Politics thread (USA Elections 2016) - Page 225

On June 08 2020 22:51 Stroggoz wrote: the real educational enrichment is youtube, twitter, and meme's, but apparently the academics that study this topic their whole life are not worth consideration.

On June 08 2020 04:31 Loco wrote: But like Spitfire said, it's already too easy to laugh at right-wingers just with their own content, so I barely spend time looking at memes. Recent example:

lol dethrone god.

Foxnews boomers create tons of hillarious self parodies, but the beard & tits squad doesn't fall behind.

On June 09 2020 03:17 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On June 08 2020 05:16 MezmerizePLZ wrote:   On June 06 2020 23:35 Baalim wrote: Funnily enough, the race that does the best in virtually any metric are the jews, so under Loco's anti-racist system he would systematically discriminate against jews the most, where have I heard that before? LOL Baal you are a saint for continuing this conversation with a mentally incapacitated young man. I really think it makes his day Its a weird masochism, I'll try to disengage a bit and post for meme shit.

Of course you'd weasel out when I've proven your callous/ignorant argument wrong.

If you raise the SAT requirements for asians to get into a university you are discriminating against them, it doesnt matter if they are gaining overall representation, if they are, more power to them. It doesn't matter if you use quotas or not, you can use many handicaps method to insure certain proportion of student races, which is a exactly the same as a quota.

Except that's not how it works. Again, you just don't pay attention to things that challenge your views. There's a reason why Harvard isn't losing these lawsuits and their holistic review process has been deemed constitutional. Race is not used against an applicant and it is never the deciding factor for why someone gets in or not, or at least not in the cases that I've seen. I'm happy to be proven wrong if you have studies that clearly demonstrate this. Quotas are illegal in the US and it follows reason that if another system was "exactly the same as a quota system" it wouldn't be allowed............

Let's just take one single case, the one of Abigail Fisher. She sued because she assumed that she didn't get in and some person of color stole her spot with worse grades. That is your argument, yes? Yet there were 168 black and Latino students with grades as good as or better than Fisher's who were also denied entry into the university that year. How does that support your argument?

Freedom of speech isn't a principle to you, you are not abandoning anything, its just you showing that you will become an authoritarian if it suits your leftist political ideals.

It is a principle for me, but because you are a dogmatist you don't understand that principles don't have to be fanatically held as absolutes.

For example, I am vegan because I think there is a moral baseline for not exploiting and killing animals if it's possible not to. That's a principle. But if I had to kill an animal in order to save an entire city of people, then clearly the harm reduction of that has to be factored in, and my priority has to change. This is a position in moral philosophy called threshold deontology.

Another example would be lying. Jordan Peterson says you should always say the truth, or at least never lie. That's a principle. What if he was put into a scenario where his lie can directly save lives? He'd probably choose to do that instead.

Same thing applies if you have the freedom to verbally abuse people as part of a mob, and it can be empirically proven that this kind of verbal abuse and bullying leads to a high degree of harm in their lives, I have to take that into account. If the victims of the abuse can defend themselves, or have groups that can help defend them, I want them to do that. In circumstances where they can't, I'd rather have an authority there to prevent the harm. But of course it's just an intellectual exercise because conservatives wouldn't pass laws that prevent them from abusing minorities because they'd much rather live in a world where minorities fail to thrive or kill themselves as a result of their oppression.

What does that have to do with what I said? I said that under your affirmative action program the race that does the best academically and economically, the jews, would be the most affected, I wonder where I've seen that rethoric about taking privileges away from jews that they have gained unfairly over others... such a new idea.

Please make an actual argument. I can't make anything out of that jumbled rhetoric. As for the point, you are deliberately missing it in order not to face the consequences of what you just said. Why do you think Jewish people are in these positions of power and high standards of living? Jewish people have received reparations, they were given what they needed to rebuild, and according to the vast majority of them Germany has done full mea culpa, so they moved on with their lives and their traumatic histories are not perpetuated and constantly dangled in their faces as they do not face systemic discrimination like the blacks that you disfavor. In fact, the pathetic liberals and right-wingers in congress are very quick to levy emotionally-manipulative charges of anti-semitism whenever there is any sort of criticism of Israel that is unrelated to race, e.g. when they are criticized for their genocidal treatment of the Palestinians.

