Black man shoots 3 white girls for their white privilege.
280 replies, posted
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442078]other way around, it used to be unfalsifiable but then they added a bunch of post-facto adhockery that preserved the core ideas and made it falsifiable but also robbed it of its interestingness[/QUOTE]
thats not what ive read about it, in fact ive read quite the opposite haha
it used to be falsifiable but then the core ideas were twisted in order to maintain a status quo
[QUOTE=thisispain;39442107]yeah i know what falsifiability is but if karl popper can't give a yes or no you cant expect me to give a yes or no[/quote]
you what mate
[quote]at the most basic level, right down to original marx theory, you could certainly prove it wrong, but i think most recently you'll find it was proven right, he anticipated much of the economic climate today[/quote]
in what way? i don't see anything in the current economic situation that implies marxism is right. even if you go with the bog-standard "hurr evul capitalists" interpretation that still favors keynes more than marx.
[quote]and he was dead right on his prediction that a equal society would slowly veer towards socialism[/quote]
other way around, socialist societies tend towards equality (not the good kind of equality either)
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=thisispain;39442147]thats not what ive read about it, in fact ive read quite the opposite haha
it used to be falsifiable but then the core ideas were twisted in order to maintain a status quo[/QUOTE]
i'm not sure to be honest, we might be looking at different periods or places
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Mon;39442142]can anyone actually prove that racism is a purely social phenomenon?
because maybe people just don't get along very well with races they aren't accustomed to[/QUOTE]
it's present in every society ever documented and we seem to be absurdly predisposed to dislike people different to us, i'd say it's transparently obvious we're innately predisposed towards xenophobic attitudes
(standard is/ought disclaimer etc)
[QUOTE=thisispain;39442107]yeah i know what falsifiability is but if karl popper can't give a yes or no you cant expect me to give a yes or no
at the most basic level, right down to original marx theory, you could certainly prove it wrong, but i think most recently you'll find it was proven right, he anticipated much of the economic climate today, and he was dead right on his prediction that a equal society would slowly veer towards socialism
this is a really deep conversation that im having with a fedora wearing fper, i wish i wasnt hungover[/QUOTE]
I don't wear a fedora anymore (instead I wear other things).
However, the problem I find with Marxism is that it doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny. We have been building on the schools of psychology and biology for instance (which have become fully fledged sciences in their own right). Economics is starting to take on lessons from psychology and is becoming a harder science. Sociology is still somewhat in an older stage (like when alchemy was becoming chemistry) where it still hangs onto some old theories. Marxism is one of them, and despite being very supportive for economic equality, I see Marxism as a old theory that has been surpassed.
[QUOTE=Jeep-Eep;39441762]Dain's like a scummier version of Glaber, isn't he?
I mean, Glaber is hilarious in a sad kind of way. Dain doesn't even manage that.
Edit: Glaber is unironic Foxer, Dain is "Politically Incorrect ~~So Edgy~~" unironically.[/QUOTE]
I think Dain is just a viral ad for Bioshock: Infinite.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442157]
in what way? i don't see anything in the current economic situation that implies marxism is right. even if you go with the bog-standard "hurr evul capitalists" interpretation that still favors keynes more than marx. [/QUOTE]
well we see the workers' alienation on a daily basis. a whole generation of people who are directed by labour need rather than their own personal goals, the depression of the masses as they understand they are simply just labour capital and nothing more with a government that treats them that way.
that prob echoes in the affirmative action debate too
not to mention marx's economic predictions about the cycle of wealth, in which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer was only proven by the US's economic cycles.
i mean we forget marx admired capitalism in many ways, he just didnt think it would lead to an equal society because of his world view
a world view i dont really share for the record.......
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442157]other way around, socialist societies tend towards equality (not the good kind of equality either)[/QUOTE]
thats a matter of interpretation
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442157]
i'm not sure to be honest, we might be looking at different periods or places
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.isreview.org/issues/58/gasper-determinism.shtml[/url]
[quote]This was the argument of the philosopher Karl Popper, who claimed that Marxism is unscientific because it “is not refutable by any conceivable event.” According to Popper:
In some of its earlier formulations…[the] predictions [of Marxist theory] were testable, and in fact falsified. Yet instead of accepting the refutations the followers of Marx re-interpreted both the theory and the evidence in order to make them agree. In this way they rescued the theory from refutation; but they did so at the price of adopting a device which made it irrefutable…and by this stratagem they destroyed its much advertised claim to scientific status.[/quote]
if you trust the international socialist review that is....
