In the 14 -15 responses you've had with me in this thread, I don't believe I've glossed over any point you've made. Definitely not intentionally.
Here's what you've said :
1. indicated your opinion that a sympathizers coalition with the intolerant was broadly and globally destructive, not constructive.
2. extremist that are intolerant shouldn't be allowed to steer policy decisions
3. We should not tolerate intolerance
4. I'm mis-defining tolerance as right wing ipso facto tolerance
5. I'm mis-defining reverse racism as racism
6. I'm single minded and implied I'm not open to other trains of thought
7. The sjw side is right, and bitching about the means used to achieve a greater equality has always been the refuge of those seeking to oppose it.
8. Affirmative action isn't discrimination

Does that categorize it well enough? Doesn't really seem like you're talking to my points. I don't really have a script I'm following but you haven't really invested enough in the conversation to give me another train of thought to contemplate.

So I agree with 1,2 . Clarified 3,4,5 and 8. I disagree with 6 and 7 and you didn't support them, so I have nothing to rebut. I've tried talking to your points and I value your opinion, even when we differ. I think it's a little disingenuous to imply I'm not trying to see your side of it though.

(December 19, 2018 at 4:36 am)Grandizer Wrote:

(December 18, 2018 at 11:55 pm)bennyboy Wrote: Of course it means that.  If not, you'd just have the rule I suggested-- that the students with the best scores are accepted to the best schools.

The problem is that the best scores don't generally mean most qualified, rather best scores often mean the most privileged in a lot of cases. That's what affirmative action is trying to address, and that's the kind of problem you keep denying because of your racial bias in favor of white people. You don't seem to like that black people have to overcome obstacles (that white people don't typically get to face) in order to be just as successful as white people.

I've literally mentioned all of this, right here, in this very thread. If you can enumerate the obstacles someone has to overcome (for example, if they've been working 5 hours a day in McDonald's to help support a family, even in high school), then I'd support that. If you want to give a little boost to kids from single-parent families, or from schools where the average IQ of teachers is low, or whatever, I'm okay with that.

But there are rich black kids, too. The Obama kids are doing okay, for example: news flash, Malia's going to Harvard. I suspect they have relatively few obstacles to college approval. But they are in fact black, and they will count toward Yale or MIT's quota, if the quota is based only on racial identity. I don't think either one of us thinks Malia needs a special scholarship.

As for my racial bias in favor of white people-- then I suppose you'd have to say I'm even MORE biased toward Asians or Ashkenazy Jews, since as a demographic, their IQs, test scores and grades are better. You and Khem are never going to be able to comprehend this, but my interest is 100% in getting the best academic minds into the best places for training minds. If that means 100% of MIT students are Asian, then I'm fine with that.

Force-feeding people into the system by fiat is a particularly poor replacement for addressing those clusterfuck correlations: IQ and SAT performance, single parentage, crime, incarceration and drug-use rates in parents, lack of daycare, low IQ and academic achievement of teachers in schools, bad health care, and so on.

(December 10, 2018 at 5:19 pm)tackattack Wrote: A couple of thoughts I had and wanted opinions on.

Are you really tolerant in your beliefs? Is tolerance something to strive for? Should we strive to be more tolerant as a society? Is it even worth it?

Pluralization ought to be the case and it is beneficial. I don't agree with pluralization extrapolated to relativism though.


https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/0...51839.html

Even instrumental carols have been banned in some schools. Are people so weak in their beliefs that they can't accommodate someone else's belief?
I've told a muslim I hope your Ramadan goes well. I'd have no problem telling a Wiccan that I hope their Yule festival is well. It doesn't mean I support those beliefs.

I just don't know when "being tolerant" or "politically correct" became so much about what we don't want to see or believe or have, and less about respecting the sacredness of other people's beliefs?

I mean if we're truly an autonomous culture or striving for one, do we really respect the autonomy of the individual?

This is a touchy subject right now, and is entangled with free-speech, civil rights, and all sorts of other issues.  I can give you my own thoughts on the issue, but no prescription.

