What do we do with MAGA?

Dreamer

Argument Topic: I agree that older people are more likely to die from covid.

@just_sayin

You could easily substitute instead of racist, ageist things a person can easily and legally do is not get vaccinated.

"Evidence increasingly suggests that pulse oximeters, the little finger clips that measure blood oxygen, overestimate the blood oxygenation in Black patients." David Gorski 2022

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/covid-19-puts-the-spotlight-on-an-unexpected-racial-disparity-in-health-care/

Not all disparities are by individual choice. There is way more content to your post that I can respond to at the time. I disagree for example that affirmative action discriminates against whites and Asians, but forming a coherent and convincing argument requires more time and energy than I currently have. 

Unfortunately because the topic is about race I find it difficult to ask other liberals for help, if I don't phrase my words perfectly in woke language I get in trouble. We can end up with three different definitions of racism. The woke, colorblind, and finally the MAGA definition. There is a reason why race is such a difficult and confusing topic.

MichaelElpers

@Dreamer

"Unfortunately because the topic is about race I find it difficult to ask other liberals for help, if I don't phrase my words perfectly in woke language I get in trouble. We can end up with three different definitions of racism. The woke, colorblind, and finally the MAGA definition. There is a reason why race is such a difficult and confusing topic."

Doesnt seem that difficult.  Dont create criteria or treat people different based on their race.  If you factor it in you have racist habits.

Having faulty blood oxygen monitors isnt racist unless of course youre occusing a manufacturer of specifically purposefully creating that flaw.

just_sayin

Dreamer said:

@just_sayin

You could easily substitute instead of racist, ageist things a person can easily and legally do is not get vaccinated.

"Evidence increasingly suggests that pulse oximeters, the little finger clips that measure blood oxygen, overestimate the blood oxygenation in Black patients." David Gorski 2022

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/covid-19-puts-the-spotlight-on-an-unexpected-racial-disparity-in-health-care/

Not all disparities are by individual choice. There is way more content to your post that I can respond to at the time. I disagree for example that affirmative action discriminates against whites and Asians, but forming a coherent and convincing argument requires more time and energy than I currently have. 

Unfortunately because the topic is about race I find it difficult to ask other liberals for help, if I don't phrase my words perfectly in woke language I get in trouble. We can end up with three different definitions of racism. The woke, colorblind, and finally the MAGA definition. There is a reason why race is such a difficult and confusing topic.

I am sure that those that support the racist policies of Affirmative Action do so for noble purposes.  They want to see more Blacks and Hispanics succeed. Thats a good thing.  Helping others up is wonderful, but tearing down others so you can help someone else up is wrong. There are several racist beliefs in the rationale of those who support AA.  First, they believe that it is OK to penalize someone because of their racial group.  When you are willing to accept a Black student into college with much lower a SAT scores than you would accept for an Asian student, you are not just favoring the Black student, you are penalizing the Asian one because of their race.  That's unjust.  Secondly, this type of rationalization requires that the Asian student not be evaluated on their individual merits, but that they be reduced to a group affiliation.  Their humanity and individualism is disregarded.  A space-less and timeless amalgamation of Asian-ness or whiteness is created in the minds of those who support this kind of racism, which allows them to punish individuals of those races today for actions of those in the past.  Are people today guilty for actions of other people in the past who share their race?  Logically, they are not, but those who support the racist policies of Affirmative Action often express this racist notion.  True justice does not show favoritism, but that is exactly what those who support AA want.  They feel it is OK to tip the scales based on someone's race.  For that reason social justice is an immoral perversion of true justice, that cares more about someone's group affiliation than it does about character or merit.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Let's not fight over semantics.

@MichaelElpers

"Having faulty blood oxygen monitors isnt racist unless of course youre occusing a manufacturer of specifically purposefully creating that flaw."

No, I am not accusing any manufacturer of intentional racism. Under the strict definition of racism yes. On that note no book is racist because paper has no intentions and is not possible for an inanimate object to discriminate by race.

Yet, people say for example the The Turner Diaries are racist.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2004/turner-diaries-other-racist-novels-inspire-extremist-violence

I mean I could use the phrase racial harm or Institutionalracism to describe blood oximeters. In the end this becomes a fight over semantics, you know what I meant. 

MichaelElpers

@Dreamer

Books are an expression of ideas that people put on paper. The ideas are intentionally put there.  It would make the author racist.  My point had nothing to do with inanimate objects being racist which is impossible.  This is why i pointed to the manufacturer not the blood monitor itself.

Manufacturers of blood oxygen moniters gain no benefit from creating a potentially faulty monitor unless you think theyre so nefarious they risked losing money and trust just to give incorrect readings for black people.

My assumption is there was some scientific rational we didnt understand at the time causing faulty readings that testing didnt catch.  Nothing racist.

Dreamer

@MichaelElpers

"My assumption is there was some scientific rational we didnt understand at the time causing faulty readings that testing didnt catch.  Nothing racist."

This is pretty much the definition of institutional sometimes called colorblind racism.

Bogan

Hi guys!    I'm back!    My internet provider blew a fuse and I (and a lot of Australia) has been of line for over a week!    I know you missed me.

Bogan

@Dreamer

Dreamer quote   If you want to learn about myths and welfare, I recommend this article. If not, it’s your loss, I am not going to perform unpaid intellectual labor and summarize it for you.

 Hi Dreamer.  My internet service has been down and I missed you.     I clicked on your link (for once) because I don’t mind you using links for evidence.   What I object to is you directing me to some site where you expect me to debate against an opinion maker who I can not debate or question.     But anyhoo.   I have no idea what you are trying to prove with your link other than some welfare cheat in the USA ‘s race could not be ascertained.      How that negates my post is beyond me?

 

Dreamer quote      There are malicious criminals. Some of them cheat the welfare system. Yet, to use this as excuse to cut welfare spending is deceitful and immoral. We need better safeguards to prevent welfare cheats, yes. Yet, too often bad political actors use welfare con artists to reduce benefits.

 There are more than “some” welfare cheats in Australia.    I know, because I was in public accommodatio,n and my own friends and neighbours were dole bludgers.   When the socialist Whitlam government came into power in 1973, the law was that the federal Commonwealth employment Service had to find you a job or you automatically got the dole.        People were going into the CES and telling the officials that they were “lion tamers”,  “pop stars”, and “high wire circus acts.”    Getting the dole in Australia became so easy that a British man wrote a book entitles “How to Holiday in Australia At the Australian taxpayers Expense.”   People were going into the CES with Scottish brogue accents and claiming that they were born in Australia.     Insurance scams were so out of control that tourists would come to Australia just to stage a car accident and get on Australia's Disability Support Pension for the rest of their lives.   

  Meanwhile, every one of my young mates tossed in their apprenticeships and went surfing every day.    They thought that I was stu-pid because I kept my electrical apprenticeship and went to work.    The trick in Australia was to leave any place you could easily find a job and go to some sunny coastal town where work was scarce, live on the dole forever, and go surfing every day.     It became so ridiculous that a Soviet News crew came to Australia to do an expose on the degeneracy of western youth.      The Queensland town of Airie Beach received 2100+ dole cheques every two weeks, 320 oOld Age pension checks, and 700 Disbility Suoort Cheques, even though there were only 900 people resident in the town according to the census.   The figures I submitted clearly display that dole bludging in Australia is still very much out of control, especially with ethnic ghettoes.      Your opinion is that of a virtue signalling person who thinks that automatically supporting welfare for “the poor” is a noble thing to do, but who does not have a clue about what is happening out on the streets.    You must be a middle class chick raised in some leafy middle class bubble.    Do you hail from Martha's Vineyard?   

  

 Dreamer quote    Children in the USA suffer from food insecurity due to inflation caused by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Some of these children stop gaining weight and stop growing, failure to thrive.