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39442206]I don't wear a fedora anymore (instead I wear other things).[/QUOTE]
its too late you are already infected
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;39442206]However, the problem I find with Marxism is that it doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny. We have been building on the schools of psychology and biology for instance (which have become fully fledged sciences in their own right). Economics is starting to take on lessons from psychology and is becoming a harder science. Sociology is still somewhat in an older stage (like when alchemy was becoming chemistry) where it still hangs onto some old theories. Marxism is one of them, and despite being very supportive for economic equality, I see Marxism as a old theory that has been surpassed.[/QUOTE]
even if marxism was a hard enough science, i think the fact that theres no international labour movement anymore puts a pretty big nail in marxism's coffin
i mean marxism had its dying breath in the 70s so im not quite sure what cultural marxism is supposed to communicate as a word
imo its just a buzz(term) conservatives use when they want to inject a bit of reactionary cold war politics into their dogwhistling. anyone who uses the term is someone i usually dont care for at all
[QUOTE=thisispain;39441624]this is amazing
do you like jun togawa[/QUOTE]
um i don't know who that is
[QUOTE=thisispain;39441740]wait what the fuck does marxism have to do with anything?
is this the fucking pat buchanan forum?[/QUOTE]
yeah totally sounds like a stormfront dude or something and im sad about the agrees
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39440562]erm no there's many other explanations such as non-whites not wanting to apply there or non-whites not being as competent at the job
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
because whites are more likely to have the merit needed to have the scholarship and blacks commit disproportionately more crimes[/QUOTE]
If these are your official explanations you are going to have to provide proof that whites are:
1) More competent at jobs than blacks
2) Smarter than blacks
3) Not more likely to get away with the same crimes as blacks
Have fun
[QUOTE=Shadaez;39442359]um i don't know who that is[/QUOTE]
you cant be in the sanius squad unless you can deal with dori's jun togawa vids
[QUOTE=Shadaez;39442359]yeah totally sounds like a stormfront dude or something and im sad about the agrees[/QUOTE]
when i searched cultural marxism on youtube i got:
ron paul
some metal head who compares them to nazis
a video that said a bunch of jews from 1923 are destroying american society
an old retired general that said the bailouts were straight from fidel castro's rule book
a video of trotsky overlayed on some nuclear bombs
"Oragnized Cultural Marxist Jewry & The Western Cultural Revolution"
andrew breitbart
yeah thanks facepunch for agreeing with someone thats fucking crazy
[QUOTE=thisispain;39442442]you cant be in the sanius squad unless you can deal with dori's jun togawa vids[/QUOTE]
not even I'm in the sanius squad then
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442472]not even I'm in the sanius squad then[/QUOTE]
youre always welcome to join :)
we watch gaki no tsukai
[QUOTE=thisispain;39442267]well we see the workers' alienation on a daily basis. a whole generation of people who are directed by labour need rather than their own personal goals, the depression of the masses as they understand they are simply just labour capital and nothing more with a government that treats them that way.[/quote]
i don't see this is the case at all? western governments are trying harder than ever to get more people into college, more people to have higher self-esteem, self-actualization and so on.
besides even if it were the case that "people who are directed by labour need rather than their own personal goals, the depression of the masses as they understand they are simply just labour capital and nothing more" I don't see how that would be any different from previous generations.
[quote]not to mention marx's economic predictions about the cycle of wealth, in which the rich get richer and the poor get poorer was only proven by the US's economic cycles.[/quote]
then why has the standard of living increased monotonically throughout the entire 20th and 21st centuries
[quote]i mean marxism had its dying breath in the 70s so im not quite sure what cultural marxism is supposed to communicate as a word
imo its just a buzz(term) conservatives use when they want to inject a bit of reactionary cold war politics into their dogwhistling. anyone who uses the term is someone i usually dont care for at all[/QUOTE]
if I had to give a name to the modern phenomenon i probably wouldn't call it marxism because it bears very little resemblence to marxist orthodoxy. i'd call it something like "hyper-egalitarianism" or something with the "neo-" prefix. it's really more of the ideological descendant of marxist thought, the same way that modern progressivism is descended from puritans and quakers.
and I think we could do with some reactionary cold war politics.