Various religious-related activities are a part of my culture; they pervade the society in which I live.  Religious beliefs will not be changed or eliminated by decree -- just look around the world where that's being tried right now, and see how well it's working.  Only time and increasing education and educational opportunity is going to effect that kind of change.  In the mean time, that I personally feel these activities are, at root, based on systems of absurd and mistaken beliefs does not change the the fact that I needed to learn, and my children need to learn how to navigate these issues.  

If I want to be treated well on a day-to-day basis, I need to treat the people around me well.  Sometimes that means tolerating what I may see as their bizarre beliefs, so that they will in turn tolerate what they see as my bizarre beliefs.  To try to eliminate all religious references from, say, public schools is pretty much impossible if you want to maintain a viable educational institution.  How, for example, can you possibly teach history without reference to religion, when religious motives drove so much of that history?  Acknowledging the existence of religion, and its impact on society does not mean subscribing to its tenets.

I draw a line where the beliefs of others impact my freedom, or where they begin to insist that I must share their beliefs.  But there's a lot of territory to be found between complete repression and theocracy.  

While I don't think prayer should be encouraged in schools, nor especially accommodated, neither do I think that a kid who prays in school needs to become a federal case or a media circus.  Public prayer does not harm me:  I steadfastly remain unaffected by magic words.

Likewise, I an not harmed by a Nativity display on the village green in December, any more than I am by a display of carved pumpkins in the same space every October, or red, white, and blue stars and stripes every July.  There should be equity, though, and if the town is going to allow a public Nativity display, it needs to also allow other displays, should someone want to put them up:  Jewish; Muslim; Hindu; Scientologist; Satanist; atheist; etc.  Some places don't really want to deal with all that, and thus ban all displays, which I think is unfortunate.

I grew up performing in annual Christmas pageants at school.  While I don't feel I was harmed by this, I'm not sorry to see them gone, because they did always make some kids feel excluded.  But I don't see the harm in carols, or any other music with cultural referents -- it is neither easy, nor necessary to separate culture and religion in music.  As a musician, I still like Christmas carols and have written arrangements and performed them: they are a part of my cultural heritage.  The words have no religious connotation for me:  singing "Hark, the herald angels sing" puts me no more in danger of believing in the Christian God, than reading Little Red Riding Hood to a kid puts me in danger of being waylaid by a talking wolf.

Banning instrumental carols is ignorance-based silliness.  A lot of Christmas carols use melodies borrowed from earlier non-religious folk songs, and some of the most popular seasonal songs aren't even about Christmas (Jingle Bells and Deck the Hall come to mind).

I think "PC" has run amok, a lot of people are very easily offended, and some people have come to believe that they have some kind of Constitutional right to not be offended, regardless of the cost to everyone else.  That is not tolerance, it is itself a form of bigotry.  Understandable, perhaps, in some cases, but non-productive.  Van Jones has made a very powerful statement that is relevant here, and one with which I fully agree.

One has to choose one's battles.

(December 19, 2018 at 6:00 pm)tackattack Wrote: 8. Affirmative action isn't discrimination

This would be the only point I was referring to when I commented on what gets glossed over.  Explained to you better by another poster than myself. 

It simply has to in order to maintain the well trained insistence of the recognizable Not A Script™. I think that this nonsense is like pollen..it gets on you..you don't know where it came from..you don't even know that it's on you. You sit down and it gets on something else. Happens to everyone, none of us are particularly good at noticing it.

Here's something to consider. There hasn't been any issue raised in this thread that wasn't completely expected from page one..post one. I can shortcut to the end for you. You don't value my opinion here. You will argue against my opinion with every fiber of your being. You will feel maligned by my opinion, you will reject my opinion. My opinion is simple..you've either gotten yourself covered in pollen, somehow..or you're a racist flower just beginning to bloom, lol.

There's no sense in bickering over the minutiae.

(December 19, 2018 at 8:20 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote:

(December 19, 2018 at 6:00 pm)tackattack Wrote: 8. Affirmative action isn't discrimination

This would be the only point I was referring to when I commented on what gets glossed over.  Explained to you better by another poster than myself. 

It simply has to in order to maintain the well trained insistence of the recognizable Not A Script™.  I think that this nonsense is like pollen..it gets on you..you don't know where it came from..you don't even know that it's on you.  You sit down and it gets on something else.  Happens to everyone, none of us are particularly good at noticing it.

