|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 10, 2017 14:15:09 GMT -5
Nah. That's just your personal animosity. I offered a lot more than my personal opinion in the second post of this thread as MichaelW noted. He seemed to pick up on it, but then he has the advantage of not being you. You posted a copy & paste from the SPLC, which has already been discussed. It's been discussed because I brought the information to the debate. What have you brought? Zip. Look up "Malcolm X: "I believe in the brotherhood of man, all men, but I don't believe in brotherhood with anybody who doesn't want brotherhood with me. I believe in treating people right, but I'm not going to waste my time trying to treat somebody right who doesn't know how to return the treatment."
Did you notice it is of no interest to me what "everyone else" does? What I did notice was a few White guys defending another White guy's right to get his racist eugenics/White supremacy freak on. I beg to differ with that defense. You haven't brought any civil convesation, actual facts or evidence. Just an opinion The Bell Curve isn't racist based upon...welll, nothing really. You've provided ZERO actual facts or evidence that it isn't. Where's your actual facts or evidence supporting your flimsy and feeble opinion? What "everyone else" is doing doesn't me I have to to do it. This is debate, not fucking Happy Hour. My opinion doesn't change because somone like you and one or two others don't like it. This thread isn't about me, Amadan but I know how much you enjoy trying to make it about me. Try harder.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 10, 2017 13:11:48 GMT -5
Because a Wikipedia article has citations you think that makes it accurate? You say a Wikipeida article carries more weight than my asserting something because I say so. Oh, I see the problem here. You believe what you read in Wikipedia because it has a citation? No. I said Wikipedia has more credibility than you, when you offer nothing other than your personal opinion. Nah. That's just your personal animosity. I offered a lot more than my personal opinion in the second post of this thread as MichaelW noted. He seemed to pick up on it, but then he has the advantage of not being you. How's that? Because you wrote it? Well, I can't take all the credit. You make it so easy for me. Not with you, but as long as it does with the editors who publish and pay for it, who cares? Problematic for you because you're a White man. Not problematic for me because I'm neither White nor Asian and you've undermined your contention Murray's not a White supremacist by stating "Asians are superior to Whites" and Murray declares both are superior to Blacks and Latinos. In case you didn't know, let me school ya before they fool ya: That's Racist. Nah, it's problematic because it's inconsistent with white nationalism/white supremacy. The very source you cited--the SPLC--to demonstrate that Murray was a white supremacist (the SPLC calls him a "white nationalist") defines the ideology thusly: For Murray, one simply can't say this fits, given--again--that he doesn't proclaim that the "white race" is superior to all other races, with regard to IQ or anything else. As to claiming that the supposition--whites are superior to blacks when it comes to IQ, and Asians are superior to whites--is racist as a matter of course, I disagree. Of course, I see race as largely a social construct and therefore meaningless when it comes to capabilities of any sort, but nonetheless there is data on IQ and race, as Amadan notes, for people who see meaning in these concepts. People do see meaning in the reality of race. It's not a concept. As far as the Southern Poverty Law Center's opinion on Charles Murray, White Supremacist, I share it. You don't have to agree with it. The SPLC is a well-respected and regarded organization for racial justice and your definition is only your self-serving opinion to defend Murray's rancid racist ramblings. Me? I believe in the man's own words tell me all I need to know about him. " A huge number of well-meaning whites fear that they are closet racists, and this book tells them they are not. It's going to make them feel better about things they already think but do not know how to say.” —regarding his book, Losing Ground, quoted in “Daring Research or Social Science Pornography?: Charles Murray,” The New York Times Magazine, 1994 People like being told their beliefs are supported by science and they really like it when "science" tells them they're better than someone else by a roll of the genetic dice. Everybody needs self-affirmation, but when it comes by standing on the backs of Black people by a mainstreamed bigot, I shrug my shoulders. Murray really needs to spend his sunset years doing something more productive than venting his miserable spleen on eugneics and White supremacist claptrap. You don't end racism by saying race doesn't exist. There is ample evidence to the contrary that's simply not true.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 10, 2017 12:04:26 GMT -5