Well, time to go to bed facepunch. Gotta get some rest so tomorrow I can go around asserting my dominance as a privileged white citizen.
There is truly nothing I enjoy doing more than using my white privilege to go around making black people have it rough. Sometimes I stroll into Detroit and use my shining white aura to oppress the people there. As they see my immense power and success (Which I acquired through my skin pigmentation.) they lose all hope of leading a successful life. Their motivation fades to nothingness upon seeing my pasty white body. White hot power then envelops them and I begin my racially motivated oppression.
I corrupt them. No longer do they wish to gain education, they now seek gangs. I turn future lawmakers into hookers and pimps. Teachers into crack dealers. Artists into drug addicts. Nothing is to terrible for me. As they lose their consciousness, I know my work there is done. In the subsequent weeks the crime and murder rates increase exponentially as the ruined ruins of Detroit become even more ruinedly ruinous. As I peer to the chaos and disparity something comes to mind.
As I wipe a single joyous tear I voice a single remark to myself quietly.
[SP]"This was truly a privilege..."[/SP]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442402]If these are your official explanations you are going to have to provide proof that whites are:
1) More competent at jobs than blacks
2) Smarter than blacks
3) Not more likely to get away with the same crimes as blacks
Have fun[/QUOTE]
for 1 and 2
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve[/url]
dunno about 3, you might have me there
lol did u just reference the bell curve?
[editline]2nd February 2013[/editline]
the bell curve has been used to justify racism ever since it came out.
[QUOTE=yawmwen;39442632]lol did u just reference the bell curve?
[editline]2nd February 2013[/editline]
the bell curve has been used to justify racism ever since it came out.[/QUOTE]
the data and conclusions in the bell curve are not disputed in academia (gould doesn't count, being a fraudster and charlatan and all). if it's used to support racism then that doesn't actually mean it's wrong.
besides if you look carefully i'm not actually using it to justify racism. i'm using it to show why affirmative action does not and cannot work. if anything you lot are the racists, advocating a system that systematically favors certain groups over others regardless of merit.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442580]for 1 and 2
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve[/url]
dunno about 3, you might have me there[/QUOTE]
I hope this is an extreme case of Poe's Law
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
it's not is it
[QUOTE=Shadaez;39442720]I hope this is an extreme case of Poe's Law
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
it's not is it[/QUOTE]
well no what actually is wrong with my reasoning
i've cited an extremely well-researched bit of scholarship that happened to kill a few sacred cows, not my or the authors' problem
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39440326][url=http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/09/12/study-shows-minorities-less-likely-to-win-grants-scholarships/]Yeah I got a source[/url]
Caucasian students receive more than three-quarters (76%) of all institutional merit-based scholarship and grant funding, even though they represent less than two-thirds (62%) of the student population.[/QUOTE]
being fair, it probably has a lot to do with their GPAs:
White: 3.09
Black: 2.69
Hispanic: 2.84
Asian/Pacific Islander: 3.26
[url]http://nationsreportcard.gov/hsts_2009/race_gpa.asp[/url]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39439884]Imagine a soccer pitch
One team is white and has a normal sized net
One team is black and has a net 3x the normal size
Affirmative action is making the black team's net the normal size
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
Yeah I don't get why people think this
Maybe it's why having an ethnic-sounding name makes you less likely to get a job with equal qualifications, why the vast majority of CEOs and politicians are white, why merit-based scholarships are awarded to whites more often than they would be if they were truly awarded on merit, and why blacks are disproportionately charged with crimes
That's the equality[/QUOTE]
Imagine a soccer pitch
One team is white and is good at soccer
One team is black and sucks at soccer
Affirmative action is making the white team's net 3x the size.
That is affirmative action.
