a question for tyrannical

[charlou]

Quotes are from here.

...

But if we're going to allow people to sport racist/sexist/homophic stuff here, then we have to counter it every single time it comes up. If we have stuff like that unanswered, it conveys a message that that sort of thing flies here. It means we can't not feed certain types of trolls.

That very argument was played out at RDF, but in the context of a much bigger membership, and a much greater number of people prepared to tackle those sorts of POV at the drop of a hat. Even so, there were times where objectionable material just went unanswered. It can get very tiresome having to counter the same crap again and again and again.

It couldn't be countered at RDF just like it couldn't be countered at RatSkep. The result was a small vocal minority that threw a temper tantrum because they wanted viewpoints they disagreed with banned.

I haven't read the full extent of your views on 'race'. From the little I have read, my impression is that you believe it exists, and that it makes a difference .. that people are not equal, due to 'race'. What, in your view, are the proofs, qualifiers, and ramefications, in their entirety, of this? I want to know the full extent of what you believe this means ... all laid out here in this thread, if you can manage it. Go.

[Gallstones]

If they don't want to be separate why do they call themselves "African" Americans and "Asian" Americans and [fill in the blank] Americans?

Being black in the USA does not automatically equate to being Afircan. And being African does not automatically equate to being black. What are white immigrants from South Africa to call themselves? What are black immigrants from Brazil to call themselves? What are people of Japanese heritage immigrating from Mexico to call themselves--Mexican Americans?

If there are no races why then do the "races" adopt segregationist terms for themselves?

And why do liberals refer to conservative blacks as "tokens"? Thinking that and saying that is racist. It is racist to presume that all persons of a certain complexion should or would associate with any particualr ideology. One can't say another is a token without being racist or sexist or some kind of bigot. One can't assume things about a person based on superficial physical traits without being some kind of bigot.

[charlou]

Why do you think people do it, gallstones?

[Gallstones]

Because they either are mindlessly faithful to a group they consider themselves a member of or they hate or fear.

And who's to say they are, in the ultimate evolutionary scheme of things, wrong? How, why?


I believe that at our most basic, most primal, we are tribal creatures--still. Not cosmopolitan, not even general humanists.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Some of us, maybe.

[Gallstones]

Some of us, maybe.

Practically delusional.

[Warren Dew]

If they don't want to be separate why do they call themselves "African" Americans and "Asian" Americans and [fill in the blank] Americans?

For a lot of us, it's because we're forced to by government forms.

[Gallstones]

If they don't want to be separate why do they call themselves "African" Americans and "Asian" Americans and [fill in the blank] Americans?

For a lot of us, it's because we're forced to by government forms.

Right: if you are white are you Hispanic White or Hispanic non-white? Asian American? Pacific Islander? Native American (I've checked yes on this one),......decline to state (another one of my favorites).

[Warren Dew]

Quotes are from here.

...

But if we're going to allow people to sport racist/sexist/homophic stuff here, then we have to counter it every single time it comes up. If we have stuff like that unanswered, it conveys a message that that sort of thing flies here. It means we can't not feed certain types of trolls.

That very argument was played out at RDF, but in the context of a much bigger membership, and a much greater number of people prepared to tackle those sorts of POV at the drop of a hat. Even so, there were times where objectionable material just went unanswered. It can get very tiresome having to counter the same crap again and again and again.

It couldn't be countered at RDF just like it couldn't be countered at RatSkep. The result was a small vocal minority that threw a temper tantrum because they wanted viewpoints they disagreed with banned.

I haven't read the full extent of your views on 'race'. From the little I have read, my impression is that you believe it exists, and that it makes a difference .. that people are not equal, due to 'race'. What, in your view, are the proofs, qualifiers, and ramefications, in their entirety, of this? I want to know the full extent of what you believe this means ... all laid out here in this thread, if you can manage it. Go.

As for Tyrannical, he just looks at tables that show correlations between race or ethnicity and various factors, like this one regarding homicide rates:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtm ... 4.htm#tab2

Then he just assumes that the correlation reflects a pure causation from race, without accounting for things like socioeconomic status or other confounding factors.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Some of us, maybe.

Practically delusional.

Complain, complain, complain.

[pErvinalia]

Quotes are from here.

...

But if we're going to allow people to sport racist/sexist/homophic stuff here, then we have to counter it every single time it comes up. If we have stuff like that unanswered, it conveys a message that that sort of thing flies here. It means we can't not feed certain types of trolls.

That very argument was played out at RDF, but in the context of a much bigger membership, and a much greater number of people prepared to tackle those sorts of POV at the drop of a hat. Even so, there were times where objectionable material just went unanswered. It can get very tiresome having to counter the same crap again and again and again.

It couldn't be countered at RDF just like it couldn't be countered at RatSkep. The result was a small vocal minority that threw a temper tantrum because they wanted viewpoints they disagreed with banned.

I haven't read the full extent of your views on 'race'. From the little I have read, my impression is that you believe it exists, and that it makes a difference .. that people are not equal, due to 'race'. What, in your view, are the proofs, qualifiers, and ramefications, in their entirety, of this? I want to know the full extent of what you believe this means ... all laid out here in this thread, if you can manage it. Go.

As for Tyrannical, he just looks at tables that show correlations between race or ethnicity and various factors, like this one regarding homicide rates:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtm ... 4.htm#tab2

Then he just assumes that the correlation reflects a pure causation from race, without accounting for things like socioeconomic status or other confounding factors.

yep.

[Tyrannical]

I'm still stewing about the subject, and when ready I'll open a new topic on it and answer it. I will entertain any rational questions or queries on the subject if someone else has any.

And for Gawdzilla and rEvolutionist particularly, your typical off the cuff trolling comments would not be welcome.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[Robert_S]

Because they either are mindlessly faithful to a group they consider themselves a member of or they hate or fear.

And who's to say they are, in the ultimate evolutionary scheme of things, wrong? How, why?


I believe that at our most basic, most primal, we are tribal creatures--still. Not cosmopolitan, not even general humanists.

Or perhaps because the social reality has been that they have been treated different since they got here. Jim Crow is still in living memory and the Klan is older than the term "African American". And they were Africans living in the US before they were given the rights that we think we have when we call ourselves "Americans".

It's just one of many terms. Perhaps it will fade away as it skin colour becomes less relevant to one's fate in the US. But with people with attitudes like you're expressing, it might take a long time. A long time during which, in a multitude of ways, a group of people will be treated differently.

[pErvinalia]

I'm still stewing about the subject, and when ready I'll open a new topic on it and answer it. I will entertain any rational questions or queries on the subject if someone else has any.

And for Gawdzilla and rEvolutionist particularly, your typical off the cuff trolling comments would not be welcome.