Black people have not received reparations, people don't listen to their issues or actively charge them of reverse racism when they bring them up and say pathetic things like "white lives matter" in response. Their historic past repeats itself today in new forms, their lives are systematically ruined, and you favor dismantling the only process by which they are taken to be deserving of equality of opportunity. You value discriminating against the few of them that manage to get to a place where they can get into elite schools, why? I won't let you distract from the conversation by bringing up gender. I know you like to engage in these diversionary tactics over and over again. Deal with the topic that is already on the table and we can move to gender after that.

And not only that, but if anyone disagrees with you, they are deeply racist, yes everyone is morally inferior to you bright anti-racist warrior, also here is a quick life tip, using the term "ableist" outside of reddit and your bubble of idiots only makes people cringe at you.

I'll give you a quick life tip too: having blatant disregard for disabled people, to the point where pointing out that they are oppressed can only be but mere "cringe", brings you one step closer to the fascists. The line between that position and supporting institutionalized violence against them and eugenics is pretty blurry. Personally, I prefer having a spine and standing up for something I believe in in spite of the ridicule I receive from the ignorant and bigots. Clearly you prefer being on the wrong side of history just because it's trendy to dismiss the humanity of some people and to mock those who care about various injustices.

I think you should expect as a social status quo warrior that ableism will become increasingly a bigger part of social discourse, so you'll eventually change your position over time. Unless, that is, you keep radicalizing further to the right and you decide that fascists are right and purging the degenerates is the way to go. I think the former is more likely, but who knows.

Personally I think the anti SJW trend is going to die out within the next few years and something else will replace it, just like with trendy diets. It's basically the keto diet of the mind right now and lots of people are already getting disillusioned about it.

loco whats ur twitter handle i wanna follow you

Alright let's share some memes. Just made this one based on this data

On June 09 2020 05:15 MezmerizePLZ wrote: loco whats ur twitter handle i wanna follow you

Sure, I don't mind. I don't post very often on Twitter but here it is.

But I'm more active on my YouTube account where I make music videos influenced by my politics.

On June 09 2020 03:35 Loco wrote: Of course you'd weasel out when I've proven your callous/ignorant argument wrong.

lol yeah you totally proved that anybody who isn't pro affirmative action is a profound racist.

Except that's not how it works. Again, you just don't pay attention to things that challenge your views. There's a reason why Harvard isn't losing these lawsuits and their holistic review process has been deemed constitutional. Race is not used against an applicant and it is never the deciding factor for why someone gets in or not, or at least not in the cases that I've seen. I'm happy to be proven wrong if you have studies that clearly demonstrate this. Quotas are illegal in the US and it follows reason that if another system was "exactly the same as a quota system" it wouldn't be allowed............

Except that race is considered, so a handicap is applied based on your race, that is discrimination.

Let's just take one single case, the one of Abigail Fisher. She sued because she assumed that she didn't get in and some person of color stole her spot with worse grades. That is your argument, yes? Yet there were 168 black and Latino students with grades as good as or better than Fisher's who were also denied entry into the university that year. How does that support your argument?

I often quote your exact posts and just change a subject to make you realize how crazy they are but they fly over your head, lets see if this time it works.

Imagine the same situation, but white people are favored and are given extra points in their SAT, so a black girl named Abigail Fisher complains that she had better grades and was denied entry, and your would say: "but other whites with your same score also didn't get in"

It is a principle for me, but because you are a dogmatist you don't understand that principles don't have to be fanatically held as absolutes. For example, I am vegan because I think there is a moral baseline for not exploiting and killing animals if it's possible not to. That's a principle. But if I had to kill an animal in order to save an entire city of people, then clearly the harm reduction of that has to be factored in, and my priority has to change. This is a position in moral philosophy called threshold deontology. Same thing applies if you have the freedom to verbally abuse people as part of a mob, and it can be empirically proven that this kind of verbal abuse and bullying leads to a high degree of harm in their lives, I have to take that into account. If the victims of the abuse can defend themselves, or have groups that can help defend them, I want them to do that. In circumstances where they can't, I'd rather have an authority there to prevent the harm. But of course it's just an intellectual exercise because conservatives wouldn't pass laws that prevent them from abusing minorities because they'd much rather live in a world where minorities fail to thrive or kill themselves as a result of their oppression.

