|
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 May 18 2016 08:34 GreenHorizons wrote:
Instead we have the other extreme where people are thinking it's really white men who are at the mercy of a new and destructive "black/female/etc... privilege"
It's demonstrated every time this topic comes up here and just about anywhere else.
Because men are falling behind in higher education, men dominate suicides, Asians face the highest standards in academia, and so forth. Many people are suspicious of the ability of the revolutionary left, which comes along every couple decades with newfound righteousness, to understand the world (and therefore fix anything) when their starting assumptions are things like privilege is oppressive.
On May 18 2016 08:39 Nyxisto wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 08:20 LegalLord wrote:On May 18 2016 06:02 GreenHorizons wrote:
So if the question is how do we accelerate that, I'd say by making sure we don't allow those views to be treated like they are worthy of discussion. We need to treat the absurdity of modern racism in the same way we would treat the idea of re-enslaving people (as that's basically what's happened with private prisons anyway). That's exactly the right way to make people much more polarized and willing to vote for reactionary candidates who promise to reverse that issue. Ignore people and they will push more strongly for their position, and furthermore it's a slippery slope. If you try to label everything as "racist" and unworthy of being taken seriously, you're going to go down a very shitty road. Worried about economic issues with Syrian immigrants? Racist! Worried about crime from Mexican immigrants? Racist! Argue that BLM has a very shitty element to it that has encouraged lots of petty crime and poorly thought out accusations of "privilege omfgz" that don't hold up to scrutiny? Racist! Keep doing this, and it's no wonder that genuine race-related issues get drowned out in the process. Being a shitty messenger is not a good way to get your message to have any traction, and crying "racism" on every other issue is a great way to make a message that may otherwise seem reasonable to be drowned out. Tell people for a hundred years that they can't have nice things because of their skin color, and when they actually start demanding things because of their skin color tell them that it doesn't matter and that they should ignore it, because the majority of the society doesn't mind being reminded of their misdeeds and they don't want to give all of the good stuff up that they have now
What do people deserve because of their skin color? 
On May 18 2016 08:39 Nyxisto wrote:
Maybe for once let the affected group lead the discourse? Why do the ones least affected get to determine what the "right way" to protest is? Could be an Onion headline "Angry man tells feminist what forms of criticism are acceptable"
I don't know that feminism is considered an affected group, but replace "Angry man" with "woman," then, would that be okay?
|
On May 18 2016 10:38 zlefin wrote:
It annoys me how much of the behavior of congress would, if done in a court of law, be grounds for contempt of court. imho, Congress should have higher standards than your regular run of the mill court of law.
(watching more c-span, this time some hearings on the Iran nuclear deal, and some drivel a republican is spouting which is thoroughly unsound).
the one time I watched C-span it was some guy giving a 40 minute speech on peak oil. I had no idea what he was even trying to point out or argue for.
|
On May 18 2016 10:38 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 10:35 Mohdoo wrote:On May 18 2016 10:33 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:On May 18 2016 10:30 Mohdoo wrote:On May 18 2016 10:03 Karis Vas Ryaar wrote:
its proportional so a basic draw doesn't help bernie other then maybe give him a reason to stay in the race (It's good pr but thats about it). I just wish California could have it's primary already so we could stop all this (pretty sure everything til then is essentially meaningless) Bernie losing KY prevents him from saying the revolution is finally happening and prevents him from pretending "winning" is all about the most recent primary, not delegates. That being said, he's about to body slam Oregon. Hard. Despite my best efforts </3 Oregon voters are like 90 percent white I think. It's expected I would be shocked to find we are only 90% white. found what I was referencing from 538 "That’s because whites made up about 90 percent of Obama voters in the 2008 general election." Oregon's nice though, I'm going to school there in the fall
Off-topic
+ Show Spoiler +
Oregon is absolutely amazing. I have lived in many states. Oregon outclasses them all by a long shot. It is beautiful, crime is minimal and its just plain wonderful. And some of the best weed in the country. Welcome!