Here's something to consider.  There hasn't been any issue raised in this thread that wasn't completely expected from page one..post one.  I can shortcut to the end for you.  You don't value my opinion here.  You will argue against my opinion with every fiber of your being.  You will feel maligned by my opinion, you will reject my opinion.  My opinion is simple..you've either gotten yourself covered in pollen, somehow..or you're a racist flower just beginning to bloom, lol.

There's no sense in bickering over the minutiae.

Translation: "Your unwillingness to embrace my flavor of racism is racist."

Ya know-- if you want to minimize racism, maybe stop defining society in terms of racial demographic groups. If only there was some way to define the rights of individual citizens, like by law or something, and if only there was something about poor, uneducated black people that you could focus on more than the "black". . .

Oh wait. . .

(December 19, 2018 at 8:20 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote:

---

(December 19, 2018 at 6:00 pm)tackattack Wrote: 8. Affirmative action isn't discrimination

This would be the only point I was referring to when I commented on what gets glossed over.  Explained to you better by another poster than myself. 

It simply has to in order to maintain the well trained insistence of the recognizable Not A Script™.  I think that this nonsense is like pollen..it gets on you..you don't know where it came from..you don't even know that it's on you.  You sit down and it gets on something else.  Happens to everyone, none of us are particularly good at noticing it.

Here's something to consider.  There hasn't been any issue raised in this thread that wasn't completely expected from page one..post one.  I can shortcut to the end for you.  You don't value my opinion here.  You will argue against my opinion with every fiber of your being.  You will feel maligned by my opinion, you will reject my opinion.  My opinion is simple..you've either gotten yourself covered in pollen, somehow..or you're a racist flower just beginning to bloom, lol.

There's no sense in bickering over the minutiae.

---

I'm going to gloss over your choice to disengage, because I genuinely do value your opinion and I feel I've put in serious online effort here and I'll assume you were referring to

Quote:If you're against unmerited discrimination, then you should be for affirmative action (not against). No affirmative action means continued unmerited discrimination whereby the privileged continue to be favored when it comes to preferable things such as top university admissions and high-status positions.

And being biased against unmerited discrimination isn't a bad thing. The problem is that there are people who are doing whatever they can to get rid of affirmative action and trying to feed people (with the help of conservative media) all sorts of falsehoods about it.

so allow me to address it directly.

Affirmative action is an active effort to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women per the common definition, which I support. It's not PRACTICED in a vacuum though. I'm certain it's goals are noble, but it's application can be intolerant and discriminatory, not always, but my RL experiences say sometimes it is. I'm not trying to get rid of affirmative action, just police how it is used. Should I get no say on how it's used because I'm part of the apparent problem?

Here's why I liked Dr. H's post: He made it personal and he spoke to the cure, impact and perspective.

Racism, intolerance, injustice can be systemic, but it always impacts the individual. This is a personal problem/offense and I believe needs a personal solution. The methods used to change society by SJWs matter. I'm not saying I'm not part of the majority or that I'm not standing on the higher/lower part of the uneven battlefield.

Look, I'm white, religious, in my 40s, in America. That gives me some advantages. I'm also tall, dead sexy, come from a 2 parent home, have blue eyes, ad nausium. Some of these things give me advantages as well yet I have no control over them. Life isn't fucking fair and all of us are affected by certain traits we have no control over.

Privilege shouldn't invalidate your perspective. I have a perspective that is biased, I lie sometimes, sometimes I can be intolerant. Seeing people as groups rather than individuals is really part of the problem. You've all seen that subway video of the racist white lady being a racist and someone yelling "Your white privilege won't work here" That wasn't her privilege talking, it was her bigoted racism."white privilege" was used just to shut down the lady's very wrong an offensive opinion. That is the perfect example of being intolerant of the intolerant, and I have serious issues with that being a viable solution.

