(07-21-2020, 12:19 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-21-2020, 12:15 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't get the outrage. The poster was not criticizing white people or Western civilization. "White people believe in hard work." Ooooh, I'm outraged!!!
If anything, they're indirectly dissing non-white people, although I didn't take it that way, either.
I think you guys just enjoy being outraged.
Then explain the purpose of the poster. It must have meant something to someone to go through the effort of creating and posting it.
"White" is the root of all things evil, don't you know that by now?
(07-21-2020, 12:15 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]I still don't get the outrage. The poster was not criticizing white people or Western civilization. "White people believe in hard work." Ooooh, I'm outraged!!!
If anything, they're indirectly dissing non-white people, although I didn't take it that way, either.
I think you guys just enjoy being outraged.
I decided to do a search of what "whiteness" means in our society and found the article linked below. While there is factual information there, it's the backhanded way in which it says how white folks think, see and feel about folks from other backgrounds that grinds my gears. Not everyone sees black, brown and yellow folks as "other" or lesser than. They're people. Do they have a different skin color? Yes. Does it matter? It shouldn't and it doesn't to a lot of people. I don't deny there are people who do see different races than white as other, inferior, etc., but not nearly as many people feel this way as folks with an agenda would have us think.
This junk is being taught in schools and universities as if it's fact. How did they arrive at this conclusion? Polls? Questionnaires? Did they ask everyone or just a certain type of people? I wasn't asked. I don't trust
any polls, statistics, questionnaires, etc., because they can be rigged according to the answers the people doing the asking are looking for.
Interesting article
"Sociologists believe the construct of whiteness is directly connected to the correlating construct of people of color as "other" in society."
You guys really need to look into critical race theory to understand what's going on here. I can post some videos, but no one ever watches them.
(07-21-2020, 11:59 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You guys really need to look into critical race theory to understand what's going on here. I can post some videos, but no one ever watches them.
I looked into it, and found it wanting.
CRT is a blanket accusation that conservatives have started throwing out whenever they feel like a non-white person has gone on talking too long.
It gets thrown out in so many different situations that it doesn't really have any meaning on its own.
You are such a disingenuous person.
(07-22-2020, 07:33 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]You are such a disingenuous person.
"not candid nor sincere, typically by pretending to know less about something than one really does."
Don't act like you don't do this too.
This is what I'm talking about. For starters, I don't have to google disingenuous.
You think, because you argue by reading wiki articles, that all people do this. Do you know how much time I put into trying to understand our current cultural climate? I spend probably 20+ hours a week reading various philosophical and historical works, and listening to experts unpack similar concepts. I spend less time, but still a decent amount, following various trends in our nation, especially those movements that are actively working to fundamentally dismantle the structure of the US government. This group is growing at an exponential rate, and I find it's movement into the mainstream alarming. These movements didn't just pop out of the ether. They are part of an ideological campaign that goes all the way back to the 1920's (further if you want to be technical).
I am very invested in understanding the framework that built our society. I have spent a considerable amount of time understanding where my views came from, and now I devote a LOT of time trying to understand where these alternative ideologies were formed. The more I peel back the layers of the onion, the more clearly I understand the views and goals of my ideological opponents. You don't do this, and it's obvious. You can't even watch an 8 minute video on the definition of socialism. You are so ignorant, but you masquerade like you have an understanding of something when you CLEARLY do not.
(07-22-2020, 09:11 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]This is what I'm talking about. For starters, I don't have to google disingenuous.
You think, because you argue by reading wiki articles, that all people do this. Do you know how much time I put into trying to understand our current cultural climate? I spend probably 20+ hours a week reading various philosophical and historical works, and listening to experts unpack similar concepts. I spend less time, but still a decent amount, following various trends in our nation, especially those movements that are actively working to fundamentally dismantle the structure of the US government. This group is growing at an exponential rate, and I find it's movement into the mainstream alarming. These movements didn't just pop out of the ether. They are part of an ideological campaign that goes all the way back to the 1920's (further if you want to be technical).
I am very invested in understanding the framework that built our society. I have spent a considerable amount of time understanding where my views came from, and now I devote a LOT of time trying to understand where these alternative ideologies were formed. The more I peel back the layers of the onion, the more clearly I understand the views and goals of my ideological opponents. You don't do this, and it's obvious. You can't even watch an 8 minute video on the definition of socialism. You are so ignorant, but you masquerade like you have an understanding of something when you CLEARLY do not.
You forgot to drop the mic.
(07-22-2020, 09:11 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]This is what I'm talking about. For starters, I don't have to google disingenuous.
You think, because you argue by reading wiki articles, that all people do this. Do you know how much time I put into trying to understand our current cultural climate? I spend probably 20+ hours a week reading various philosophical and historical works, and listening to experts unpack similar concepts. I spend less time, but still a decent amount, following various trends in our nation, especially those movements that are actively working to fundamentally dismantle the structure of the US government. This group is growing at an exponential rate, and I find it's movement into the mainstream alarming. These movements didn't just pop out of the ether. They are part of an ideological campaign that goes all the way back to the 1920's (further if you want to be technical).