Seriously, a lot of this Bell Curve stuff is coming back to me now. It was a serious thing, the issue of criticism and outrage coming from people who couldn't be bothered to read the book. Then it came back to you worng because a great deal of the criticism of The Bell Curve--as literature, as science, as sociology---came from people who did bother to read the book. They even understood it for the pornography for bigots it was. Problematic for you because you're a White man. Not problematic for me because I'm neither White nor Asian and you've undermined your contention Murray's not a White supremacist by stating "Asians are superior to Whites" and Murray declares both are superior to Blacks and Latinos. In case you didn't know, let me school ya before they fool ya: That's Racist. [/quote] Are you really suggesting a Wikipedia article means a damn thing? With citations, and absent any evidence that what it states is inaccurate, a Wikipedia article carries more weight than you asserting something based on you saying so. Because a Wikipedia article has citations you think that makes it accurate? You say a Wikipeida article carries more weight than my asserting something because I say so. Oh, I see the problem here. You believe what you read in Wikipedia because it has a citation? Okay, I'll play along. Who wrote the Wikipedia article? What's their name? Who do they work for? What's their agenda? Has the Wikipedia article been edited? Who editied it? What did they add in, take out or change? Your faith in All Things Wikipedia is sweet, Amadan. It really is. Like a child believing the Tooth Fairy really left a quarter under their pillow. Unfortunately, I hate to be the one to tell you, but even Wikipedia doesn't believe in Wikipedia.
This is one reason why any credible institute of higher learning laughs at students who quote from Wikipedia. It can be used as a quick and easy tool, but you've made the error of thinking it's the toolbox. I'll reference Wikipedia but I don't believe anything just because it's in Wikipedia. I don't put my trust in something anybody can edit. Even you. Uh-huh...and which one are you? It's nice you got something out of The Bell Curve but it's too bad you didn't understand it.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 10, 2017 11:25:42 GMT -5
I understand the basic controversy over the book. That said, I think what you're saying here regarding the finger wagging would make more sense if I were taking a position on the book that diverged from your own or that of the students at Middlebury. But that's not what I'm doing. I'm willing to allow, for the sake of argument, that everything you've said about Murray and his writings is basically correct. In fact, let's assume, for the sake of argument, that you've understated the case, that the book is actually much worse than what you've said about it. How is that supposed to change what I think about what happened here? Again, the thing that bothered me the most about the whole incident was something that bothered you, as well. Yes, I am bothered by an innocent bystander being roughed up and injured. But I'm also bothered by the cause and not only the effect and I think that's kinda important too. I don't have to read The Turner Diaries or The Bell Curve any more than I have to watch D.W. Griffith's The Birth of A Nation to know its racist and that doesn't have fuck-all to do with "intellectual integrity." That's about not indulging White supremacist crap. People whom are being targeted by bigots don't owe bigots a fair hearing or any hearing at all. Sure you do (have to read or watch these things), otherwise you can't know anything about them, at least not for yourself. You can know what other people have said, true enough, but that's not the same thing as knowing for yourself, imo. The operative phrase there is "IMO" because that's all it is. I don't HAVE to do shit but stay Black and die and certainly not because you insist I must. That's your rule of how to navigate through the world and if it works for you, God bless ya, but it's not my way and you insisting it is doesn't move the needle. I do not HAVE to read racist crap to KNOW it's racist and particularly not when someone whose opinion and perspectives I respect HAS. Exposing ones self to bad movies, bad music and bad books is one of the primary reasons to justify the existence of film, music and book critics and I should know because I've done all three. One does not have to wallow in radioactive waste to know it is bad for you and your contention you must to understand is an argument reduced to absurdity. It's as dumb as suggesting a cowflop must taste good on a sesame seed bun as a hamburger because they both come from a cow.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 9, 2017 22:54:48 GMT -5
It still looks like you didn't read it. Your criticisms are all about the Pioneer Fund, not the content of the book. And yes, if someone is going to declare that a given book is anti-Semitic, they should have the intellectual integrity to do the fucking work first, to actually read the book, not just pass judgement based on someone else's opinions (who may or may not have read the book in question). I don't have to read The Turner Diaries or The Bell Curve any more than I have to watch D.W. Griffith's The Birth of A Nation to know its racist and that doesn't have fuck-all to do with "intellectual integrity." That's about not indulging White supremacist crap. People whom are being targeted by bigots don't owe bigots a fair hearing or any hearing at all. Do what you want, but if you say The Pioneer Fund and Murray and Herrestein's ties to it has nothing to do with the content of their book, that's you not doing the fucking work. I'll cede to you as the expert on emotional responses. That's fair. I've already ceded to you this week's expertise on shrill and uninfromed repsonses. Next week, somebody else will probably take the title from you, but until then enjoy your time in the Number One spot. You haven't read the book. Apparently, you didn't even kno what the controversy about The Bell Curve was about or why people are still hyped over it. What then gives you the right to wag your finger at others who may have sweated the details you didn't bother with? Besides the smug satisfaction that comes with looking down your nose?