 Black children in Democrat run cities suffer from food insecurity because their absent, low IQ fathers keep sticking up the local grocery store, or shoplifting in plain sight.    Being du-mb, they vote for low IQ African American mayors like London Breed, Brandon Johnson, Lori Lightfoot, and Eric Adams, people who defunded the police, abolished cash bail, allowed shoplifters to steal US$1000 dollars in goods, and wondered why every retail store, including food stores, fled the black Democrat controlled areas.

 

Dreamer quote       What do the Republicans do they complain that sending supplies to Ukraine the breadbasket of the world is costing too much. This is why I say Trump doesn't care about poor people.   

 Because the USA is trillions in dept and Biden is making it making a lot worse.      America can not spend it’s way out of dept.    Trump is the only hope you have to reverse that, or sooner of later, the bailiffs will arrive.  

 

Dreamer quote      I seriously doubt rich people are paying 2/3s of taxes. Rich people can simply move to another country like they did in France. The very rich don't have income per say but live off capital. The association between hard work and wealth is tenuous at best.

 If you tax the most productive people to death in order to buy the votes of the ever expanding unproductive and counter productive, then, sooner or later,  the productive are going to flee to another state or country which values them, and they will take their job creating skills and tax revenues with them.    eg Elon Musk.    That is why Democrat cities and states are losing their most productive taxpayers, and are going bankrupt.      It is an easy concept to understand.    How come you cannot understand it?     Didn't mummy and daddy give you a copy of the Golden Goose when you were a toddler?   

 

Dreamer quote     Instead the plutocracy uses private equity and leveraged buyouts to gut healthy corporations, take all the cash reserves, load them up with debt, sell all the assets, declare bankruptcy, and call it a win as the stockholders make a lot of money. This is pure extraction and kleptocracy. 

 Are you referring to all of the crooked woke CEO’s who funneled money into the Democrats and the Biden family, using Sam Bankman- Fried’s FTX to launder the “pay for play” bribes as “election contributions?

just_sayin

Dreamer said:

@MichaelElpers

"My assumption is there was some scientific rational we didnt understand at the time causing faulty readings that testing didnt catch.  Nothing racist."

This is pretty much the definition of institutional sometimes called colorblind racism.

I would agree with you that different races will have some differing health concerns.  However, those who assumed that humans are humans, and that their bodies would work the same way, were not being racist.  To impute racism upon them is unjust.  More technically, it is not the skin color that causes different races to have variances in their probability of having certain physical conditions, it is their genes, and certain gene conditions can be cross-racial.  Looking deeper than skin color, into why their are variances, is important if you really want to improve health outcomes.

just_sayin

Bogan said:

Hi guys!    I'm back!    My internet provider blew a fuse and I (and a lot of Australia) has been of line for over a week!    I know you missed me.

Of course you were missed.

MayCaesar

Dreamer said:

@MichaelElpers

"My assumption is there was some scientific rational we didnt understand at the time causing faulty readings that testing didnt catch.  Nothing racist."

This is pretty much the definition of institutional sometimes called colorblind racism.

"Colorblind racism" is contradiction in terms. "Racism" by definition implies color-awareness (if race is to be associated with skin color), so lack of thereof is incompatible with racism.

Western people are masters of inventing new interpretations of the word "racism", largely because they engage in the fallacy where they confuse the cause with the effect: where the proper argument is "racism means X and X is bad, so racism is bad", their argument is, "I call X racism, and racism is bad, so X is bad". It is a very deep confusion.

Bogan

@MichaelElpers

MichaelElpers quote   "Unfortunately because the topic is about race…….

I wish you were right, because the topic of “race” is one of my favourite subjects.    It is about “What Should We Do With MAGA Supporters” as if productive working class and lower middle class people, of every race, are the problem.

 

MichaelElpers quote       …….I find it difficult to ask other liberals for help,….

Well, you could ask me for help, because I am a Liberal, in the real sense of that often misused word.

 

MichaelElpers quote  …… if I don't phrase my words perfectly in woke language I get in trouble.

Which would tend to indicate that the left wing woke crowd have low IQ’s.    Low IQ people have little or no self control, are obsessed with their self esteem, and they get passionate and angry over things that normal people take in their stride.        Why you are frightened of dummies is beyond me?

 

MichaelElpers quote     We can end up with three different definitions of racism. The woke, colorblind, and finally the MAGA definition.

I can probably help you out there.   

The word “racism” acquired new meaning in the late 1960s. Previously it had been used to denote a type of doctrine and was often distinguished from “racialism”, the practice of such a doctrine. The International Convention had defined racial discrimination as a practice that resembled a crime.     Participants in the Civil Rights movement in the United States then gave a wider significance to “racism”, to denote racial prejudice and discrimination as well as associated doctrine. Racism in this wider sense was said to be institutionalized in white society and was represented as a social sickness. To call someone or something racist was to issue a potent moral condemnation. Thus, racism became a concept that empowered the African-Americans who had previously suffered from the racial assumptions of whites.

When racism was defined from this purely North American perspective, it often excluded any possibility that a black person could be called racist. It seemed to simplify the issue by implying that there was a single evil to be eliminated rather than a variety of evils.  However, if there were no distinction between racism and racial discrimination, one of the words must be redundant.  

 

The new laws adopted worldwide since 1965 to meet UN treaty obligations prohibit both the dissemination of racist doctrines and racially discriminatory practices. They have extended the definition of what is “racial” by forbidding less favourable treatment on grounds of ethnic and national origin as well as on grounds of race.

 

As a result, the UN General Assembly was persuaded in 1965 to adopt the International Convention Against All Forms of Racial Discrimination. This defines racial discrimination as “any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, or any other field of public life”. More than three-quarters of the world's states have now ratified this convention and accepted the extensive legal obligations to combat racial discrimination that ratification entails.

The UN does not define "racism", however it does define "racial discrimination": according to the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination,

the term "racial discrimination" shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life. '[2]

 

MichaelElpers quote    There is a reason why race is such a difficult and confusing topic."

 Actually I find it an easy and fascinating subject.    I find it incredible that people believe that races must be equal in every way, yet they can never explain how they came to that conclusion?    No one who ever crossed swords with me on this topic has ever submitted the slightest shred of evidence to support their belief that races are equal.      So, the idea that races are equal is simply a belief.     It is no different from belief in the Trinity, the Resurrection, or that the Earth is flat.

Michaelelpers quote     Doesnt seem that difficult.  Dont create criteria or treat people different based on their race.  If you factor it in you have racist habits.

 The idea of race has been around since forever because people name concepts which they can see.    Would you like me to submit some ancient racist remarks?     My favourite is “Britanculi”, which was the racist name the Romans gave the British tribesmen,  It literally means in Latin “Wretched little Brits.”   One of the tasks of science is to name natural concepts, and “race” is just as valid as “mammal”, “reptile”, “igneous rock”, or “white dwarf star.”

Bogan

Just-sayin quote       I am sure that those that support the racist policies of Affirmative Action do so for noble purposes.  They want to see more Blacks and Hispanics succeed. Thats a good thing.  Helping others up is wonderful, but tearing down others so you can help someone else up is wrong. There are several racist beliefs in the rationale of those who support AA.  First, they believe that it is OK to penalize someone because of their racial group.  When you are willing to accept a Black student into college with much lower a SAT scores than you would accept for an Asian student, you are not just favoring the Black student, you are penalizing the Asian one because of their race.  That's unjust.  Secondly, this type of rationalization requires that the Asian student not be evaluated on their individual merits, but that they be reduced to a group affiliation.  Their humanity and individualism is disregarded. 

What you wrote is not entirely correct.       The basis of AA is the belief that races are equal.     Therefore, if university admissions do not reflect racial population proportions, then the system is wrong, and it needs rectification by setting racial quotes.     Seen from that perspective, AA makes a lot of sense and can be seen as valid.       The problem is, AA is based upon an incorrect premise.    Races are not equal.    The proof is in the pudding.   All AA has achieved is to enroll a disproportionate number of minority people who have not got the acumen to handle the sort of STEM courses that an advanced society needs to stay competitive with our competitors.     All that it has achieved is blow out the number of Humanities students who take utterly useless university courses such as "Black studies" and "Gender studies."     

