers and create spaces where the ideology can lead to profit. Can you please elaborate on what you're referring to with the phrase "regressive leftists in academia"? Thanks.
Those people that wants "safe spaces" and restrict freedom of speech in campus because they are offended by facts.
Much of those programs are funded by leftists which doesn't help the society at all.
|
On March 06 2016 06:36 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:25 oBlade wrote:On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 04:35 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
I think that most people consider race to be based on location/ nationality, and xenophobia is a dislike of people from outside countries. Barring a slight semantics argument at best, they're basically the same... And they're certainly both under the umbrella term of bigotry. I think most of the people are just scared of people blindly following books with unreasonable demands. But people that are big about "social justice" loves them because more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them. What's wrong with being an advocate for social justice? You make it sound like people who want equal and fair treatment for everyone are secretly hoping for the opposite. If their business model relies on having distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear, then absolutely. Their "business model"? That's a very cynical way of approaching people who are legitimately trying to make the world a better place. That's like saying that tutors don't want to actually help educate students- and in fact, will try to make them dumber- because that way, the tutors won't become obsolete and unemployed. It's partially paradoxical from a self-interest perspective, but it's not a matter of financial gain. Civil rights activists, much like educators, are pursuing their passion and vocation and expressing a purity of motive (barring the occasional nutjob or extremist that exists with any group of people). MLK Jr. wasn't fighting for civil rights because he was secretly in cahoots with screwing over blacks and profiting off it. You can also look at the kinds of people who are successful (financially, politically, etc.) by spreading messages of fear and hate. Donald Trump, for example, is pretty much the opposite of a sincere advocate for social justice, and his message is all about "distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear" and "more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them". Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days. And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear. Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA. While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Not for BLM, these people are violent as fuck. And wage gap only exists if you add up the income of both male and female and count it that way instead of dividing it up by sector/hrs/jobs. But ofc in that case women will make less money because most of them need to take care of their kids instead of working. So wage gap exists in a complete fair fashion. Nothing to protest there. The people protesting these things are either trolls that wants sane people to explain these concepts or they are in this for the money because many of these things can be easily researched. The motives of self-interest among regressive leftists in academia and professional "SJWs" are definitely strong. They have to perpetuate their own relevance for the sake of their careers and create spaces where the ideology can lead to profit. Can you please elaborate on what you're referring to with the phrase "regressive leftists in academia"? Thanks.
Search in everything related to post colonial studies / gender studies, you'll find plenty of those "regressive leftists" - amongst great thinkers of course, I'm not saying those field are useless.
|
On March 06 2016 06:36 WhiteDog wrote:What I don't understand is that everyone believe the success of Trump has anything to do with education / discourse (it's the left or the right), and not with reality/the economy. What about the fact that the poor white population is in a bad state and face a significant degradation of its life conditions ? I linked this a few month ago on the increasing death rates of the white men in the US. That those real problems express themselves politically through the caricatural behavior of Trump and xenophobia is sad (and, to be fair, recurrent throughout history). But you can't just wash away Trump by saying his supporters are stupid and that's it. There are people that actually need help and that could welcome another solution, less caricatural and xenophobic than Trump's.
So your saying that what (some) Trump supporters really want is to vote for Bernie?