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 9, 2017 18:34:33 GMT -5
I'm a woman, and I agree with both Don and Vince. This was a dumb idea. Poorly thought out. Poorly executed. Silly. Unfocused. Difficult to define. Whiny. With a definite Marxist flavor. And it's particularly easy to criticize because it's in a country with some of the greatest freedoms and opportunities for women in the entire world. As a doctor, I didn't have the choice to strike and leave my patients unattended. But I would not have done this anyway. I graduated from a top 20 med school where there were more women than men in my graduating class. And when I bill for my services, my pay is exactly what a male would get doing the same thing. And yes, I do a lot of work at home, for my kids and husband, to keep the household a comfortable place and calm center for our family. I get fulfillment out of doing that, and I'm not ashamed of it. I don't need "society" to pat me on the back for it, and I certainly don't want society to take over these responsibilities for me. I think it's interesting that this "strike" is calling for unity between the work done in the formal economy and that done in the domestic sphere, (paraphrased from the New York Times article on this www.nytimes.com/2017/03/08/opinion/why-women-are-on-strike.html ), whatever that actually means, but really, the feminist movement needs to take some responsibility for devaluing the wonderful work that stay at home moms and wives do. I guess the main point of my post is that all women cannot be crammed into the same box in terms of perspective on this, just because of their gender. Some people are just not happy unless they are unhappy. So you're happy making $20,000 less than a male doctor because you don't have a penis? Good to know you're happy and not whiny at all about that pay inequity thing. You'd probably only waste that extra $20K on frilly things and getting your nails done. Next time you're hanging out with your doctor bros make sure they pick up the bar tab for your fuzzy navels.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 9, 2017 18:23:04 GMT -5
I'd be more inclined to consider your POV if there was any evidence that you'd actually read any of the books, because it doesn't look like you have, at all. I wasn't asking you to consider my POV and there is no reason I have to provide evidence I've read any of Charles Murray's shitty books. The fact of the matter is I read as much of The Bell Curve as I could stomach, but since you seem to be suggesting that as a Black man I must actually read a racist book to know it is racist, do you also demand of Jews they prove they have read Mein Kampf before declaring it anti-Semitic? A piece of hackwork whose premise is Blacks and Latinos are genetically inferior to Whites and predisposed to lower intelligence isn't racist? Such a stance is not inhererently racist, but it certainly is enabling racism and that's worse. That's not what The Bell Curve says. Even reading the Wikipedia article about it, you'd know that's not the book's premise. Are you really suggesting a Wikipedia article means a damn thing? I'd be more inclined to consider your POV if there was any evidence that you'd actually read any of the books, because it doesn't look like you have, at all. To be fair, I haven't read Murray's books either. But even if one assumes for the sake of argument that he's racist, that changes nothing for me. The rightness or wrongness of what happened at Middlebury just doesn't hinge on that particular question, IMO. Then if you haven't read The Bell Curve and don't know anything about it, you're not sufficiently informed as to the cause of what happened at Middlebury to have an opinion on the effect. Details matter and they matter very much when you are popping off with an emotional and knee-jerk response because someone didn't protest the way you think they should have. That's placed in quotes because I wrote that in 2003 which was the last damn time I had to deal with defenders of The Bell Curve.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 9, 2017 11:02:22 GMT -5
Wow. I'm not actually sold on the idea of a day-long strike as useful or pointed, but you two really did come off as a couple of jerks here. Q.F.T. I'm guessing maybe Vince and Don would have preferred the little ladies submit a written request in advance for the day off so the boss could tell them "Hell, no and get me some damn coffee." Nice going, guys. You're real gentlemen.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 9, 2017 10:59:15 GMT -5