Having a bunch of unemployable and not real bright 'Black studies" graduates meant that black activists and lobbyists had to dream up some sort of job which might soak up this pool of unemployable graduates..   Thus we got Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion officers in every major and even minor corporation.   Companies began to go woke, and as they discovered, going woke meant going broke.    As for "Gender studies", these were the same morons who dreamed up the idea that a man can turn into a female just by putting on a dress and declaring that he "identifies" as being female.

If the very basis of your thinking is clearly false, then these are the sorts of crazy situations which will manifest themselves.   Irrationality will build upon irrationality, until your civilisation collapses.     .    

John_C_87

Who is MAGA?
Even communists can say they are working at making America great again...
MPM - Make Preamble matter. Make the introduction of whole truth matter don't use the broke piece of American constitution laying on the ground.

Using the United State Article of Amendment written as a part of the United States Constitution. Want to know what is dumb, calling a person who interprets only a partition of an introduced truth wrong because the person who holds grievance does not keep the whole truth together as their filed grievance. That's dumb, but then again maybe not some might see that as being super smart as they reap the benefit of something they never really defend, preserve, or protect.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: I think you are getting hung up on terminology.

@MayCaesar ;

The idea is that damage can be caused due to structural flaws in the system. Privilege and obliviousness to these flaws go together. Another way to explain is that racial harm can be caused even when everyone has the best of intentions. Racism without racists. 

MayCaesar

Dreamer said:

@MayCaesar ;

The idea is that damage can be caused due to structural flaws in the system. Privilege and obliviousness to these flaws go together. Another way to explain is that racial harm can be caused even when everyone has the best of intentions. Racism without racists. 

That something can cause damage disproportionally affecting people of different races does not imply that that something is racist. Lighting the streets negatively affects black people relative to white people as it becomes harder for them to hide in the shadows - in the darkness black people have the advantage of being less visible, while when the streets are lit they lose this advantage. Does this imply that lighting the streets is racist because it favors white people? Does this also imply that NOT lighting the streets is racist because it favors black people? Does this hence imply that, no matter what you do here or not do, you are a racist?

Or does all of this imply that, perhaps, your definition of racism is... how to put it softly... not quite intellectually viable?

Lastly, "racism without racists" is something from Orwell. Think about this sentence... Do you really not see how it is self-contradictory? If there are no racists, then where is racism - in the tea we drink? Tea, after all, is preferentially black.

It is quite sad that, instead of developing artificial intelligence or space exploration tech, so many people spend their time on this rubbish instead.

Dreamer

@MayCaesar

"Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is defined as policies and practices that exist throughout a whole society or organization that result in and support a continued unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others based on race. It manifests as discrimination in areas such as criminal justice, employment, housing, healthcare, education and political representation.["

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism

There is nothing wrong the statement racism without racists. This illustrates that racism is more than just prejudice or bias.

In a previous comment you made a mouse and elephant analogy comparing BLM to Proud Boys. Which group do you think is more racist?

MayCaesar

Dreamer said:

@MayCaesar

"Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is defined as policies and practices that exist throughout a whole society or organization that result in and support a continued unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others based on race. It manifests as discrimination in areas such as criminal justice, employment, housing, healthcare, education and political representation.["

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism

There is nothing wrong the statement racism without racists. This illustrates that racism is more than just prejudice or bias.

In a previous comment you made a mouse and elephant analogy comparing BLM to Proud Boys. Which group do you think is more racist?

Discrimination by race implies presence of racists. If there are no racists discriminating by race, discrimination by race does not occur. Your definition does not contradict it: it mentions "unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others based on race", it does not mention some ethereal medium that discriminates by race.
The fact that some arbitrarily defined groups have inferior outcomes to other arbitrarily defined groups does not imply that discrimination takes place. For example: women are on average less able to survive physical damage than men - it is not a result of discrimination and not a manifestation of sexism.

I think you should spend less time looking for sources to quote, and more time thinking about what is being said and why.

As for "which group is more racist", the question does not make much sense to me. Both exhibit racism in different ways. Quantitatively, however, BLM would be more racist, simply because far more people follow it and, therefore, racist incidents are expected to occur much more frequently. I am also not familiar with any elite politicians openly embracing Proud Boys, while embracing BLM is very popular among the Democratic elite.

Bogan

@Dreamer

Deamer quote     "Institutional racism, also known as systemic racism, is defined as policies and practices that exist throughout a whole society or organization that result in and support a continued unfair advantage to some people and unfair or harmful treatment of others based on race. It manifests as discrimination in areas such as criminal justice, employment, housing, healthcare, education and political representation.["

  A peculiarly American meaning of the word “racism” derives from the current dogma that all ethnic stocks are absolutely equal. Despite clear evidence to the contrary, all races have been declared to be equally talented, intelligent, and hard- working, and anyone who questions this dogma is thought to be not merely wrong, but evil.

This dogma has logical consequences that are profoundly important. If blacks, for example, are equal to Whites in every way, what accounts for their poverty, criminality, and welfare dependence?    Since any theory of racial differences has been either ruthlessly suppressed or even outlawed, the only possible explanation for black failure is White racism. And since blacks are markedly more poor, crime-prone, and welfare dependent, America must be racked with pervasive racism. Nothing else could be keeping them in such an abject state.

All public discourse on race today is locked into this rigid logic. Any explanation for black failure that does not depend on White wickedness threatens to veer off into the forbidden territory of racial differences. Thus, even if today's Whites can find in their hearts no desire to oppress blacks, yesterday's Whites must have oppressed them. If Whites do not consciously oppress blacks, they must oppress them unconsciously.    If no obviously racist individuals can be identified, then societal institutions must be racist and they must have “systemic racism.”   Or, since too many blacks are failing so terribly in America, there simply must be millions of White people we do not know about, who are working day and night to keep blacks in misery. The dogma of racial equality leaves no room for an explanation of black failure that is not, in some fashion, a racist indictment of White people.

The logical consequences of this are clear. Since we are required to believe that the only explanation for non-White failure is White racism, every time a non-White is poor, commits a crime, goes on welfare, or takes drugs, White society stands accused of yet another act of racism. All failure or misbehaviour by non-Whites is standing proof that White society is riddled with systemic hatred and bigotry.    For precisely so long as non-Whites fail to succeed in life at exactly the same level as Whites, Whites will be, by definition, thwarting and oppressing them. This obligatory pattern of thinking leads to strange conclusions. First of all, racism is a sin that is thought to be committed exclusively by White people. Indeed, a black congressman from Chicago, Gus Savage, and Coleman Young, the black mayor of Detroit, have argued that only White people can be racist. Likewise, in 1987, the affirmative action officer of the State Insurance Fund of New York issued a company pamphlet in which she explained that all Whites are racist and that only Whites can be racist. How else could the plight of blacks be explained without flirting with the possibility of racial inequality?

Although some blacks and liberal Whites concede that non-Whites can, perhaps, be racist, they invariably add that non-Whites have been forced into it as self-defense because of centuries of White oppression. What appears to be non-White racism is so understandable and forgivable that it hardly deserves the name. Thus, whether or not an act is called racism depends on the race of the racist. What would surely be called racism when done by Whites, is thought to be perfectly acceptable when done by anyone else.

Dreamer

Argument Topic: I am more worried about the far right. I don't think all MAGA are far right.

For example anti-abortion and white nationalists are becoming closer together.

"The white supremacist and anti-choice movements have always been closely linked. But more and more, they are becoming difficult to tell apart." Moira Donegan

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/24/white-nationalists-are-flocking-to-the-us-anti-abortion-movement

Bogan, I am done arguing with you and the others about race. Everything that can be said has been said and neither of us have changed our minds. People reading have informed me they are tired of too much talk about race, lets face it we have become boring. I thought maybe I could convince you but I'd rather focus on the anti-vaxx movement.