With these quality of thoughts you honestly believe you are somehow "winning" come on man, you are a mess. Yeah everybody would drop their principles to literally save the lives of an entire city, genius argument.

Anybody can argue that an idea or cetain speech can lead to the harm of many, some will say Islam, others communism or fascism, eugenics, misgendering or whatever the fuck, however the very concept of Freedom of speech is that people are allowed to thing about "forbidden" things so that people in power cannot excersize this power and ban speech it deems dangerous.

That is why you are an authoritarian, you are in favor of opressive tools if these suit your ideas.

What does that have to do with what I said? I said that under your affirmative action program the race that does the best academically and economically, the jews, would be the most affected, I wonder where I've seen that rethoric about taking privileges away from jews that they have gained unfairly over others... such a new idea.

Please make an actual argument. I can't make anything out of that jumbled rhetoric. As for the point, you are deliberately missing it in order not to face the consequences of what you just said. Why do you think Jewish people are in these positions of power and high standards of living? Jewish people have received reparations, they were given what they needed to rebuild, and according to the vast majority of them Germany has done full mea culpa, so they moved on with their lives and their traumatic histories are not perpetuated and constantly dangled in their faces as they do not face systemic discrimination like the blacks that you disfavor. In fact, the pathetic liberals and right-wingers in congress are very quick to levy emotionally-manipulative charges of anti-semitism whenever there is any sort of criticism of Israel that is unrelated to race, e.g. when they are criticized for their genocidal treatment of the Palestinians.

Black people have not received reparations, people don't listen to their issues or actively charge them of reverse racism when they bring them up and say pathetic things like "white lives matter" in response. Their historic past repeats itself today in new forms, their lives are systematically ruined, and you favor dismantling the only process by which they are taken to be deserving of equality of opportunity. You value discriminating against the few of them that manage to get to a place where they can get into elite schools, why? I won't let you distract from the conversation by bringing up gender. I know you like to engage in these diversionary tactics over and over again. Deal with the topic that is already on the table and we can move to gender after that.[/quote]

I dont know what part you didn't get.

Why jews have done well? I think reparations have little to do with it, I think its mostly cultural same with east asians, they perform well academically because their society value education a lot.

you dodge the gender part because it exposes your hypocricy, if you want equal prison sentences, there is a bigger gap between men-women than white-black, if you want affirmative acction in school, why not handicap in favor of men over women?

I'll give you a quick life tip too: having blatant disregard for disabled people, to the point where pointing out that they are oppressed can only be but mere "cringe", brings you one step closer to the fascists. The line between that position and supporting institutionalized violence against them and eugenics is pretty blurry. Personally, I prefer having a spine and standing up for something I believe in in spite of the ridicule I receive from the ignorant and bigots. Clearly you prefer being on the wrong side of history just because it's trendy to dismiss the humanity of some people and to mock those who care about various injustices. I think you should expect as a social status quo warrior that ableism will become increasingly a bigger part of social discourse, so you'll eventually change your position over time. Unless, that is, you keep radicalizing further to the right and you decide that fascists are right and purging the degenerates is the way to go. I think the former is more likely, but who knows.

Yeah except that calling you retard does not reflect in any way how i feel about disabled people, you are just making pathetic virtue signaling, its disgusting.

Interesting predicting the left will win the culture war yet you are convinced the nazis are taking over.