I am very invested in understanding the framework that built our society. I have spent a considerable amount of time understanding where my views came from, and now I devote a LOT of time trying to understand where these alternative ideologies were formed. The more I peel back the layers of the onion, the more clearly I understand the views and goals of my ideological opponents. You don't do this, and it's obvious. You can't even watch an 8 minute video on the definition of socialism. You are so ignorant, but you masquerade like you have an understanding of something when you CLEARLY do not.
*drops the mic*
(07-22-2020, 09:39 AM)Cleatwood Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2020, 09:11 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]This is what I'm talking about. For starters, I don't have to google disingenuous.
You think, because you argue by reading wiki articles, that all people do this. Do you know how much time I put into trying to understand our current cultural climate? I spend probably 20+ hours a week reading various philosophical and historical works, and listening to experts unpack similar concepts. I spend less time, but still a decent amount, following various trends in our nation, especially those movements that are actively working to fundamentally dismantle the structure of the US government. This group is growing at an exponential rate, and I find it's movement into the mainstream alarming. These movements didn't just pop out of the ether. They are part of an ideological campaign that goes all the way back to the 1920's (further if you want to be technical).
I am very invested in understanding the framework that built our society. I have spent a considerable amount of time understanding where my views came from, and now I devote a LOT of time trying to understand where these alternative ideologies were formed. The more I peel back the layers of the onion, the more clearly I understand the views and goals of my ideological opponents. You don't do this, and it's obvious. You can't even watch an 8 minute video on the definition of socialism. You are so ignorant, but you masquerade like you have an understanding of something when you CLEARLY do not.
You forgot to drop the mic.
LOL you beat me to it.
(07-22-2020, 09:11 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]This is what I'm talking about. For starters, I don't have to google disingenuous.
You think, because you argue by reading wiki articles, that all people do this. Do you know how much time I put into trying to understand our current cultural climate? I spend probably 20+ hours a week reading various philosophical and historical works, and listening to experts unpack similar concepts. I spend less time, but still a decent amount, following various trends in our nation, especially those movements that are actively working to fundamentally dismantle the structure of the US government. This group is growing at an exponential rate, and I find it's movement into the mainstream alarming. These movements didn't just pop out of the ether. They are part of an ideological campaign that goes all the way back to the 1920's (further if you want to be technical).
I am very invested in understanding the framework that built our society. I have spent a considerable amount of time understanding where my views came from, and now I devote a LOT of time trying to understand where these alternative ideologies were formed. The more I peel back the layers of the onion, the more clearly I understand the views and goals of my ideological opponents. You don't do this, and it's obvious. You can't even watch an 8 minute video on the definition of socialism. You are so ignorant, but you masquerade like you have an understanding of something when you CLEARLY do not.
The word for that isn't disingenuous though.
You're saying I am ignorant and have too much self confidence.
A disingenuous person is very informed but pretends to be naive.
You're saying I'm the opposite of disingenuous.
(07-22-2020, 09:45 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2020, 09:11 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]This is what I'm talking about. For starters, I don't have to google disingenuous.
You think, because you argue by reading wiki articles, that all people do this. Do you know how much time I put into trying to understand our current cultural climate? I spend probably 20+ hours a week reading various philosophical and historical works, and listening to experts unpack similar concepts. I spend less time, but still a decent amount, following various trends in our nation, especially those movements that are actively working to fundamentally dismantle the structure of the US government. This group is growing at an exponential rate, and I find it's movement into the mainstream alarming. These movements didn't just pop out of the ether. They are part of an ideological campaign that goes all the way back to the 1920's (further if you want to be technical).
I am very invested in understanding the framework that built our society. I have spent a considerable amount of time understanding where my views came from, and now I devote a LOT of time trying to understand where these alternative ideologies were formed. The more I peel back the layers of the onion, the more clearly I understand the views and goals of my ideological opponents. You don't do this, and it's obvious. You can't even watch an 8 minute video on the definition of socialism. You are so ignorant, but you masquerade like you have an understanding of something when you CLEARLY do not.
The word for that isn't disingenuous though.
You're saying I am ignorant and have too much self confidence.
A disingenuous person is very informed but pretends to be naive.
You're saying I'm the opposite of disingenuous.
I think disingenuous is perfect. You know what you're saying is bull [BLEEP], you just like to argue even if it means you regularly take positions you don't really believe.
(07-22-2020, 09:50 AM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2020, 09:45 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]The word for that isn't disingenuous though.
You're saying I am ignorant and have too much self confidence.
A disingenuous person is very informed but pretends to be naive.
You're saying I'm the opposite of disingenuous.
I think disingenuous is perfect. You know what you're saying is bull [BLEEP], you just like to argue even if it means you regularly take positions you don't really believe.
No. I don't say anything I don't believe, though I do sometimes ask questions I already have my own answer to.
The error people like Lucky2Last make is, while they read a lot, they overestimate the importance of what they are reading.
Some random American college professor who adopted an African first and last name in the 1970s wrote some essays on applying Marx's writings to racial issues, and calls it critical race theory, and people like Lucky2Last suppose that this person has influenced every single person who has anything to say about improving the status of black people. Suddenly everything racial is actually Marxist.