Bogan

@Dreamer ;   Bogan, I am done arguing with you and the others about race. Everything that can be said has been said and neither of us have changed our minds. People reading have informed me they are tired of too much talk about race, lets face it we have become boring. I thought maybe I could convince you but I'd rather focus on the anti-vaxx movement.

Of course you are.   You know that I am all over you like a rash.    

just_sayin

Dreamer said:

@Bogan

Trump is a populist president and perhaps the most anti-science ever.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_conspiracy_theories_promoted_by_Donald_Trump

With all due respect, Biden has had federal policies written based on the idea that a man can become a woman. Sorry, but saying a man can be a woman is not science. Biden's energy policy has attacked nuclear power when it is the only proven energy source without carbon emissions that can scale to the level that is needed.  Fewer people have died from nuclear power over 70 plus years than have died from either solar or wind.  Biden has ignored the evidence that school choice improves not only the kids who go to these private schools, but it improves educational outcomes of public school affected by them.  Democrats often express an anti-science view that an unborn child is not a living human being.  How can you say Trump is the most anti-science person, when so many on the left openly embrace anti-science?

MayCaesar

Dreamer said:

For example anti-abortion and white nationalists are becoming closer together.

"The white supremacist and anti-choice movements have always been closely linked. But more and more, they are becoming difficult to tell apart." Moira Donegan

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jan/24/white-nationalists-are-flocking-to-the-us-anti-abortion-movement

Bogan, I am done arguing with you and the others about race. Everything that can be said has been said and neither of us have changed our minds. People reading have informed me they are tired of too much talk about race, lets face it we have become boring. I thought maybe I could convince you but I'd rather focus on the anti-vaxx movement.

You are exhibiting a pattern of behavior that is strongly associated with extreme discomfort intolerance. As it is painful for you to consider that there can be people holding ideas that you find abhorrent while being logical and consistent, you try to convince yourself that those people are not worth paying any attention to because of their dishonesty, or association with groups you view negatively, or intellectual impairment, or something else. Rather than seriously considering the arguments of the most logical anti-abortion thinkers, you just lump them up with white supremacists (who incidentally you consider so vile and evil that their arguments are a-priori illogical) and throw away.

This is a sign of a very low mental fortitude. People with high mental fortitude dive into intellectual challenges and discomfort and see what transpires there. Low mental fortitude is going to set you back in life significantly. I will once again remind you of your own words that you will not achieve a lot financially in this life... You could though if you worked on your mental fortitude and purposefully challenged yourself by seriously engaging with people whose views you find unacceptable, but cannot refute easily. Otherwise, yeah, any serious challenge arises in your life (and if you go after serious economical achievements, you will be barraged by them) - and you will resort to your habitual dismissal of it, blame someone for it, say, "Well, what can I do about it anyway?", and remain stuck in the economical limbo.

Bogan

@just_sayin ;      Trump is a populist president and perhaps the most anti-science ever.

You have made a boo boo, just-sayin, I have never said the quote that you have attributed to me.   Scroll back and find out who it really was.   

just_sayin

Wow.  A few Democrats in congress could not bring themselves to vote that Israel has the right to exist When a political party's leaders are so anti-Semitic that they can't support the notion that Israel has a right to just exist, that party seems like the real danger.  

Bogan

@just_sayin

The Dems are in real danger because their leftist views are now veering into outright kookiness.     Trump keeps getting more and more popular while Biden's rating is sinking into the toilet.     Everyone knows that Biden can not possibly win against Trump, but Biden still won't step down.    The Africans are turning against the Dems, as the Democrat policies (which black voters once supported) is turning democrat controlled cities into third world sheetholes.  .   The Hispanics are turning away from Biden as the Democrat support for "transgenderism" is anathema to catholic Hispanics.   The Jews, who usually vote 70% Democrat must be feeling the heat of anti semitism now rife within the Democratic party, while Biden's half hearted support for Israel must also have them thinking again about who they are going to vote for.     It was said that in the last Presidential election, that Biden was mainly voted in by women voters, but here again, the Dems are losing women over transgenderism.    Few women would support the idea that males should be able to call themselves females and then compete against females in female sports.     So too, the indoctrination of their children in schools with anti US, anti white, and pro transgender propaganda is also pis-sing women off.

MayCaesar

I have to agree that the left movement on the West has taken a strange turn. The discussion between the two movements has always been focusing on real social and economical issues. Recently though the left movement has been focusing on weird stuff like finding racism/sexism/homophobia/transphobia everywhere, denying basic biology, catering to the most emotionally fragile and unstable individuals... It is like a bunch of misbehaving children are holding millions of adults a hostage.

People though have real needs. When this circus is put against serious economists, investors, lawyers and doctors, who are the voters going to pick? I would expect this temporary confusion to be cleared up quite quickly, and when people remember that paying their bills is more important to them than listening to yet another teary-eyed story about the traumas of a person living in a first world country from being "misgendered", they are going to wipe the floor with these folks on the elections.

Openminded

Argument Topic: just_sayin

@just_sayin

 think that tribalism is rampant among MAGA.  I think it is equally rampant among leftists.  It drives me crazy that MAGA will excuse some of Trump's conduct because he's on their side.  It irritates me just as much to watch Biden supporters excuse his lies and unethical conduct also.  Just yesterday he told his 20th documented lie about his house fire story.  That's 20 documented lies over just that one event since 2020. Biden was probably trying to clumsily identify with the people of Maui and threw in some hyperbole. Refreshingly and thankfully he didn´t resort to bombastic and braggadocio.

  /The media is mostly silent.  Biden lied about his involvement with Hunter's business dealings, yet the media have been mostly silent.  This investigation has been under way for five years, no real evidence yet has been shown, but we shall see. They have aligned with 'their guy'.  You and I both know that if the situation were reversed and were about Trump the coverage would be much different.  

Both parties have demanded unconditional loyalty to their party.  McCain, Romney and Cheney were very prominent in the Republican party, with 2 of them being the presidential nominees for the party.  Now their legacy is tarnished among Republicans because they spoke out against Trump.  This is shockingly unamerican and despicable. The three decent republicans have been ostracised for decency and loyalty to their country and not one man. And even more shocking is Trump had and still has much influence over the republican party. As bad as that is, the left has been worse.  Joe Lieberman, the vice-presidential candidate for the Democrat party was essentially voted out of the party for being 'too moderate' and to 'pro-Israel'.   Yes, Dems have been becoming increasingly less tolerant of those that are conservative dems. Joe Manchin is on the verge of leaving the Democrat party because his party spends more time attacking him than the Republican party does.  Yes the Dems have their share of problems for sure. They´ve been strongly influenced and pushed into a very progressive party with less moderate factions like The Squad. Republicans have been fractured also with The Tea Party and Freedom Caucus.

Recently a state Democrat had to switch parties and become a Republican because she supported school choice.  68% of Democrats support school choice.  85% of Black parents support school choice, but you can't take that position and expect Democratic party support.  The power of teacher's unions and of tribalism is too great to differ on that issue.  Did you know that pro-life Democrats have not been allowed to speak at the past 3 Democrat party national conventions?  Prominent pro-abortion Republicans such as Rudy Giuliani and Christine Todd Whitman have had prominent speeches at the RNC conventions.  So, the extremism does seem to be tilted more toward the Democrats. Now I hadn´t read this about the Dems not allowed to speak at national conventions. Decades ago perhaps. Is this old news? Your assertion that the Dems are more extremist seems frankly biased.