edit: *puts hands in the air to give my energy to Jefferson county*
|
On May 18 2016 10:40 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 08:34 GreenHorizons wrote:
Instead we have the other extreme where people are thinking it's really white men who are at the mercy of a new and destructive "black/female/etc... privilege"
It's demonstrated every time this topic comes up here and just about anywhere else. Because men are falling behind in higher education, men dominate suicides, Asians face the highest standards in academia, and so forth. Many people are suspicious of the ability of the revolutionary left, which comes along every couple decades with newfound righteousness, to understand the world (and therefore fix anything) when their starting assumptions are things like privilege is oppressive. Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 08:39 Nyxisto wrote:On May 18 2016 08:20 LegalLord wrote:On May 18 2016 06:02 GreenHorizons wrote:
So if the question is how do we accelerate that, I'd say by making sure we don't allow those views to be treated like they are worthy of discussion. We need to treat the absurdity of modern racism in the same way we would treat the idea of re-enslaving people (as that's basically what's happened with private prisons anyway). That's exactly the right way to make people much more polarized and willing to vote for reactionary candidates who promise to reverse that issue. Ignore people and they will push more strongly for their position, and furthermore it's a slippery slope. If you try to label everything as "racist" and unworthy of being taken seriously, you're going to go down a very shitty road. Worried about economic issues with Syrian immigrants? Racist! Worried about crime from Mexican immigrants? Racist! Argue that BLM has a very shitty element to it that has encouraged lots of petty crime and poorly thought out accusations of "privilege omfgz" that don't hold up to scrutiny? Racist! Keep doing this, and it's no wonder that genuine race-related issues get drowned out in the process. Being a shitty messenger is not a good way to get your message to have any traction, and crying "racism" on every other issue is a great way to make a message that may otherwise seem reasonable to be drowned out. Tell people for a hundred years that they can't have nice things because of their skin color, and when they actually start demanding things because of their skin color tell them that it doesn't matter and that they should ignore it, because the majority of the society doesn't mind being reminded of their misdeeds and they don't want to give all of the good stuff up that they have now What do people deserve because of their skin color? Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 08:39 Nyxisto wrote:
Maybe for once let the affected group lead the discourse? Why do the ones least affected get to determine what the "right way" to protest is? Could be an Onion headline "Angry man tells feminist what forms of criticism are acceptable" I don't know that feminism is considered an affected group, but replace "Angry man" with "woman," then, would that be okay?
apparently in America "Females attempt suicide three times more often than male"
although apparently males are more succesful at it ". "While males are 4 times more likely than females to die by suicide, females attempt suicide 3 times as often as males. "
https://afsp.org/about-suicide/suicide-statistics/
Although you seem to be talking about Asian countries.
I don't think anyone is going to argue that privilege is oppressive (althouh Focault once stated that langauge is oppression), but merely to get to a fair and just society we need to realize that certain groups are better off then others and that socioeconomic factors are often the result of segregation and its legacy
|
Relative to a state containing the city of Portland, "outclassed" seems like the wrong word to use 
^that's because women tend to attempt suicide via overdose by pills and self mutliation, whereas men tend to opt for guns, hanging, and garage fumes.
|
On May 18 2016 10:44 farvacola wrote:Relative to a state containing the city of Portland, "outclassed" seems like the wrong word to use
I don't understand what you are saying here.
|
Another Clinton win, another round of sanders backers screaming that him losing is proof of voter fraud.
|
On May 18 2016 10:46 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 10:44 farvacola wrote:Relative to a state containing the city of Portland, "outclassed" seems like the wrong word to use I don't understand what you are saying here.
I'll just say that I prefer Seattle and leave it at that.
|
In other news apparently people in California are now arguing over whether India should be referred to as South Asia when talking about where Columbus was trying to go. This is a few days old but interesting.
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/south-asian-community-debates-south-asia-india-ahead-textbook-updates-n570671
Opposing groups are battling over some 30 proposed changes to the state's history and social science framework set to be voted on later this year that may alter text about South Asian history for sixth and seventh graders, specifically certain references to "India" and "South Asia," among others.
apparently also arguing about what should be said about the connection between hinduism and the caste system is popular too.