Here are some statements that are intended to be self evident truths:
Black people are subject to discrimination and prejudice.
Women are subject to different kinds of discrimination and prejudice.
A black woman is likely to be subject to both kinds of discrimination and prejudice.
But if you believe there is a nebulous Marxist force called "Critical Race Theory" you start to believe that merely acknowledging these truths is a step on the way to demolishing All That Is Good, and you accuse anyone who tries to start that conversation of being an actual Marxist or a stooge for Marxists. Meanwhile, the black people and the women are still subject to unfair stereotypes and prejudices that society could be working on, but isn't.
Silence is a virtue to those who are not wise.
(07-22-2020, 10:57 AM)Lucky2Last Wrote: [ -> ]Silence is a virtue to those who are not wise.
The poli sci majors would never say anything at all.
I agree with you if you're talking economics. It was an unwise career choice. When it comes to this conversation, however, you're out of your league and should probably do more listening than talking.
I want you to know that I totally understand how I make you feel.
In my office, I have to deal with people who don't know the difference between heat and temperature. I have to deal with people who don't know the difference between force and velocity. As an engineer, I have to try to help them communicate clearly with our clients, and bite my tongue as they misuse these highly technical terms.
So I come in here talking about what I think of critical race theory, but I haven't read the same books as either, and I haven't taken classes on it. You must be throwing your hands up, saying, "Gah! That's not what it means! What you're describing is actually this whole other issue!"
But here's the difference.
If I allow buildings and structures to be designed based on my untrained colleagues' understanding of the loads and material properties, these buildings will fail. People could get hurt. Millions of dollars will be wasted having to rehabilitate the structures and mechanical systems.
If any of us goes through life with a misunderstanding of the law, we might break the law and have to pay the penalties.
But you political scientists are not applying the laws of physics or the laws of men. You're creating a whole esoteric system of vocabulary that means nothing to anyone outside of your field. And you even have schisms with each other. Conservative political scientists insist that critical race theory is an overarching system of thought. Liberal political scientists insist that it is a set of ideas that are only loosely associated with each other, you can believe some without believing all. They must be talking about different things.
(07-22-2020, 12:20 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want you to know that I totally understand how I make you feel.
In my office, I have to deal with people who don't know the difference between heat and temperature. I have to deal with people who don't know the difference between force and velocity. As an engineer, I have to try to help them communicate clearly with our clients, and bite my tongue as they misuse these highly technical terms.
So I come in here talking about what I think of critical race theory, but I haven't read the same books as either, and I haven't taken classes on it. You must be throwing your hands up, saying, "Gah! That's not what it means! What you're describing is actually this whole other issue!"
But here's the difference.
If I allow buildings and structures to be designed based on my untrained colleagues' understanding of the loads and material properties, these buildings will fail. People could get hurt. Millions of dollars will be wasted having to rehabilitate the structures and mechanical systems.
If any of us goes through life with a misunderstanding of the law, we might break the law and have to pay the penalties.
But you political scientists are not applying the laws of physics or the laws of men. You're creating a whole esoteric system of vocabulary that means nothing to anyone outside of your field. And you even have schisms with each other. Conservative political scientists insist that critical race theory is an overarching system of thought. Liberal political scientists insist that it is a set of ideas that are only loosely associated with each other, you can believe some without believing all. They must be talking about different things.
That's easy, Force is making someone do something against their will, while Velocity is the rate at which money changes hands in an economy. Gosh, I could be an engineer!
(07-22-2020, 12:30 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2020, 12:20 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I want you to know that I totally understand how I make you feel.
In my office, I have to deal with people who don't know the difference between heat and temperature. I have to deal with people who don't know the difference between force and velocity. As an engineer, I have to try to help them communicate clearly with our clients, and bite my tongue as they misuse these highly technical terms.
So I come in here talking about what I think of critical race theory, but I haven't read the same books as either, and I haven't taken classes on it. You must be throwing your hands up, saying, "Gah! That's not what it means! What you're describing is actually this whole other issue!"
But here's the difference.
If I allow buildings and structures to be designed based on my untrained colleagues' understanding of the loads and material properties, these buildings will fail. People could get hurt. Millions of dollars will be wasted having to rehabilitate the structures and mechanical systems.
If any of us goes through life with a misunderstanding of the law, we might break the law and have to pay the penalties.
But you political scientists are not applying the laws of physics or the laws of men. You're creating a whole esoteric system of vocabulary that means nothing to anyone outside of your field. And you even have schisms with each other. Conservative political scientists insist that critical race theory is an overarching system of thought. Liberal political scientists insist that it is a set of ideas that are only loosely associated with each other, you can believe some without believing all. They must be talking about different things.
That's easy, Force is making someone do something against their will, while Velocity is the rate at which money changes hands in an economy. Gosh, I could be an engineer!
It's not too late! What's a little more school at this point?
(07-22-2020, 12:43 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2020, 12:30 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]That's easy, Force is making someone do something against their will, while Velocity is the rate at which money changes hands in an economy. Gosh, I could be an engineer!
It's not too late! What's a little more school at this point?
Thanks, but it never interested me.