You can see that tribalism in the recent Supreme Court decisions.  When the racist policy of Affirmative Action in college admissions was struct down, there was not repentence from Democrats over the students that these policies had harmed.  Instead, we saw Democrats double down on their support of racism.  The focus seemed to be how they could continue to discriminate but be more covert about it. There have been numerous fearmongering stories about how ending discriminatory Affirmative Action policies in hiring and promotions will harm America.  Democrats have truly doubled down on their racism, and you don't hear voices who oppose this form of racism speaking out in that party. ??? Not sure I understand this? ¨The focus seemed to be how they could continue to discriminate but be more covert about it.¨ I do not believe Democrats are doubling down on racism. The Democrats favor Affirmative Action in college admissions-they always have. How is this racist? And what is the fear being mongered? You mean fear of African Americans given opportunity? Affirmative Action is meant to lift up the poor, impoverished but talented, intelligent African Americans with much to offer America. Thatś a win-win for all of America. Not sure what news you´re listening to? Also please read about Legacy college admissions. Youĺl be surprised how many Legacy admissions there are. There likely will be a bill to stop the unfair policy of Legacy college admissions to balance this out. There´s a huge difference between the two policies. Affirmative Action expands OPPORTUNITY while Legacy admissions expand PRIVILEGE.

I do hear people speaking out against Trump from the Republican party.  That's not to say they have the influence to keep him from winning the nomination.  But I do think that it is interesting that more Republicans have spoken out against Trump and his actions than Democrats have spoken out against either Biden's unethical business dealings or their support of racist Affirmative Action policies. Come on. Because the Dems are trying to help African Americans does not make this a racist policy. That sounds like a Fox News talking point. Are you saying Democrats hate white people? It seems like you´re passionately trying to compare apples to oranges but it just won´t work. The Dems and Republicans are definitely not one in the same. There are plenty of Democrats who believe Biden is just too old to run again and have spoken out openly knowing that Biden will not retaliate. Now Trump on the other hand ....  Trump gave us George Santos, MTG, The Proud Boys, The Three Percenters.... Trump´s own administration have spoken out against him and with fear knowing that he MAY retaliate against them. Trump gave America permission to act with amoral repugnancy - and THAT will be HIS legacy.

Openminded

@just_sayin
https://thepoliticswatcher.com/pages/articles/congress/2023/7/30/democratic-party-ku-klux-klan-debunking-myth

Openminded

Argument Topic: Are Dems in bed with the KKK? Did Dems push Jim Crow laws? Did the Dems appoint a KKK member to the SC? Etc.

@just_sayin
So in my opinion, the proper response to racism is to repent of it, not double down on it, as the Democrat party has done.  It was wrong of Democrats to get into bed with the KKK, under their white sheets.  It was wrong for the Democrats to push Jim Crow laws, appoint a KKK member to the Supreme Court, place Asian people in concentration camps, prevent Black kids from going to good public schools, and it is just as wrong today to discriminate against Asian and white students because of their color.  Which races are being targeted may have changed somewhat in the Democrat party, but the racism remains.  Its time to end racist Affirmative Action policies. I believe you´re stretching the truth here. Sure, the above things MAY have happened decades ago....I researched a few and they´re OLD assertions, but t apply this in today´s political climate is just disingenuous.

Openminded

@jack

Dems vs. Repubs. Here we are in our two-party system. The arguments I´m hearing seem to be pushing one side or another. The Bottom Line:  Vote for the LEAST immoral party. That´s it. To me The Democrats are the LEAST immoral.

just_sayin

@Openminded
??? Not sure I understand this? ¨The focus seemed to be how they could continue to discriminate but be more covert about it.¨ I do not believe Democrats are doubling down on racism. The Democrats favor Affirmative Action in college admissions-they always have. How is this racist? And what is the fear being mongered? You mean fear of African Americans given opportunity? Affirmative Action is meant to lift up the poor, impoverished but talented, intelligent African Americans with much to offer America. Thatś a win-win for all of America. Not sure what news you´re listening to? Also please read about Legacy college admissions. Youĺl be surprised how many Legacy admissions there are. There likely will be a bill to stop the unfair policy of Legacy college admissions to balance this out. There´s a huge difference between the two policies. Affirmative Action expands OPPORTUNITY while Legacy admissions expand PRIVILEGE.

Now I'm sure you think the racism you support is well intentioned racism, but its still racism.  Affirmative Action is indeed a racist policy.  It shows favoritism or penalizes someone based on their race.  Discrimination based on race is indeed racism.  I know you think the racism that your support is 'good' racism - but it is just racism.  To come to those racist conclusions one had to ignore the individual - their merit, their character, and ignore their individuality and humanity and reduce them to an automaton of their racial group.  I'm sure someone would argue that their racism helps the races that they want to help - but all racist arguments make that claim.  Racism always benefits someone at the expense of someone else.  What they dismiss, is that those racist policies unjustly penalize others who are not in the races they favor.  If you support Affirmative Action, then you support racism.  How is it just to penalize an Asian student in college admissions because of her race?  

Further, there can be negative impacts of Affirmative Action policies on Black students.  Mismatching a Black student, who has lower academic credentials than the school would accept for an Asian or white student,  to a college, can set that student up for failure.  That is part of the reason why Black students are twice as likely to drop out of college than white students, and even though they are more likely to enter STEM fields, are more than twice as likely to switch to lower paying degree fields.  

Contrast that with HBCUs.  HBCUs are about 3% of colleges and universities in the US.  They make up about 10% of Black students.  But 20% of all Black college graduates.  They represent 40% of all Black engineer graduates, and 50% of all Black lawyers.  A racist assumption that supporters of Affirmative Action have made is that if there isn't this racist policy in place then Black students won't get into college.  That is a racist lie.  Some Black students may not get into as prestigious of an institution, but they still would get into a good school - a school that fits the academic rigor they are ready for - which means they will be more likely to succeed and graduate.

I hope that you will see the error of your ways and repent of the racist polices you support.  

Openminded

@just_sayin

I see your racism argument and raise you one simple truth.
Yes, in the Democrats mission to support our least fortunate group (lifting them up to be better leaders and role models) unintended consequences happened. When supporting the most marginalized group, another less marginalized group gets overlooked. But to demonize the Democrats in their support of Affirmative Action policy, calling them racists along with  MANY untruths you stated is truly gaslighting. Stop demonizing. I suggest you do some research on Legacy admissions to be fair.

just_sayin

Openminded said:

@just_sayin

I see your racism argument and raise you one simple truth.
Yes, in the Democrats mission to support our least fortunate group (lifting them up to be better leaders and role models) unintended consequences happened. When supporting the most marginalized group, another less marginalized group gets overlooked. But to demonize the Democrats in their support of Affirmative Action policy, calling them racists along with  MANY untruths you stated is truly gaslighting. Stop demonizing. I suggest you do some research on Legacy admissions to be fair.

I typically will not call someone a 'racist'.  They would have to be openly pushing an agenda and trying to get others to support their racist policies for me to consider this (maybe for Louis Farrakhan or Ibram X Kendi would qualify).  Its not that Democrats may or may not be racist.  I just don't find it helpful to call people that.  My focus is on racist policies.  People tend to dig in on their support of racism when you call them racists.  They rationalize their support of racism.  So I'd rather focus on the actual policy or behavior.  

I don't support legacy admissions.  That argument seems like a 'whataboutism' to me.  

I am sure you think the policies you support are noble.  You want to help Black and Hispanics to get into colleges and get more degrees.  If that was all, that would be a noble goal.  However, you are willing to obtain that by unjust means that discriminate against white and Asian students.  You rationalize your support by minimizing the injustice done to Asian and white students.  You realize that there is another way.  You can help someone up, without tearing someone else down, right?

Bogan

@Dreamer

Dreamer quote   "about 80 percent of white evangelicals consistently approved of President Trump's performance. While their numbers have dwindled from 21 to 15% of the U.S. population"

 Which would roughly coincide with the decay of US influence, power, and social stability.       The more non white people who populate the USA, the more the USA sinks into the toilet.      Compare North America to South America.      South America is actually much richer in resources than North America.    It should be a rival for North America.      But while there is a United States of America, there is only a Disunited States of South America.     Do you think that might be so because collectively, Hispanic people are not as bright as white people?     How about the “Soccor War” between El Salvador and Honduras, which broke out because of a disputed line call in the Soccor World Cup?      White people can do some pretty stu-pid things, some of them actually voted for Joe Biden, but could you imagine Florida going to war with Texas over a football game? 