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442686]the data and conclusions in the bell curve are not disputed in academia (gould doesn't count, being a fraudster and charlatan and all). if it's used to support racism then that doesn't actually mean it's wrong.
besides if you look carefully i'm not actually using it to justify racism. i'm using it to show why affirmative action does not and cannot work. if anything you lot are the racists, advocating a system that systematically favors certain groups over others regardless of merit.[/QUOTE]
It still relies on IQ to argue for my points 1 and 2 and you've yet to show me anything that actually validates IQ as being meaningful or nonbiased in any way
Showing how it correlates to other arbitrary ways of measuring intelligence (grades, income, etc) doesn't count
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442739]It still relies on IQ to argue for my points 1 and 2 and you've yet to show me anything that actually validates IQ as being meaningful or nonbiased in any way
Showing how it correlates to other arbitrary ways of measuring intelligence (grades, income, etc) doesn't count[/QUOTE]
the bell curve does a good job of demonstrating this, you'd know this had you actually read it
also what, how are grades or income not indicative of intelligence
[QUOTE=Pantz76;39442735]Imagine a soccer pitch
One team is white and is good at soccer
One team is black and sucks at soccer
Affirmative action is making the white team's net 3x the size.
That is affirmative action.[/QUOTE]
If this was the case then we'd see whites being disadvantaged in employment and education - we don't
We still see minorities being disadvantaged
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39440106]Like if a company is 95% white when the demographics of the people they hire from are 60% white, there's absolutely no explanation for that other than the company going out of their way to only hire whites[/QUOTE]
What if the other races are simply not as qualified for the job?
i really shouldn't have to do this, i mean it's not even controversial at all
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)[/url]
[quote]While the existence of g as a statistical regularity is well-established and uncontroversial, there is no consensus as to what causes the positive correlations between tests.
Behavioral genetic research has established that the construct of g is highly heritable. It has a number of other biological correlates, including brain size. It is also a significant predictor of individual differences in many social outcomes, particularly in education and the world of work. The most widely accepted contemporary theories of intelligence incorporate the g factor.[4] However, critics of g have contended that an emphasis on g is misplaced and entails a devaluation of other important abilities.[/quote]
i mean yeah it isn't perfect but still
[editline]2nd February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442760]If this was the case then we'd see whites being disadvantaged in employment and education - we don't
We still see minorities being disadvantaged[/QUOTE]
but we do see whites being disadvantaged in education
(well in the selection process, i don't think afterwards)
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442757]the bell curve does a good job of demonstrating this, you'd know this had you actually read it
also what, how are grades or income not indicative of intelligence[/QUOTE]
Grades show how good you are at doing what's required to get good grades
Income shows how good you are at doing what's required to get money
IQ shows how good you are at taking IQ tests
You've provided me with nothing that proves the things required to get good grades, the things required to make good money, or the things required to score a good IQ actually mean you're a smarter or more productive person and you never will because smarter and more productive are subjective qualities
You think just because something has a number it's quantifiable, but it isn't. These above scores are used to mask non-quantifiable things as quantifiable things
[editline]1st February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442778]
but we do see whites being disadvantaged in education
(well in the selection process, i don't think afterwards)[/QUOTE]
Show me
Show me white people not being accepted because they're white
I don't even mean specific cases just show me statistics that indicate it's happening
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442802]Grades show how good you are at doing what's required to get good grades
Income shows how good you are at doing what's required to get money
IQ shows how good you are at taking IQ tests[/quote]
this is a stock argument and it is pure cant.
your grades correlate with knowledge on whatever the study is about, "Income shows how good you are at doing what's required to get money" is as trivial as it gets - you need to look "how good you are at getting money" is correlated with".
IQ tests predict all of these things and more. it would help if you read things.
[quote]You've provided me with nothing that proves the things required to get good grades, the things required to make good money, or the things required to score a good IQ actually mean you're a smarter or more productive person and you never will because smarter and more productive are subjective qualities[/quote]
i'm reasonably sure that productivity is directly measurable and quantifiable and that smartness is similarly so.
[editline]2nd February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442802]Show me
Show me white people not being accepted because they're white
I don't even mean specific cases just show me statistics that indicate it's happening[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.discriminations.us/2010/01/race-preferences-how-many-benefit-how-many-are-burdened/[/url]
[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;39442828]this is a stock argument and it is pure cant.[/quote]
You've made it blatantly clear already that you disagree you just haven't shown why. We're just going in circles here
[quote]i'm reasonably sure that productivity is directly measurable and quantifiable and that smartness is similarly so.[/QUOTE]
How do you measure the overall productivity of a person
this thread is clear evidence that I'm not the only one who reads shit on pol
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442885]How do you measure the overall productivity of a person[/QUOTE]
the amount of economic wealth they produce in a given time i guess
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39442885]How do you measure the overall productivity of a person[/QUOTE]
by how much they're paid
clearly
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.