But the contentions go further. Shukla says some proposed changes that strengthen Hinduism's ties to the caste system will reinforce negative stereotypes which could lead to Hindu students being bullied, discriminated against, and left with a sense of erasure of their identities, as some students testified to in a hearing at the California State Capitol earlier this year.
...
There is not an academic consensus, however, on whether the caste system is a social construct of the region or endemic to the Hindu religion. And some see HAF and other groups as attempting to gloss over an uncomfortable part of religious history, especially when it comes women, and minority populations like Sikhs (a religious minority), and Dalits, the population on the lowest rung of the caste system.
|
I don't see how anyone can argue that Hinduism is not profoundly related to India's caste system in good faith, but at least they're actually having real, public conversations over curriculum. The same cannot be said throughout much of the rest of the United States.
|
On May 18 2016 10:50 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On May 18 2016 10:46 Mohdoo wrote:On May 18 2016 10:44 farvacola wrote:Relative to a state containing the city of Portland, "outclassed" seems like the wrong word to use I don't understand what you are saying here. I'll just say that I prefer Seattle and leave it at that.
Me too! I have never lived in Washington and I honestly just kinda consider Washington and Oregon the same state. Not technically, sure, but i mean...they are in every other sense. Only thing I would say I actually prefer about Oregon over Washington is Oregon's hiking and general outdoors stuff. In terms of Seattle vs Portland, I'd say they are pretty similar in the ways I care about. But Seattle is definitely superior.
|
In most ways, it really does make sense to think of Washington and Oregon as a single region, with Oregon being slightly weirder and a little more rural.
Edit: I will say that I'd take Rainier over Hood any day
|
Netherlands45349 Posts
IIRC men more then often use stuff like guns which has a higher "success" rate of suicide, women more often use pills and stuff that has a larger chance to fail.
|
24,000 voted other? Is a blank answer considered other?
Edit:
http://www.wsaz.com/content/news/31-Kentucky-counties-report-election-fraud-Tuesday-379882911.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
FRANKFORT, Ky. (WSAZ) – More than 76 reports of election fraud from 31 counties were called into the Kentucky Attorney General’s hotline during Tuesday’s primary, Attorney General Andy Beshear reports.
Complaints included procedural and legal questions, voter assistance, voting machines, voter identification, residency, election officials, electioneering, poll disruption and vote buying.
The following counties in our region were among those with reported issues:
Boyd County: Voting machine
Floyd County: (two calls) Special or absentee ballot and one electioneering within 100 feet of polls
Johnson County: Procedural question
Pike County: Election official
Rowan County: (two calls) Election official and procedural question
At this point, I expect Bernie to accuse Clinton of voter fraud in Oregon after winning by 6 trillion votes.
|
|
|
Its kinda sad that its 50/50 on whether there will be more GOP/Dem primary votes when Trump has basically secured the nom.
|
As the republican side now doesn't have anyone campaigning anymore or have any GOTV programs running it would seem like an odd stat to keep track of.
|
On May 18 2016 12:02 ZeaL. wrote:
Its kinda sad that its 50/50 on whether there will be more GOP/Dem primary votes when Trump has basically secured the nom.
Some states essentially had general election campaigns being run in them during the GOP primary. It's been nuts.
|
On May 18 2016 10:59 farvacola wrote:In most ways, it really does make sense to think of Washington and Oregon as a single region, with Oregon being slightly weirder and a little more rural. Edit: I will say that I'd take Rainier over Hood any day
There's a lot of cultural overlap in the PNW but Oregon also has a unique history that's resulted in it lacking the same kind of diversity we have in WA. I imagine for white folks it's pretty interchangeable though.
|
Clinton losing by shockingly little in Oregon.
Here's my shitty anecdote: All my Bernista friends have almost entirely stopped spamming Sanders shit except for 1. I think Sanders enthusiasm crashed recently in Oregon.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