 

Dreamer quote    "That's right—15% of Americans account for around 25% of those who turn out to vote." 

 I have no idea why you should think that there is anything wrong with that?        The reason why the USA prospered is because most of the population were Christians, with Christian values and ideals, especially the “Protestant work ethic.”         Would you prefer it if most people in the USA were Muslims?     If it had happened that the USA was settled by Muslims, do you really think that the USA today would be the world’s premier democracy?     Or would it have been another South America, except a lot more dysfunctional?      

    

Dreamer quote      Anyways this is why I focus on white evangelical Christians.

 No doubt about it, you seem to have a beef with white Christians.   What skin colour do you have?  And which God, Gods, or ideology, do you prostrate yourself too? 

 

Dreamer quote       Hmmm, targeting Christianity seems like a smart place to start weakening Trump's power base.

 You seem to despise Donald Trump so much that you think that targeting Christians is the place to start attacking him?     Look ma-a-a-ate.    I am an atheist, but I more or less accept the Christian moral code, because it just happens to be the basis of western democracy.     Whether you realise it or not, white Christian countries are the best places on planet earth to live in.    Which is why every non white person on planet earth wants to come and live with us.

But you see, the problem is, that the more that the white Christians, or white atheists who follow the Christian moral code, get displaced by non white people, the more western society turns into the sort of places that these people fled from.   You are cutting off your nose to spite your face.    

MayCaesar

@Openminded

"Unintended consequences" refers to consequences of an action that do not seem to logically derive from it and are hard to predict, yet happen in the real world - for example, one of the unintended consequences of government-provided housing is raise of crime rates due to concentration of the lowest elements in the society in isolated communities.

Affirmative action though have very clear intent. What is unintended about people of certain races gaining advantage over people of other races if that is explicitly prescribed by the policy? Would you also say that Jim Crow's laws were not racist, that they were just an unintended consequence of the overall good intentions - to separate law-abiding citizens from criminals?

Bogan

@Openminded

Openminded quote   Yes, in the Democrats mission to support our least fortunate group (lifting them up to be better leaders and role models) unintended consequences happened.

 How is openly and publicly discriminating against people based on their race, and instigating quotas based on race, “unintended” racism?

 

Openminded quote        When supporting the most marginalized group, another less marginalized group gets overlooked.

White, Jewish, and Asian students were not “overlooked” at all.     They were openly racially discriminated against.    Either racism is absolutely wrong, or you and your peers think it can be beneficial in certain circumstances.      In that case, racism can not always be wrong. 

 

Openminded quote      But to demonize the Democrats in their support of Affirmative Action policy, calling them racists along with MANY untruths you stated is truly gaslighting.

It is not untrue, nor is it “gaslighting”,  to point out that selecting people solely upon the colour of their skin for either plum government jobs, or student selection is racism.  The problem for you leftist humanitarians is, that while you consider racism as the Eight Deadly Sin, you either refuse to recognise your own racism, or you dismiss it as inconsequential because it exists to lift up “marginalised” people. 

 

Openminded quote      Stop demonizing. I suggest you do some research on Legacy admissions to be fair.

 Stop being hypocritical.  Either racism is wrong or it is not wrong.      This is the weakest link in the “anti racist” chain of “logic” and you can bet that I am going to keep sawing away at it.  

Openminded

Argument Topic: Now Iḿ sure you think the racism you support is well intentioned racism, ....

@just_sayin

 just sayin said  Now I'm sure you think the racism you support is well intentioned racism, but its still racism.  Affirmative Action is indeed a racist policy.  It shows favoritism or penalizes someone based on their race.  Discrimination based on race is indeed racism.  I know you think the racism that your support is 'good' racism - but it is just racism.  To come to those racist conclusions one had to ignore the individual - their merit, their character, and ignore their individuality and humanity and reduce them to an automaton of their racial group.  I'm sure someone would argue that their racism helps the races that they want to help - but all racist arguments make that claim.  Racism always benefits someone at the expense of someone else.  What they dismiss, is that those racist policies unjustly penalize others who are not in the races they favor.  If you support Affirmative Action, then you support racism.  How is it just to penalize an Asian student in college admissions because of her race? 

I understand the point you are pressing. Yes, lifting up one race, will always unfairly and unintendedly keep another at status quo. Lifting up a marginalized race, to me, can only benefit society as a whole and I never thought of AA as being a racist policy. I´ve read that the argument ¨Asians are being discriminated against due to the racist AA policy¨ is being used to help support the anti Affirmative Action policy. Are Whites unfairly pitting Asians against African Americans to help push the racism of AA theory? Whites are the privileged in America. Could it be that whites are upset that Asians are beneficiaries of AA and taking THEIR spots? Could it possibly be that Asian admissions into college unjustly penalizes the White student and hey, let´s blame the Blacks? There was a study done back in 2019. 43% of white students who got into Harvard were in fact Legacy Admissions. This is Affirmative Action for the white and wealthy.  Could your question be ¨Are WHITES being unfairly discriminated against with AA?¨  I would be interested in your thoughts about Legacy Admissions.

You say that in many instances, because of AA, black students drop out twice as much than white students. Now along with your assertion that black students drop out at a higher rate due to their lack of credentials, blacks also drop out due to racism and harassment in schools along with poverty. Your assertion that ¨Mismatching a black student who has lower academic credentials than Asian or white students¨ is questionable. Is it your belief that a AA minority group is not qualified academically? Your paragraph on HBCUs is troubling to me. Correct me if I´m wrong, but it sounds as if you believe that Blacks should be happy with their traditional HBCU and not rock the boat by bothering to apply to a more prestigious college due to lack of credentials. You say ¨they should settle for a ¨good¨ school.¨ Eeeeeks.

jack

Openminded said:

I understand the point you are pressing. Yes, lifting up one race, will always unfairly and unintendedly keep another at status quo. Lifting up a marginalized race, to me, can only benefit society as a whole and I never thought of AA as being a racist policy.

Hello again, O:

I DO have a simple solution, of course...  If education is in short supply, instead of doling out the available seats, and pissing off everybody in the process, let's increase the supply and make education free for all comers.. 

Will it be expensive?  Nahh.  An educated society will pay big dividends.

Brevity rules!

excon

just_sayin

@Openminded
I understand the point you are pressing. Yes, lifting up one race, will always unfairly and unintendedly keep another at status quo. Lifting up a marginalized race, to me, can only benefit society as a whole and I never thought of AA as being a racist policy. I´ve read that the argument ¨Asians are being discriminated against due to the racist AA policy¨ is being used to help support the anti Affirmative Action policy. Are Whites unfairly pitting Asians against African Americans to help push the racism of AA theory? Whites are the privileged in America. Could it be that whites are upset that Asians are beneficiaries of AA and taking THEIR spots? Could it possibly be that Asian admissions into college unjustly penalizes the White student and hey, let´s blame the Blacks? There was a study done back in 2019. 43% of white students who got into Harvard were in fact Legacy Admissions. This is Affirmative Action for the white and wealthy.  Could your question be ¨Are WHITES being unfairly discriminated against with AA?¨  I would be interested in your thoughts about Legacy Admissions.

No.  It is not inevitable that helping someone up, means tearing someone else down.  Only 4% of Black students are proficient (on grade level) in science in the 12th grade.  Just 6% of Black students are proficient in math in the the 12th grade.  You aren't going to get many STEM graduates in college with those kinds of results in grade school.  Many inner city schools, as well as Appalachian schools, don't even offer the right math and science classes to prepare kids for college.  That would be a start.  School choice and charters will help, well, they aren't as likely to happen in Appalachia, but you get the idea.