|
On March 06 2016 06:36 ErectedZenith wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:34 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:13 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 04:35 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 04:27 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
I think that most people consider race to be based on location/ nationality, and xenophobia is a dislike of people from outside countries. Barring a slight semantics argument at best, they're basically the same... And they're certainly both under the umbrella term of bigotry. I think most of the people are just scared of people blindly following books with unreasonable demands. But people that are big about "social justice" loves them because more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them. What's wrong with being an advocate for social justice? You make it sound like people who want equal and fair treatment for everyone are secretly hoping for the opposite. If their business model relies on having distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear, then absolutely. Their "business model"? That's a very cynical way of approaching people who are legitimately trying to make the world a better place. That's like saying that tutors don't want to actually help educate students- and in fact, will try to make them dumber- because that way, the tutors won't become obsolete and unemployed. It's partially paradoxical from a self-interest perspective, but it's not a matter of financial gain. Civil rights activists, much like educators, are pursuing their passion and vocation and expressing a purity of motive (barring the occasional nutjob or extremist that exists with any group of people). MLK Jr. wasn't fighting for civil rights because he was secretly in cahoots with screwing over blacks and profiting off it. You can also look at the kinds of people who are successful (financially, politically, etc.) by spreading messages of fear and hate. Donald Trump, for example, is pretty much the opposite of a sincere advocate for social justice, and his message is all about "distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear" and "more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them". Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days. And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear. Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA. While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Affirmative action would hurt Asians when it comes to college applications, but other minorities (especially blacks) also suffer from institutionalized racism and bigotry on a daily basis. They're not dichotomous. No they don't. There are plenty of well adjusted black people that looks out of this irrational fear and end up in extreme high positions. The only institutionalized racism that you want to exist are the ones that are in your head.
In my head? What?
Just because there exists some "well-adjusted black people" doesn't mean that racism doesn't exist lol.
Out of curiosity... true or false/ agree or disagree: "The fact that Obama is our president, Oprah is successful, and Ben Carson ran for president proves that there isn't truly racism against blacks in this country"???
|
On March 06 2016 06:40 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:36 WhiteDog wrote:What I don't understand is that everyone believe the success of Trump has anything to do with education / discourse (it's the left or the right), and not with reality/the economy. What about the fact that the poor white population is in a bad state and face a significant degradation of its life conditions ? I linked this a few month ago on the increasing death rates of the white men in the US. That those real problems express themselves politically through the caricatural behavior of Trump and xenophobia is sad (and, to be fair, recurrent throughout history). But you can't just wash away Trump by saying his supporters are stupid and that's it. There are people that actually need help and that could welcome another solution, less caricatural and xenophobic than Trump's. So your saying that what (some) Trump supporters really want is to vote for Bernie?
No I'm saying some people might have real source of discontent, and that maybe they feel the left do not speak to them.
|
Well gl hf with this garbage. We've regressed to the point where waving away systemic racism against Black and Hispanic people is just par for the course. Fuck that.
|
On March 06 2016 06:34 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:23 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:19 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:16 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:17 ErectedZenith wrote:
[quote]
If their business model relies on having distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear, then absolutely. Their "business model"? That's a very cynical way of approaching people who are legitimately trying to make the world a better place. That's like saying that tutors don't want to actually help educate students- and in fact, will try to make them dumber- because that way, the tutors won't become obsolete and unemployed. It's partially paradoxical from a self-interest perspective, but it's not a matter of financial gain. Civil rights activists, much like educators, are pursuing their passion and vocation and expressing a purity of motive (barring the occasional nutjob or extremist that exists with any group of people). MLK Jr. wasn't fighting for civil rights because he was secretly in cahoots with screwing over blacks and profiting off it. You can also look at the kinds of people who are successful (financially, politically, etc.) by spreading messages of fear and hate. Donald Trump, for example, is pretty much the opposite of a sincere advocate for social justice, and his message is all about "distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear" and "more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them". Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days. And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear. Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA. While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Not for BLM, these people are violent as fuck. And wage gap only exists if you add up the income of both male and female and count it that way instead of dividing it up by sector/hrs/jobs. But ofc in that case women will make less money because most of them need to take care of their kids instead of working. So wage gap exists in a complete fair fashion. Nothing to protest there. The people protesting these things are either trolls that wants sane people to explain these concepts or they are in this for the money because many of these things can be easily researched. The ignorance/dishonesty in this post is astounding. It should tell you all you need to know about how interested ErectedZenith is in dealing with reality. You are just mad because I'm right. You're factually wrong on institutional racism not targeting blacks, and you're factually wrong on the wage gap not existing after taking into about sector/hrs/jobs. You simply have no idea of what you're talking about. No, I'm absolutely right and you know it but is plain embarrassed to admit it. You are embarrassing yourself. Institutional racism is real, and is well documented in countless scientific studies. Open Google Scholar and go educate yourself if you're that uninformed. A few examples among the first hits: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5. The same is true of the wage gap after controlling for several variables. First of all, studies have shown that overall there remains a pay gap between men and women for the same jobs, even taking into account various factors like the number of hours worked, the qualifications, etc. ( see for example the Invest in women, invest in America - A Comprehensive Review of Women In the U.S. Economy report by the U.S. Congress' Joint Economic Committee). A difference remains, some of which is attributable to gender discrimination (for example in the hiring process). And with regards to STEM jobs specifically, here's another study which shows gender pay disparity in STEM jobs even after controlling for hours, age, experience, education, etc. Second, the existence of statistical differences in occupations between men and women is not at all an argument against the idea that there are differences in earnings between the two that need to be addressed. The point is precisely that social norms and representations about both genders still permeate our societies and contribute to the choices made by individuals with regards to their studies and careers. The pay gap is therefore very real, and it needs to be addressed by targeting both gender discrimination at (and to access) work and the cultural factors that play a role in the professional trajectories of men and women. To admins: isn't declaring that institutional racism affecting African-Americans doesn't exist a bannable offense? Seriously, this is getting beyond ridiculous.
Thank you for posting a well-informed, evidence-based comment.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
i talked about that a lot whitedog
|
The White House has agreed to release a redacted version of a policy President Barack Obama issued in 2013 laying out basic principles for the lethal U.S. drone operations overseas.
The administration disclosed its plans to release the Presidential Policy Guidance document in a court filing Friday in a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union.
In May 2013, the White House released a fact sheet about the Obama directive but refused to release any portion of the actual memo.
Last month, Manhattan-based U.S. District Court Judge Colleen MacMahon issued an order requiring the Justice Department to produce the PPG document (sometimes called the Playbook), as well as two others, for in-camera review by her.
In a letter to the judge Friday, government lawyers said officials had long been debating making an edited version of the policy public and they have now decided to do so.
"Before receiving the Court’s February 25, 2016 Order, the Government was engaged in extensive discussions regarding the possibility of discretionarily releasing portions of the PPG. Lengthy, high-level,inter-agency coordination was necessary to ensure that the sensitive national security classification equities contained in that document remain protected. Following those deliberations, the Government has determined to waive privilege," Justice Department attorneys wrote.
The government has dropped its claims of attorney-client privilege and deliberative process privilege with respect to the drone-related memo — claims MacMahon signaled in her order that she was inclined to reject. Instead, the administration is claiming protection for portions of the memo under an exemption for classified information and another for intelligence sources and methods.
In the past, the Obama administration has run into difficulty with overly broad privilege claims. In 2013, a federal judge in Washington rejected the White House's efforts to keep secret an unclassified foreign aid and development directive sent to numerous government agencies. The government chose not to appeal the ruling and released the order.
Source
|
There was once a time in my life where I lamented how asians are negatively affected by affirmative action. But now I'm not 16.
|
On March 06 2016 06:42 oneofthem wrote:
i talked about that a lot whitedog
I was just reacting to the last few pages, didn't actually read everything.
|
On March 06 2016 06:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:34 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:23 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:19 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:16 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 05:29 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
[quote]
Their "business model"? That's a very cynical way of approaching people who are legitimately trying to make the world a better place. That's like saying that tutors don't want to actually help educate students- and in fact, will try to make them dumber- because that way, the tutors won't become obsolete and unemployed. It's partially paradoxical from a self-interest perspective, but it's not a matter of financial gain. Civil rights activists, much like educators, are pursuing their passion and vocation and expressing a purity of motive (barring the occasional nutjob or extremist that exists with any group of people). MLK Jr. wasn't fighting for civil rights because he was secretly in cahoots with screwing over blacks and profiting off it.