I also read a USA Today news article this morning saying pretty much the same thing(not that I'm using that to justify my position). I don't think simply tolerating others bad behavior or being intolerant of intolerant people is successful. It may be all we have right now, but I just wanted to mentally masturbate out other possible solutions. If you want to stick with this failed system works, or that's all we have and I've heard it all before so let me jump to the end we will disagree, then feel free to bow out of the conversation. I'm tolerant that you have a position, and I'm tolerant of your lack of engaging in brainstorming for a solution. I even value opinions when they are limp in effort or don't agree with me. So if all this is predictable and unoriginal, I aim at mediocrity and sometimes achieve it.

(December 20, 2018 at 4:37 am)bennyboy Wrote:

(December 19, 2018 at 8:20 pm)Gae Bolga Wrote: This would be the only point I was referring to when I commented on what gets glossed over.  Explained to you better by another poster than myself. 

It simply has to in order to maintain the well trained insistence of the recognizable Not A Script™.  I think that this nonsense is like pollen..it gets on you..you don't know where it came from..you don't even know that it's on you.  You sit down and it gets on something else.  Happens to everyone, none of us are particularly good at noticing it.

Here's something to consider.  There hasn't been any issue raised in this thread that wasn't completely expected from page one..post one.  I can shortcut to the end for you.  You don't value my opinion here.  You will argue against my opinion with every fiber of your being.  You will feel maligned by my opinion, you will reject my opinion.  My opinion is simple..you've either gotten yourself covered in pollen, somehow..or you're a racist flower just beginning to bloom, lol.

There's no sense in bickering over the minutiae.

Translation: "Your unwillingness to embrace my flavor of racism is racist."

Ya know-- if you want to minimize racism, maybe stop defining society in terms of racial demographic groups.  If only there was some way to define the rights of individual citizens, like by law or something, and if only there was something about poor, uneducated black people that you could focus on more than the "black". . .

Oh wait. . .

............

---

(December 20, 2018 at 9:19 am)tackattack Wrote: Privilege shouldn't invalidate your perspective. 

It doesn't, but this statement and everything that followed is simply an expression of how you feel victimized.  It's not because you're privileged that I have no patience for this sort of shit. It's because you're simply wrong.

Like I said..there's no sense in bickering over the minutiae.  I've come to the conclusion that the extra life breathed into these complaints that stretch back to the 60's is just another way that the internet ratfucked us. It wasn't even intentional, which is either hilarious or tragic.....though there may be no real difference between the two in the end, lol.

I'm beginning to think "SJW" is the new Godwin award winner. The minute somebody makes what SJWs think or do a part of their argument, any useful discussion is pretty much over.

Pretty much.  Couple years back there was a massive sub and view war over the subject.  Skeptic channels were particularly hard hit, a match made in heaven...granting perfect cover for an introductory view of modern white supremacy.

In all honesty, the past two decades have seen an impressive case example in base building, as white supremacist memes and ideology had, up until that point.........been static for nearly sixty years.

(December 20, 2018 at 2:24 pm)Jörmungandr Wrote: I'm beginning to think "SJW" is the new Godwin award winner.  The minute somebody makes what SJWs think or do a part of their argument, any useful discussion is pretty much over.

It's a word without meaning now

---

(December 20, 2018 at 11:00 am)Gae Bolga Wrote:

(December 20, 2018 at 4:37 am)bennyboy Wrote: Translation: "Your unwillingness to embrace my flavor of racism is racist."

Ya know-- if you want to minimize racism, maybe stop defining society in terms of racial demographic groups.  If only there was some way to define the rights of individual citizens, like by law or something, and if only there was something about poor, uneducated black people that you could focus on more than the "black". . .

Oh wait. . .

............

---

(December 20, 2018 at 9:19 am)tackattack Wrote: Privilege shouldn't invalidate your perspective. 

It doesn't, but this statement and everything that followed is simply an expression of how you feel victimized.  It's not because you're privileged that I have no patience for this sort of shit.  It's because you're simply wrong.

Like I said..there's no sense in bickering over the minutiae.  I've come to the conclusion that the extra life breathed into these complaints that stretch back to the 60's is just another way that the internet ratfucked us.  It wasn't even intentional, which is either hilarious or tragic.....though there may be no real difference between the two in the end, lol.

So Benny's idea of getting rid of racism is to deny demographics exist and are treated differently