It seems to me a premise of the argument that 'Whites [are] unfairly pitting Asians against African Americans to help push the racism of AA theory" is that it assumes that it is OK to discriminate against white people and white people know this.  That is truly racist assumption.  No one should be discriminated against because of his/her race.  The situation at Harvard disproportionately impacted Asians.  True it impacts some whites.  But whites are  roughly 65% of the population, while Asians are 4% of the population, yet Harvard's own records indicate that by merit alone Asians would make up 40% or more of the student body.  So the impact to them is much greater.  Just because the impact to Asians is greater, doesn't lesson the injustice of discriminating against whites though.  

 ¨Are WHITES being unfairly discriminated against with AA?¨ Answer: Yes.  If AA is not discriminating against whites, and it doesn't change outcomes in admissions, hiring, promotions, grants, scholarships, contracts, and benefits - then let's get rid of it.  But I would argue you think it has done all of those things and that's why you don't want to get rid of it.  Do you think it is OK to discriminate against a white person? 

Again, I don't support legacy admissions.  There aren't a lot of Appalachian Americans at Harvard.

 "Whites are the privileged in America."  - What an incredibly racist comment.  Do you really think that a poor white child in Appalachia is treated the same way as a rich white person in Manhattan or Martha's Vineyard?  Seriously?  Just what privilege do all white people, without exception, share?  I've mentioned I was born in Appalachia.  If white privilege is real, then why didn't it make it up to the holler to us?  Appalachia is the poorest region in the US.  More loans are turned down there than anywhere in the US.  The average income is less than anywhere else.  Tell me how are Appalachian Americas portrayed in TV and movies?  Are they all flattering portrayals?  If a poor white kid from Appalachia walks into a store, will he be followed?  OF COURSE HE WILL.  HE'S A POOR WHITE KID FROM APPALACHIA!!!  Do you make assumptions about an Appalachian kid's intelligence or abilities?  Does anyone ever mock their accent?  Have you ever heard any redneck jokes?  I'm waiting to hear just what privilege is whites only, and applies to each and every white person, and not anyone of any other race.  Please answer that question.

You say that in many instances, because of AA, black students drop out twice as much than white students. Now along with your assertion that black students drop out at a higher rate due to their lack of credentials, blacks also drop out due to racism and harassment in schools along with poverty. Your assertion that ¨Mismatching a black student who has lower academic credentials than Asian or white students¨ is questionable. Is it your belief that a AA minority group is not qualified academically? Your paragraph on HBCUs is troubling to me. Correct me if I´m wrong, but it sounds as if you believe that Blacks should be happy with their traditional HBCU and not rock the boat by bothering to apply to a more prestigious college due to lack of credentials. You say ¨they should settle for a ¨good¨ school.¨ Eeeeeks.

Yes, Black students are accepted at schools with lower SAT scores than are accepted for whites and Asians.  Harvard admitted this.  In fact, 50% of the Asian students rejected at Harvard had higher GPAs and SAT scores than the average Black student who was accepted.  In the book Mismatched, Sanders explains how Affirmative Action has hurt the rates at which Blacks pass the law bar exam (taken from book review):

As of the early 2000s, “about 47 percent [of black law students who enrolled in law school] were becoming lawyers,” whereas “83 percent of entering white students were becoming lawyers.” At that time, admissions preferences increased the overall pool of black law students by 14 percent, but less than a third of that 14 percent became lawyers. If the 86 percent of black students who would have been admitted to law school without affirmative action passed the bar exam at the rate their white academic counterparts did, then, with the addition of the fraction of the 14 percent who became lawyers, the overall result would be an increase in the number of black lawyers. But Sander found that mismatch “appeared to reduce the other 86 percent’s chances of becoming lawyers by nearly a third.” Sander concludes: “Admittedly, these were estimates; nonetheless, the negative effect on the success of black law students was clearly much larger than the positive effect of racial preferences in expanding the pool of blacks admitted into law schools.” Even a critic of Sander’s thesis acknowledged that, if law school admissions preferences were removed, the number of black law students who would become lawyers by passing a bar exam would remain steady.

You may want to read:

The Painful Truth About Affirmative Action
How Affirmative Action at Colleges Hurts Minority Students

A good intro and more neutral source would be
Does Affirmative Action Lead to “Mismatch”? A Review of the Evidence

I believe that HBCUs have done a better job or producing Black graduates in STEM fields and lawyers than schools with Affirmative Action programs.  You can't deny the evidence of this.  I want a higher percentage of Black graduates, I'm not interested in virtue signaling that a school increased its Black enrollment, if it means more Black students will end up dropping out or switching to lower paying degree programs.  I think students should go to a school where they fit academically - being in the lowest quintile of students dramatically increases the odds of dropping out or flunking out of a school.  

Bogan

Openminded quote   I understand the point you are pressing. Yes, lifting up one race, will always unfairly and unintendedly keep another at status quo.

 I do not think you do understand the point that “just-sayin” and I are making.     ‘Lifting up one race” using racism is still racism.     Either racism is wrong, or it is not wrong.   It can not be both.      The premise that you are avoiding, (to the extend of even thinking up euphemisms for “racism” instead of speaking about it directly), is that despite your BELIEF that racism is utterly wrong, you support policies which are racist.    That is why you are so uncomfortable discussing this point.    

 

Openminded quote       Lifting up a marginalized race, to me, can only benefit society as a whole and I never thought of AA as being a racist policy.

 Hahahaha.    Of course you haven’t, now let’s examine the logic of your statement.      What you are clearly saying is that your left wing approved racism benefits society, so you have never thought of it as racism.     But it is.     If you discriminate against people solely based upon the colour of their skin, that is racism.       If you benefit people solely upon the colour of their skin, that is racism.   If you blame one race for the dysfunctions of another, that is racism.      The reason I stopped being a committed “anti racist” and became a racist, is because I recognised that the anti racist message promoted by well meaning activist class people like yourself, was a contradiction.    My aim, is to remove the mental block that the activist caste has inserted into your brain, so that you can think straight and recognise absurdity when it is right in front of you.     Goebbels said that he could make people believe anything if he could just repeat the same message, over and over again.      If you can not see the contradiction in your own thinking, then you can not hope to convince anybody of the validity of your opinions.     Truths are stubborn things.    With intelligent people, reality trumps ideology, every time. 

 

Openminded quote       I´ve read that the argument ¨Asians are being discriminated against due to the racist AA policy¨ is being used to help support the anti Affirmative Action policy. Are Whites unfairly pitting Asians against African Americans to help push the racism of AA theory? Whites are the privileged in America. Could it be that whites are upset that Asians are beneficiaries of AA and taking THEIR spots? Could it possibly be that Asian admissions into college unjustly penalizes the White student and hey, let´s blame the Blacks? There was a study done back in 2019. 43% of white students who got into Harvard were in fact Legacy Admissions. This is Affirmative Action for the white and wealthy.  Could your question be ¨Are WHITES being unfairly discriminated against with AA?¨  I would be interested in your thoughts about Legacy Admissions.

 Okay, you can have my “thoughts” straight away.      Asians (and whites, especially Jews) are being racially discriminated against in order for universities to fulfill racial quotas, where students are selected for skin colour, instead of academic achievement.     If you really were an anti racist, then you should be screaming your head off about this unacceptable situation.     Instead, you ask a series of three questions calculated to steer the discussion away from that which you do not want to think about.      Your questions imply that white people are doing something insidious by “pitting Asians against Africans”, which is a racist premise.     By implying that white people are doing something insidious, you are once again, committing an act of racism towards white people.     But you could not see that, because you have been “conditioned” (brain washed) to never think that racism toward white people is ever wrong.      You inhabit a contradictory world where you believe that racism is utterly wrong, then you defend your position by making a racist accusation towards white people.    Your brain skipped a cog because of the mental barrier inserted in your head, and you can not recognise your own racism.   

 

Openminded quote        You say that in many instances, because of AA, black students drop out twice as much than white students. Now along with your assertion that black students drop out at a higher rate due to their lack of credentials, blacks also drop out due to racism and harassment in schools along with poverty.