You can also look at the kinds of people who are successful (financially, politically, etc.) by spreading messages of fear and hate. Donald Trump, for example, is pretty much the opposite of a sincere advocate for social justice, and his message is all about "distrust among people so they can make money from people's fear" and "more diversity = more problems among people = more business for them". Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days. And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear. Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA. While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Not for BLM, these people are violent as fuck. And wage gap only exists if you add up the income of both male and female and count it that way instead of dividing it up by sector/hrs/jobs. But ofc in that case women will make less money because most of them need to take care of their kids instead of working. So wage gap exists in a complete fair fashion. Nothing to protest there. The people protesting these things are either trolls that wants sane people to explain these concepts or they are in this for the money because many of these things can be easily researched. The ignorance/dishonesty in this post is astounding. It should tell you all you need to know about how interested ErectedZenith is in dealing with reality. You are just mad because I'm right. You're factually wrong on institutional racism not targeting blacks, and you're factually wrong on the wage gap not existing after taking into about sector/hrs/jobs. You simply have no idea of what you're talking about. No, I'm absolutely right and you know it but is plain embarrassed to admit it. You are embarrassing yourself. Institutional racism is real, and is well documented in countless scientific studies. Open Google Scholar and go educate yourself if you're that uninformed. A few examples among the first hits: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5. The same is true of the wage gap after controlling for several variables. First of all, studies have shown that overall there remains a pay gap between men and women for the same jobs, even taking into account various factors like the number of hours worked, the qualifications, etc. ( see for example the Invest in women, invest in America - A Comprehensive Review of Women In the U.S. Economy report by the U.S. Congress' Joint Economic Committee). A difference remains, some of which is attributable to gender discrimination (for example in the hiring process). And with regards to STEM jobs specifically, here's another study which shows gender pay disparity in STEM jobs even after controlling for hours, age, experience, education, etc. Second, the existence of statistical differences in occupations between men and women is not at all an argument against the idea that there are differences in earnings between the two that need to be addressed. The point is precisely that social norms and representations about both genders still permeate our societies and contribute to the choices made by individuals with regards to their studies and careers. The pay gap is therefore very real, and it needs to be addressed by targeting both gender discrimination at (and to access) work and the cultural factors that play a role in the professional trajectories of men and women. To admins: isn't declaring that institutional racism affecting African-Americans doesn't exist a bannable offense? Seriously, this is getting beyond ridiculous. Thank you for posting a well-informed, evidence-based comment.
Which you had to pay for.
This is nothing but making people to pay for bogus claims.
|
On March 06 2016 06:30 Kyadytim wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 05:23 oBlade wrote:On March 06 2016 04:49 Acrofales wrote:
Is ISIS a problem? Absolutely. And a very real aspect of it is its religious philosophy, which needs to be dealt with. But equating ISIS to all muslims is about as useful to equating the westboro baptists to all Christians. Nobody makes that equivalence. It's a self-serving strawman. Rather, there are problems in the Muslim world, and ISIS represents the combination of just about all the worst of those problems at once. Comparing the WBC to ISIS would be a fair analogy if the WBC did anything besides hold up signs calling soldiers "faggots" which is so common on the internet that I could probably use that fact to paint the WBC as an Xbox Live rather than religious problem and you would lap it up. Radical Islam has a near-monopoly in being the root cause or a factor of terrorism worldwide. I think a large part of that can be attributed to the way that similar acts from radical Christians or Jews are performed as the acts of nations, such as some of Israel's actions with regards to Palestine, or the US drone bombings that have some Pakistani kids scared of blue skies. Support for drone strikes correlates noticeably with belief that the US is fundamentally a Christian nation (we're not) or support for making Christianity the national religion of the US. Implicitly, radical Christians who want to go to war with Islam and exterminate Islam don't have to take independent action that can be labeled as terrorism, because they've got the government doing it for them. Of course, the government could be doing more of it. Thus Donald Trump winning primaries after saying that he'd target the families of terrorists, or Ted Cruz saying that the US shouldn't obey the rules of engagement or talking about bombing ISIS until the sand glows in the dark. By the way, that last bit, the glowing sand? That obliquely references the common but incorrect belief that radioactive sand glows in the dark. Basically, while terrorists acts are horrendous and reprehensible, they're the natural result of asymmetric warfare. The US is killing civilians. The people of the nations we're targeting are killing civilians. Because the US is in a position of strength, our kills, such as bombing a Doctors Without Borders hospital are labeled things like "tragic errors" or "collateral damage" and the other side's kills are labeled "terrorism." To be very clear, I am not defending or justifying the attacks listed on the linked wikipedia article. I am saying that in many ways, government actions of non-Muslims-majority nations against Muslim-majority nations are comparably bad, but whitewashed because they're government actions.