The thing is, I WILL agree with taking someone down when they deserve it. And I'm not blindly fangirling Trump. There are things he does and has done that I hate. But...I strongly think our country will be better with most of Trump's policies than Hillary's, and I like many of the people he's put in place, so I want his administration to succeed. I don't like smear campaigns against people who don't deserve them. I didn't think Sessions deserved to be called a racist, and I found that smear campaign pretty rotten and disingenuous. And I don't think he deserves to be accused of perjury here nor to be asked to resign. This is separate from Trump. And this is separate from the Russian conspiracy concern. And I think the Dems are conflating Sessions' answer with both of those things on purpose. I will gladly change my tune if any EVIDENCE comes up against Sessions (or Flynn for that matter). Right now, to me, it's just a lot of speculation. Jeff Sessions is a racist POS and that's why Coretta Scott King wrote a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee telling them how much of a racist he was. Given a choice between believing Mrs. King and Jeff Sessions is no choice at all. Sessions lied to Congress about his contacts with the Russians. That's not the Dems conflating a thing. That's your standard denial of Republican racism and malfesiance. Change your tune or don't. EVIDENCE doesn't seem to be enough to move the needle for Trumpettes. Blind faith gets them where they need to be.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 9, 2017 10:48:21 GMT -5
I thought Coming Apart was pretty good, pretty thought-provoking. I read The Bell Curve ages ago and while I felt it interesting, I also thought it was deeply flawed, that it was putting way too much stock in the concept of I.Q. But I never read it as particularly racist in orientation, especially with regard to white supremacy. Agreed, the claims in The Bell Curve itself are not inherently racist - some of the conclusions Murray seems to have drawn from it are. A piece of hackwork whose premise is Blacks and Latinos are genetically inferior to Whites and predisposed to lower intelligence isn't racist? Such a stance is not inhererently racist, but it certainly is enabling racism and that's worse. At 7:00, the University president starts speaking. She takes issue with Murray, though she really doesn't offer any justifications in that regard. Given than Murray is there to talk about Coming Apart, which is hardly T he Bell Curve, that's pretty sad. The "justification" to take issue with Murray starts with The Bell Curve to Losing Ground to Coming Apart. If William Pierce had decided to write cookbooks after The Turner Diaries, that would still be "justification" enough to dog him out every time he appeared in public. What happened to the professor was indeed pathetic. The nodding and winking at junk science bigotry is even more so.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 9, 2017 2:27:53 GMT -5
Slaves were immigrants? I call bullshit. Immigrants came to America of their own free will. Slaves were stolen and brought to America to do the work White people were too damn lazy to do themselves. I can understand a lot, but I can't understand anyone with a higher I.Q. than a potted plant not knowing Africans didn't come to this fucking country as fucking immigrants. Anyone who thinks otherwise is literally too stupid to be insulted.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 7, 2017 15:05:11 GMT -5
When Trump was elected, it was said time and again that the Republican-controlled Congress would restrain his most extravagant flights of fancy and extreme excesses. One little problem with that line of thought. What if those supposedly watching over Trump are just as batshit as he is? The remedy for a cray-cray POTUS is not an equally cray-cray Congress.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 7, 2017 11:25:09 GMT -5
Bennie Carson sho' am smart. He be perfect fo' Massa Trump's plantation. Dat boy sho do no about shuckin' and jivin' and scratch where he don't itch. Dat boy gonna go far. He be a credit to de race!
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 7, 2017 11:20:17 GMT -5
My avatar has actually achieved that certain level of smug nerdy arrogance that some claim I project. I should put in something more true, but it's growing on me. Oh, hi Nighttimer. Who? You must have me confused with some other fellow. I get that a lot.
|
|
|
Post by nighttimer on Mar 6, 2017 10:23:19 GMT -5
Yo, Max. What up, playa? It occurs to me I never did the introduction thing. Didn't seem necessary despite a new nickname as my reputation precedes me. God sent me to piss the world off. So far, so good.
|
|