petep
Legend
Posts: 25,970
|
Post by petep on Oct 28, 2021 19:39:02 GMT
I’d still say it’s culture vs inherent race
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 19:39:53 GMT
I see norm setting in private spheres as "part of the conversation and dialog" that happens in a free society. Free speech, yes, but free association, too. And there is also a contextual question. Whether people think nudges are necessary will vary with the times, and the underlying culture (and how well its norms self-govern). In our context, our technology has amplified all of our voices while we continue to limp along with subpar critical reasoning skills, and a growing distrust of mainstream consensus. If one believes there is something worth countering in alternative facts, then some kind of filtering is going to become en vogue on the part of those who think there is just one uni-verse, with one set of facts, and that it is important for us to know them and separate truth from falsity, to the best we can.
OK. I'm not sure which part of my post you are addressing.
The part about it being bad. I am responding by pointing out that there is a context where it might be good. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 19:41:10 GMT
I’d argue it’s cultural in the us. The blacks in a place like Bermuda are excellent and put many whites in the us to shame. You've already lost me with all of this raced-based lumping. |
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Oct 28, 2021 19:41:52 GMT
I hope this is as close to the edge that you feel you need to get.. Leopards can't change their spots. I can't believe he's been allowed back to begin with as what he did was before was grounds for banishment. What's changed? What were the grounds for my banishment before? Or is everything just everything, with nothing distinguishable from anything else? |
|
petep
Legend
Posts: 25,970
|
Post by petep on Oct 28, 2021 19:42:24 GMT
What’s confusing you. The culture vs race discussion.
|
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Oct 28, 2021 19:44:36 GMT
I’d still say it’s culture vs inherent race I think it's a combination of race and culture, but with race playing a big part in the creation of culture. Cultures are created that fit the people and what they like. So if you want to know what blacks are like, you can look at the culture they've created. The external darkness of their culture reflects their internal darkness to the point of nightmares. |
|
|
|
Post by CadesCove on Oct 28, 2021 19:44:42 GMT
Leopards can't change their spots. I can't believe he's been allowed back to begin with as what he did was before was grounds for banishment. What's changed? What were the grounds for my banishment before? Or is everything just everything, with nothing distinguishable from anything else? Being an overt racist and a shining example of being far less than human. For those that need a reminder we have a whole thread dedicated to removing you. libertynewsforum.boards.net/thread/3391/calling-immediate-permanent-removal-dman |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 19:45:47 GMT
What’s confusing you. The culture vs race discussion. Are you talking to me? |
|
|
|
Post by oldtrapper on Oct 28, 2021 19:49:32 GMT
A Texas Republican lawmaker has drawn up a list of 850 books on subjects ranging from racism to sexuality that could “make students feel discomfort,” and is demanding that school districts across the state report whether any are in their classrooms or libraries.
State Rep. Matt Krause, R-Fort Worth, also wants to know how many copies of each book the districts have and how much money they spent on them, according to a letter he sent Monday to Lily Laux, deputy commissioner of school programs at the Texas Education Agency, and several school district superintendents.
Krause, who chairs the state’s House Committee on General Investigating, also directed the districts to identify “any other books” that could cause students “guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress because of their race or sex or convey that a student, by virtue of their race or sex, is inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.”
"could cause 'discomfort'" .. Poor Snowflakes .. 
That's actually what I would like to see. The blacks want to go hard against whites. That's fine. Whites should go hard against blacks, too, and we can see who's the hardest. "Monkey brained"? Not too racist. Well, not any more then declaring that Blacks are not human, or treating them as slaves, and then denying them the same rights as a White man.
Seems to me that the White culture was plenty "hard" on the Blacks, and other minorities, and still wants to be.
|
|
|
|
Post by CadesCove on Oct 28, 2021 19:49:40 GMT
I don't think it's possible for blacks to live in a human society without conflict. The conflict is not created. It's unavoidable because of the innate gap in cognitive ability. The suppression of the conflict is what is artificial. It keeps the conflict at an interminable low boil. What would be better is to let it boil over naturally so that blacks end up removed from our society. I hope this is as close to the edge that you feel you need to get.. In case you've forgotten. libertynewsforum.boards.net/thread/3391/calling-immediate-permanent-removal-dman?page=1&scrollTo=53789 |
|
rmwa
Legend
Timeout2
Posts: 2,449
|
Post by rmwa on Oct 28, 2021 19:50:00 GMT
What were the grounds for my banishment before? Or is everything just everything, with nothing distinguishable from anything else? Being an overt racist and a shining example of being far less than human. I'm not sure that's what I was banned for. I think it was because my speech was violent. And maybe racism is inherent to being human, and not being racist is artificial suppression of our inherent tendencies. Evolution often happens through competition between different varieties of a species and the eventual domination of one as the fittest and elimination of others that are less fit. Part of that might be for the races to fight each other and compete for resources and survival. Rather than calling me a "racist," a more descriptive term would be "pro-evolutionist," which implies that I favor unlimited competition between the varieties of hominids and the inevitable outcome of that competition, which is evolution and progress. |
|
|
|
Post by Fiddler on Oct 28, 2021 19:57:47 GMT
I hope this is as close to the edge that you feel you need to get.. Leopards can't change their spots. I can't believe he's been allowed back to begin with as what he did was before was grounds for banishment. What's changed?