The rhetoric used in primary debates in the USA is really just that - candidates who don't get daily briefings in the White House about what's going on are in no position to do anything but blow steam. They sound retarded, but they're not laying out policy proposals when they do that. Donald Trump has said 500 other things getting where he is in the primaries.
"Collateral damage" is often criticized for being euphemistic. I'm going to use it because I think it's a fair enough term without making a value judgment about killing civilians, which I think most people would prefer never happened. The reason we differentiate "collateral damage" and "terrorism" is that one is deliberate. The military has systems, and I'll be the first to say I'm sure they could be better, need more whistleblowers, and so on, to punish abuses. What I believe you're ignoring is that most terrorism in the Muslim world is actually not directed towards the West, so what I'm getting at is a framework built on the assumption that violence in the Muslim world is fundamentally our "fault" isn't wise.
On March 06 2016 06:28 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:25 oBlade wrote:
The motives of self-interest among regressive leftists in academia and professional "SJWs" are definitely strong. They have to perpetuate their own relevance for the sake of their careers and create spaces where the ideology can lead to profit. Yeah, totally just getting our constitutional rights violated regularly for our own self interests... If people spent a fraction of the time dealing with racism as they did complaining about getting called out for it the shit would be resolved.
Can you help me understand how this woman's constitutional rights were trod on?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2016/02/25/mizzou-professor-who-pushed-reporter-away-from-protesters-is-fired/
|
On March 06 2016 06:41 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:40 Gorsameth wrote:On March 06 2016 06:36 WhiteDog wrote:What I don't understand is that everyone believe the success of Trump has anything to do with education / discourse (it's the left or the right), and not with reality/the economy. What about the fact that the poor white population is in a bad state and face a significant degradation of its life conditions ? I linked this a few month ago on the increasing death rates of the white men in the US. That those real problems express themselves politically through the caricatural behavior of Trump and xenophobia is sad (and, to be fair, recurrent throughout history). But you can't just wash away Trump by saying his supporters are stupid and that's it. There are people that actually need help and that could welcome another solution, less caricatural and xenophobic than Trump's. So your saying that what (some) Trump supporters really want is to vote for Bernie? No I'm saying some people might have real source of discontent, and that maybe they feel the left do not speak to them.
I agree with you that poor people in America (be they white or black) are in a bad state but to change that you need government assistance. Cutting taxes across the board is not going to significantly help these people since the poor already pay very little in taxes.
Free Healthcare, cheaper educations, higher min wage are all things that can help improve their lives. The irony is that they all policies of the left, not the right. So why exactly are these people still wanting to vote for Republicans? Why are they rallying to a man who wants to cut taxes on the rich and build a wall to keep out foreigners?
edit: Its poor uninsured people with no chance of ever getting coverage because of per-existing conditions protesting against the ACA all over again. its utterly backwards.
|
On March 06 2016 06:46 ErectedZenith wrote:Show nested quote +On March 06 2016 06:42 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 06:34 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:23 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:19 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:17 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:16 kwizach wrote:On March 06 2016 06:08 ErectedZenith wrote:On March 06 2016 06:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On March 06 2016 05:38 ErectedZenith wrote:
[quote]
Call it cynical but that's what a lot of people are doing these days.