On June 08 2020 22:51 Stroggoz wrote: Show nested quote + On June 08 2020 22:26 Spitfiree wrote:   On June 08 2020 01:33 Baalim wrote: That information is also incomplete because you need to take into account police acounters / death by police, if a group has more encounters with the police it would be expected to be shot by police more often and it wouldn't neccesarely imply a police more eager to shoot them but a police more likely to engage with them. No shit, the poorest regions that were segregated until 60years ago, were specifically targeted by laws and generally get sentenced easier while being targetted by police is having a disproportionate amount of encounters with the police, who would've thought There have been numerous "crime reducing" strategies enforced in the USA in the past few decades, which in reality indeed have been reducing crime greatly, while abusing the poorest neighborhoods to the fullest. Malcolm Gladwell has it covered in his last book Generally, I don't know if its a "race" problem though, or a class rather, its just that the blacks statistically fall much more into the lowest class and much less into the mid/upper one. Either way Im glad to see US government getting shook, maybe they turn tides for the better. I think there's a lot of cases to remove the confounding variables, can compare poor white area's with poor black areas. Crystal meth is the drug of poor white people, there's no good justification for that part of the war on drugs either. In any case, targetting black area's does follow from class power dynamics, and race has a lot to do with it. Look at how easy the pharmaceutical companies have gotten away with the opoid crisis. There are some more obvious examples, like the fact that countries that get drone striked only ever happen to be in africa and the middle east. Targetting is based on racsist assumptions. If some completely innocent white person got drone striked in britain, people would be outraged. If it happens in africa to a black person, it's fine, because black people are worthless. It's amazing how much of a hypocrite nearly everyone is on this. Remember charlie hebdo? It's amusing how many of my friends lined up to change their facebook profiles in support of the victims of that, but are nowhere to be seen when we bomb hospitals in the iraq war, for 'spreading propaganda'. It is also amusing that the only two terror attacks in new zealand were by a white supremicist, and another one was by the french government. Don't think there will be any progression here, as the people in this thread are ridiculing african american studies scholars, even though they are well researched in this area and dont make bad statistical arguments. Rather, the real educational enrichment is youtube, twitter, and meme's, but apparently the academics that study this topic their whole life are not worth consideration.

Thats a fair point, I guess I'm just naive

Have some time so ill post.

1) Description on website: "...is a paid 12-week summer internship program designed for second-year students interested in gaining hands-on and real-life experience in the tech industry."

"Eligibility: Full-time student identifying as black, Latinx, and/or Native American completing your undergraduate study in 2021 at a university or college."


^This is a job posring from a major tech company. Totally illegal. Obviously violates one of those Civil Rights Acts of whatever.

Also I saw dumbfuck loco quote some bs about how 20something percent of harvard is Asians when we make up like <10% of population so that "Proves" harvard is not racist. I love how loco just unilaterally makes up rules that make no sense and declares himself the winner.

Stuyvesant High School for example an elite high school where entrance determined by test score is around 70% asian or something like that. So are similar entrance based high schools.

Asians accounted for 73 percent of students at Stuyvesant, 64 percent at Bronx Science and 61 percent at Brooklyn Tech, according to school data. By contrast, blacks and Hispanics combined made up just 3.5 percent of students at Stuyvesant, 8 percent at Bronx Science and 14 percent at Brooklyn Tech

Loco logic 20% > 10% therefore it is a fair competition. It debunks it he says (lol). Its like saying a team of ppl on liquidpoker played basketball vs The LA Lakers and had rules where we started with 400 points and lost 500-400. Well since the Lakers won it was a fair game right? What kind of idiot logic is that? Who is to say 60% of Harvard shouldnt be Asian based on merit? Why should the lakers win 500-400 when they could win 500-0? Etc etc.

The reason everyone makes fun of you is because you cheat constantly in debates and say things that make absolutely no sense.

The crazy thing is you HAVE to know you are cheating. I mean theres no way you are not aware of your own absurdly unethical arguing tactics...

And in your comparison with the basketball game, the Asians are simply granted those entries is that it?

On June 09 2020 17:27 Spitfiree wrote: And in your comparison with the basketball game, the Asians are simply granted those entries is that it?

??? The comparison is about an open competition idiot so thats not the point. Everyone is allowed compete/apply for a spot to college. The nation's high school students are engaged in open competition at a given time. How do you not understand this?

Spitfire you are one of the worst posters here. Everything you say makes me think its cause your just "not smart" or because your English is not your best language. I really hope is the latter lol.

Edit also the hypothetical basketball team was just random ppl on liquidpoker, not Asians lol. I mean it can be all Asian if you want it doesnt really change how the example works because the point is to demonstrate a skill gap between basketball players and no team composed of any combination of liquidpoker posters would be able to compete vs nba players u idiot. God you are so stupid. Its called an "analogy." They have this on the SATs.

Its hard to follow your logic, its like following what a kid on LSD is saying, its simply all over the place with no real meaning whatsoever. Let me explain:

1. You show that tech companies are hiring minorities
2. You then somehow blame Loco for using pretty basic statistics that anyone over the age of 5 would understand
3. You then show how asians happen to score the highest in education .... verifying what Loco said even though you oppose him
4. You then make an absolutely random NBA comparison


And then you somehow try to tie that into Harvard acceptance....