He was banned. That's why the "don't cross that line" post from Admin ..
|
|
|
|
Post by CadesCove on Oct 28, 2021 20:03:38 GMT
Leopards can't change their spots. I can't believe he's been allowed back to begin with as what he did was before was grounds for banishment. What's changed?
He was banned. That's why the "don't cross that line" post from Admin ..
If there was any doubt to his identity, he just admitted it. Time to do your thing. Being an overt racist and a shining example of being far less than human. I'm not sure that's what I was banned for. I think it was because my speech was violent. |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Oct 28, 2021 20:07:53 GMT
I think it is all bad. Trigger warnings, video games, comedians, speakers, pornography, Facebook, etc. Stop trying to shut all these people up and counter their speech with your own.
This assumes we're dealing with individuals willing and interested in acting in good faith .. . We're not. It doesn't though. It is specifically a way of dealing with those that aren't. Hitler and Mussolini did more than just "speech". What do you mean "if that worked"? I haven't claimed speech will stop governments from acting. Or that speech alone is sufficient to resolve all problems. Nor have I said that there is any way to make the world perfect. I'm not even sure the extent of your strawman since there are some questions regarding what you are actually talking about, but it definitely seems to be a strawman going on here. More speech, in the face of attempts to cancel it, is how the world came to better understand the universe and Earth's place in it. More speech, in the face of racist laws, is what brought an end to Jim Crow and segregation. More speech, in the face of government abuse and speech restrictions, Snowden and others choosing to speak have brought abuses into the open, driving reform. And on and on. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 20:09:43 GMT
What’s confusing you. The culture vs race discussion. Are you talking to me? I'll take the silence as a yes. Well let me clear this up for you, Pete. All of your talk about the whites and blacks loses me. I am no longer tracking you. It's not a matter of confusion. Its a matter of me not sharing your race centered focus. |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Oct 28, 2021 20:14:43 GMT
OK. I'm not sure which part of my post you are addressing.
The part about it being bad. I am responding by pointing out that there is a context where it might be good.
OK. I disagree. I would rather, in the example in the OP, the group that has a problem with certain books propose a set of their own, rather than seek to disappear the books they don't like. Or for institutions like MIT to bring in speakers that would counter the views of the one they suddenly don't like, rather than disappear them. Or for comedians that come at a situation from a different viewpoints to counter a comedian that one finds offensive or disagreeable. Etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 20:29:39 GMT
The part about it being bad. I am responding by pointing out that there is a context where it might be good.
OK. I disagree. I would rather, in the example in the OP, the group that has a problem with certain books propose a set of their own, rather than seek to disappear the books they don't like. Or for institutions like MIT to bring in speakers that would counter the views of the one they suddenly don't like, rather than disappear them. Or for comedians that come at a situation from a different viewpoints to counter a comedian that one finds offensive or disagreeable. Etc.
Well, to pushback, I wouldn't be cool with my kid going to a school that had pornographic books on the shelf, even if they had others that weren't and the same goes for holocaust denial, flat earth theory or Civil War lost cause narratives. I get your point but I think it is contextual. In a world of adults, we can do it your way. In a world of kids and teenagers, we will lean this other way. And ideally we find some balance in between. |
|
|
|
Post by wyattstorch on Oct 28, 2021 20:40:59 GMT
OK. I disagree. I would rather, in the example in the OP, the group that has a problem with certain books propose a set of their own, rather than seek to disappear the books they don't like. Or for institutions like MIT to bring in speakers that would counter the views of the one they suddenly don't like, rather than disappear them. Or for comedians that come at a situation from a different viewpoints to counter a comedian that one finds offensive or disagreeable. Etc.
Well, to pushback, I wouldn't be cool with my kid going to a school that had pornographic books on the shelf, even if they had others that weren't and the same goes for holocaust denial, flat earth theory or Civil War lost cause narratives. Then I don't get your initial response, as it sounds like you are on the side of the folks ridiculed in the OP. You couldn't instruct kids and raise them to seek the good and avoid the bad? Or remove your child and seek alternatives to a school that makes objectionable things unavoidable? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2021 22:10:02 GMT
Well, to pushback, I wouldn't be cool with my kid going to a school that had pornographic books on the shelf, even if they had others that weren't and the same goes for holocaust denial, flat earth theory or Civil War lost cause narratives. Then I don't get your initial response, as it sounds like you are on the side of the folks ridiculed in the OP. Its complicated. I support people working to ensure their associations reflect their values, but I also have a particular set of values I champion, which puts me at odds with the folks from cancel culture 1.0. The folks from cancel culture 2.0 are more my people. Why can't we curate the kind of content they are exposed to while also equipping them with the kinds of skills to make their own decisions later on? For example, I can imagine a school using a book on flat earth as a case study on propaganda, or a lesson on the difference between fact and belief, but to present flat earth ideas as being equally valid with their mainstream counterparts, and then leaving it up to the kids to sort the truth out for themselves, is asking a lot of the kids and risking them coming away with mixed messages. |
|
|
|
Post by Running Deer on Oct 28, 2021 22:29:12 GMT
Looks like an enormous waste of schools' money and time.
|
|