And if they can get away with it, then good for them to figure out a way to make money out of people's fear.
Difference between Donald Trump's message on figuring out what the fuck is going on in the middle east before doing any extreme importation is actually based upon evidence that it is indeed a clusterfuck in the middle east and it probably isn't a smart idea to even think to take an action that might pollute USA.
While there are plenty of people like BLM that says institutionalized racism for blacks exist while there are affirmative action for them or feminists freaks who yells about wage gap without studying how economics work.
But I view them the same light as I view the hardcore religious folks. Somehow all these groups have figured a way to make money out of irrational fears. First of all, institutionalized racism does exist, and the wage gap does exist. At least, in the United States they do. Second, there is a big difference between social justice warriors going over the top and opportunists hoping that prejudice is perpetuated so that they can benefit financially. You were claiming that the latter occurs regularly, whereas at least SJWs have a purity of motive. Yeah institutional racism exists but not for black people. Its for Asians that have to get higher GPA than blacks to go into the same program/school. But ain't nobody protesting about that. Not for BLM, these people are violent as fuck. And wage gap only exists if you add up the income of both male and female and count it that way instead of dividing it up by sector/hrs/jobs. But ofc in that case women will make less money because most of them need to take care of their kids instead of working. So wage gap exists in a complete fair fashion. Nothing to protest there. The people protesting these things are either trolls that wants sane people to explain these concepts or they are in this for the money because many of these things can be easily researched. The ignorance/dishonesty in this post is astounding. It should tell you all you need to know about how interested ErectedZenith is in dealing with reality. You are just mad because I'm right. You're factually wrong on institutional racism not targeting blacks, and you're factually wrong on the wage gap not existing after taking into about sector/hrs/jobs. You simply have no idea of what you're talking about. No, I'm absolutely right and you know it but is plain embarrassed to admit it. You are embarrassing yourself. Institutional racism is real, and is well documented in countless scientific studies. Open Google Scholar and go educate yourself if you're that uninformed. A few examples among the first hits: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5. The same is true of the wage gap after controlling for several variables. First of all, studies have shown that overall there remains a pay gap between men and women for the same jobs, even taking into account various factors like the number of hours worked, the qualifications, etc. ( see for example the Invest in women, invest in America - A Comprehensive Review of Women In the U.S. Economy report by the U.S. Congress' Joint Economic Committee). A difference remains, some of which is attributable to gender discrimination (for example in the hiring process). And with regards to STEM jobs specifically, here's another study which shows gender pay disparity in STEM jobs even after controlling for hours, age, experience, education, etc. Second, the existence of statistical differences in occupations between men and women is not at all an argument against the idea that there are differences in earnings between the two that need to be addressed. The point is precisely that social norms and representations about both genders still permeate our societies and contribute to the choices made by individuals with regards to their studies and careers. The pay gap is therefore very real, and it needs to be addressed by targeting both gender discrimination at (and to access) work and the cultural factors that play a role in the professional trajectories of men and women. To admins: isn't declaring that institutional racism affecting African-Americans doesn't exist a bannable offense? Seriously, this is getting beyond ridiculous. Thank you for posting a well-informed, evidence-based comment. Which you had to pay for. This is nothing but making people to pay for bogus claims.
I don't even know what that means. Pay for what? Facts? Can you respond to the specific facts and articles cited in that comment? Or are you just going to brush it all off dismissively and not defend your positions?
|
The Ferguson Police Department was routinely violating the constitutional rights of its black residents.
Source
U.S. Department of Justice found that there was reasonable cause to believe that there was a pattern and practice of excessive force in Cleveland that violated the U.S. Constitution and federal law.
Source
Explain how that's not systemic violations of people constitutional rights.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