Let me blow your mind

Did you know


That

Ivy League unversities

Dont

Take students

Based

On

Their

Score alone?

Churchill was a racist churchill was a racist churchill was a racist churchill was a racist

https://www.facebook.com/hillelneuer/videos/298763997827900/

Did you know That Ivy League unversities Dont Take students Based On Their Score alone?

Yeah they have to take certain percentage of dindus so they discriminate against aryans and asians.

On June 09 2020 19:25 CurbStomp wrote: Show nested quote + Did you know That Ivy League unversities Dont Take students Based On Their Score alone? Yeah they have to take certain percentage of dindus so they discriminate against aryans and asians.

No, they are schools that see themselves as the factory for the next leaders, CEOs etc. Being smart is not enough.

Asians are generally much more introverted and while they score extremely high on tests, they wouldn't be the flavor of the month for ivy leagues schools if it they could mold them.

edit:

In fact hiems, you re trying to compare highschool stats to those of universities that are literally the getting applicants from the entire world . Do you understand how bad you are at basic common sense?

On June 09 2020 19:58 Spitfiree wrote: Show nested quote + On June 09 2020 19:25 CurbStomp wrote:   Did you know That Ivy League unversities Dont Take students Based On Their Score alone? Yeah they have to take certain percentage of dindus so they discriminate against aryans and asians. No, they are schools that see themselves as the factory for the next leaders, CEOs etc. Being smart is not enough. Asians are generally much more introverted and while they score extremely high on tests, they wouldn't be the flavor of the month for ivy leagues schools if it they could mold them. edit: In fact hiems, you re trying to compare highschool stats to those of universities that are literally the getting applicants from the entire world . Do you understand how bad you are at basic common sense?

Countering the "Blacks are stupid" argument with "Asians are introverted." Well done

First, his argument isn't that blacks are stupid, he s trying to say that since the majority of elite highschool are filled with asians, it would make much more sense to have more than 20% asians in Harvard as well, which is a fair point if high school acceptance had anything to do with Ivy league acceptance, which it doesn't.

Second, Asians are much more likely to be introverted due to cultural factors. Almost all Asian cultures are focused on the family and the good of the group, leaving the individualism on the side, which tends to create much more introverts. That's not a prejudice, those are facts that you can easily google.

Third, I cba responding to you and hiems anymore tbh, its a complete waste of time. One would think you're generally much more aware of things like that since you're actually from the US ...

On June 09 2020 19:18 VanDerMeyde wrote: Churchill was a racist churchill was a racist churchill was a racist churchill was a racist https://www.facebook.com/hillelneuer/videos/298763997827900/

Yes, he was. "He had a hierarchical perspective of race, believing white people were most superior and black people the least. Churchill advocated against black or indigenous self-rule in Africa, Australia, the Americas and the Caribbean." Here's the wikipedia article about his views.

He was responsible for the Bengal Famine of 1943 which led to the death of more than 3 million people and he supported Malayan and Kenyan concentration camps. He also supported the Italian fascist regime of Mussolini:

"This country gives the impression of discipline, order, goodwill, smiling faces. A happy strict school... The Fascists have been saluting in their impressive manner all over the place"

"If I had been an Italian, I am sure that I should have been whole-heartedly with you from the start to the finish in your triumphant struggle against the bestial appetites and passions of Leninism."

Find better heroes.

On June 10 2020 00:09 Loco wrote: Find better heroes.

“In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States.” - Engels.


"It is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes who had joined Moses’ exodus from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother on the paternal side had not interbred with a nigger. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product." - Karl Marx


Find better heroes

On June 10 2020 02:11 Baalim wrote: Show nested quote + On June 10 2020 00:09 Loco wrote: Find better heroes. “In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States.” - Engels. "It is now completely clear to me that he, as is proved by his cranial formation and his hair, descends from the Negroes who had joined Moses’ exodus from Egypt, assuming that his mother or grandmother on the paternal side had not interbred with a nigger. Now this union of Judaism and Germanism with a basic Negro substance must produce a peculiar product." - Karl Marx Find better heroes

Lmaoo