 You are once again submitting a racist accusation against white people which just happens to be completely false.     Those violent university students shouting down and jostling speakers like Candice Owen, Charlie Kirk, Ben Shapiro, and Riley Gains are from your side of politics, not mine.     When a bunch of people need to shout down their opponents to stop them from speaking, a supposedly intelligent and educated person such as yourself should instantly recognise which side is the real fascists, and which side is telling the truth.     Exactly who is “harassing” back students in university?     Please submit one example where black students are in any way “harassed” by whites in a university today?     Evergreen university students recently harassed  a white (Jewish) professor who refused to comply with their racist "black university day only" protest.    Just who are the real racists?   

 

Openminded quote     Your assertion that ¨Mismatching a black student who has lower academic credentials than Asian or white students¨ is questionable. Is it your belief that a AA minority group is not qualified academically? Your paragraph on HBCUs is troubling to me. Correct me if I´m wrong, but it sounds as if you believe that Blacks should be happy with their traditional HBCU and not rock the boat by bothering to apply to a more prestigious college due to lack of credentials. You say ¨they should settle for a ¨good¨ school.¨ Eeeeeks.

 Black African people are very much un represented in the very hard STEM courses where you really need to have a lot of brains to keep up.    In Mathematics, they are so underrepresented that black activists are now calling Mathematics itself “racist.”    Which, if you have any capacity to think at all, you know is absurd.      Instead, Africans are very much over represented in crappy ‘Humanities” courses like “gender studies” and “black studies”, which are courses no corporate entity has ever had any interest in at all.       So, black people have a real problem.     They borrow a bunch of money from the feds to study university courses for which employers have no interest in.     So, they need to invent a situation where employers will employ the unemployable.    They use their political influence and their media affiliates to promote an invented racist scenario that white people are somehow keeping black people down.     And the only solution to that is for companies to hire DEI officers, so that corporations will hire people solely based upon their skin colour.     This is done to right this supposedly dastardly and insidious behaviour by white people.      Which is a racist accusation directed at white people.  I am a white person, and I object to the racism that you support.

just_sayin

Argument Topic: Democrats show what anti-Semites they are once again

The U.S. House of Representatives voted overwhelmingly on a resolution to condemn anti-Semitism in the U.S. and around the world in another show of support for Israel and against the terrorist group Hamas.  The vote on the measure condemning anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism was 311 to 14, with 92 Democrats voting 'present' and 17 members not voting.  Many Democrats were unwilling to condemn Hamas for raping women and cutting babies heads off because they were Jewish.  Some Democrats objected to saying Israel had a right to exist.  And instead of addressing the racism, bigotry, and anti-Semitism within their party, Democrats have begun to create fantasy scenarios about the orange man being a dictator.  

jack

just_sayin said:

Democrats show what anti-Semites they are once again

Hello j:

Nahhh...  They just don't like the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians..  I'm a Jew..  I don't like it either..

excon

just_sayin

jack said:

just_sayin said:

Democrats show what anti-Semites they are once again

Hello j:

Nahhh...  They just don't like the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians..  I'm a Jew..  I don't like it either..

excon

Shame on you Jack.  There is no moral equivalency.  Israel didn't rape Palestinian women.  They didn't shoot babies as they laid in their cribs.  They didn't cut the heads off of grandmothers.  But Hamas did.  Hamas also hid behind human shields so they could accuse Israel of targeting civilians.  Hamas put tunnels under hospitals, so they could accuse Israel falsely.  Your Jew hatred is unacceptable.   What Hamas did was terrorism and it is not justifiable.

jack

just_sayin said:

jack said:

just_sayin said:

Democrats show what anti-Semites they are once again

Hello j:

Nahhh...  They just don't like the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians..  I'm a Jew..  I don't like it either..

excon

Shame on you Jack.  There is no moral equivalency.  Israel didn't rape Palestinian women.  They didn't shoot babies as they laid in their cribs.  They didn't cut the heads off of grandmothers.  But Hamas did.  Hamas also hid behind human shields so they could accuse Israel of targeting civilians.  Hamas put tunnels under hospitals, so they could accuse Israel falsely.  Your Jew hatred is unacceptable.   What Hamas did was terrorism and it is not justifiable.

Hello j:

I wish you could read better....  I didn't mention Hamas..  That you assume I support Hamas because I don't like the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians, is despicable.

If you didn't know this before, let me enlighten you once again:  The Palestinians AREN'T Hamas.  They AREN'T the enemy.  Are you unable to make that distinction???  

excon

just_sayin

jack said:

just_sayin said:

jack said:

just_sayin said:

Democrats show what anti-Semites they are once again

Hello j:

Nahhh...  They just don't like the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians..  I'm a Jew..  I don't like it either..

excon

Shame on you Jack.  There is no moral equivalency.  Israel didn't rape Palestinian women.  They didn't shoot babies as they laid in their cribs.  They didn't cut the heads off of grandmothers.  But Hamas did.  Hamas also hid behind human shields so they could accuse Israel of targeting civilians.  Hamas put tunnels under hospitals, so they could accuse Israel falsely.  Your Jew hatred is unacceptable.   What Hamas did was terrorism and it is not justifiable.

Hello j:

I wish you could read better....  I didn't mention Hamas..  That you assume I support Hamas because I don't like the indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians, is despicable.

If you didn't know this before, let me enlighten you once again:  The Palestinians AREN'T Hamas.  They AREN'T the enemy.  Are you unable to make that distinction???  

excon

You are right.  The Palestinians aren't Hamas - they elected Hamas to represent them.  They took to the streets and cheered for the murders that Hamas did.  But they aren't Hamas.  That much is true.  Israel does have a right to search out Hamas and wipe them out.  Any civilian that allows Hamas to launch rockets from their residence is fair game for Israel to attack.  

And congrats on the new book, though I hope it is not allowed in grade school libraries.

https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/170011/#Comment_170011

jack

just_sayin said:

And congrats on the new book, though I hope it is not allowed in grade school libraries.

https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/170011/#Comment_170011

Hello again, j:

I'm not sure why you're making up sh*t.  Are you unable to converse politely?  Have I beaten you so badly that you gotta LIE about me..   If you'd LIE about me, you'd LIE about anything...  Accordingly, your opinion is no longer valid.. 

excon

just_sayin

jack said:

just_sayin said:

And congrats on the new book, though I hope it is not allowed in grade school libraries.

https://debateisland.com/discussion/comment/170011/#Comment_170011

Hello again, j:

I'm not sure why you're making up sh*t.  Are you unable to converse politely?  Have I beaten you so badly that you gotta LIE about me..   If you'd LIE about me, you'd LIE about anything...  Accordingly, your opinion is no longer valid.. 

excon

Jack, if you don't learn to laugh at yourself you will miss most of the jokes in life.

You were defending kiddie porn being available in grade school libraries and I used 'your' book as an example of the type of thing leftists voice approval of and ignore the explicit parts of.  Take a break from defending anti-Semitism and pro-pedophile books and laugh.

Bogan

@jack ;  I'm a Jew..  I don't like it either..

I will bet you don't get invited to many bar mitzvahs?  

MayCaesar

Openminded said:

I´ve read that the argument ¨Asians are being discriminated against due to the racist AA policy¨ is being used to help support the anti Affirmative Action policy. Are Whites unfairly pitting Asians against African Americans to help push the racism of AA theory? Whites are the privileged in America. Could it be that whites are upset that Asians are beneficiaries of AA and taking THEIR spots? Could it possibly be that Asian admissions into college unjustly penalizes the White student and hey, let´s blame the Blacks? 

Interesting outlook. Implementing explicit policies advantaging some races and disadvantaging other races is not racist - but asking for everyone to be treated equally in the admission process regardless of their races is "Whites pitting Asians against African Americans"?

I think you guys have gotten contaminated by this racist ideology so deeply, you now have to invoke crazy conspiracy theories in order to keep believing what you do.