Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: StSanta on November 02, 2001, 08:01:00 AM
-
Been called a racist again today. An inconsiderate, egoistic selfcentered "everyone for him/her self" racist. So this is how it is to be a republican.
I am not a racist. When I say I dislike the way women are taught, like Skinner's dogs, to cover up and think of themselves as less than men, I am commenting on a cultural aspect in a society, or in societies.
Likewise, when I comment that unemployment within a segment of a population is incredibly high, and that the associated costs are astronomical, money which is taken from other places, I am not saying that people of a specific race are lazy.
When I say that people from a specific region has a culture with different values, different ways of approaching work, family and religion. I ain't a racist. If I say "all Somalis are leeches", even that does not make me a racist. The term Somali is a reference to someone from a specific geographical area of the world, not a race. That they tend to be black (is that a politically acceptable term?) is of no importance whatsoever. The region they come from have cultural values, and those are the ones I am commenting on.
When I say "Danes should diddlyin' stop being so concerned about safety and start taking libery more seriously", I am not suggesting that all whites value security more than freedom.
Is it just me, or do people have a tendency to label you a racist, when you in fact are commenting on something that has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with culture?
Am I a bigot when I say I dislike certain religions? I am not a bigot when I say the Nazi's are wacky, and, as a secular guy, organised religions are organisations just like the nazi parties are organisations.
Man. I'm a culture-ist and I admit it. I discriminate too: bananas taste good, raw liver does not. Democracy is better than dictatorship. Equality is better than subjugation.
I can't be the only one alive with ideas like this. Anyone out there?
[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: StSanta ]
-
Is it just me, or do people have a tendency to label you a racist, when you in fact are commenting on something that has nothing to do with race, and everything to do with culture?
Absolutely, yah fediddlein bigot.
So this is how it is to be a republican.
You ain't seen nothin yet; ya dirtbag.
I discriminate too: bananas taste good, raw liver does not. Democracy is better than dictatorship. Equality is better than subjugation.
Ahhhh... yer a commie too? Damn, yer just too easy a target Santa!
Cheer up... yer still my favorite danish commie racist bigot inna socialist nazi dirtbag LW pilot suit. There's honor in that. :D
Ok; jokes aside... Santa, if you stimulated someones 'amazinhunk' reflex, then you did it right. The knee-jerk 'racist' reaction generally means yah whacked a nail dead on the head. Keep up the good work... Being a republicrat is it's own reward.
Now get back out there and shout those pinheads down.
-
When you put your opinion on the table especially on a very public BBS and a world wide viewing audience you better wear your helmet.
I try to refrain form those kind of posts since it's too dam hard to get the "tone" of the post properly and all hell usually breaks loose.
-
roadkill; Spermsky... yer a freakin Uncertified Canuck Cracker (UCC), currently operating in violation of the Greater Georgia Redneck Vocal Resolution (GGRVR) and as such you are therefore not allowed to have an opinion.
Hey; this labeling stuff is fun!
-
you forgot LW Supremecist Hang. ;)
I personally allways look forward to your posts Santa, they are sure fire to provide another point of view on things and I for one welcome it.
-
I like Santa because I know by his hard work in school, his questions of investment, that one day, he will make alot of money, then tell me "Rip,you were right" :)
-
Hangtime...
No words...
You're incredible.
One question: why do you hate communists so much? Maybe some sexual problem since early childhood?
-
See, Santa?? ;)
I rest my case.
-
No, you are not alone with your ideas of semantics. :) Words mean things! But ... there are a lot of people do not know the difference between bigot, racist, and discrimination. Not all of these people will admit that they do not know the differences of semantics, in spite of their respective educational acumen, or lack thereof.
Keep posting, there are persons who understand your meanings, as well as those who never will. :D
It is far easier to "read" a post from a person who uses language correctly than to attempt to interpret a post from one who is ranting. It is also ,sometimes, difficult to understand fully the POV of persons who have a different language as their first.
All the above is just my opinion taken from a lifetime of observing different peoples in and out of their own cultural environment.
My own personal favorite example is talking with a american friend after he came home from a vacation overseas. He made the offhand comment that there wasn't anything there but a bunch of foreigners. :rolleyes: :D
-
For some time the world as been trying to convince me that I am a perpetuator of bigotry, racism and prejudice because I am a caucasion hetrosexual male.
The strange thing is, I didn't create the "caucasion hetrosexual male" title.
AKDejaVu
-
i think that before the 60's, people didn't use very much discretion or insight in dealing with others
- they relied on their generalizations TOO much. whites in segregated america, the nazis, even everyday joe and martha saw everything in black and white.
the result was to try to get people to make NO generalizations at all in an attempt to correct those wrongs.
so now you have to speak blandly about everything and embrace the idea of total relativism, everything is right, no one is evil or wrong, just sick, oppressed or misunderstood.
you can't hold that any schema is applicable to a group either. in it's extreme form you can't even acknolwedge the existence of "groups" per se.
the irony is, the same clueless plebians that buy this total relativistic nonsense are probably the same lazy bastards that bought sight-unseen into the last failed racial paradigm! it's laziness.
i think the modern reality is somewhere in between, whether that's popular or not. the 60's were 40 years ago, it's time to move on to a closer approximation of the truth.
generalizations are instinctual and not necessarily bad, BUT (here's the key), you have to be able to dismiss those generalizations if they fail to describe what you are generalizing about.
EX: almost every border collie i have ever met since i was a kid has tried to bite me (true story)
based on that - how should i react when i see a border collie?
should i offer my neck and sing kumbaya with him??? No- obviously, i should be prepared be bit or i'm the dumbest and least instinctually adept mammal on earth!
what if he wags his tail and tries to be my friend should i still be afraid?
of course not, the generalization no longer applies because i have new facts. furthermore, my generalizations in the future have to include this positive event as well.
is it my fault that he isn't warmly accepted? is it my defect that i don't expect the best from him?
hell no - it's the fault of the countless friggin mean-ass border collies who have attacked me in the past, THEY determined our relationship through their actions damnit.
which elucidates the other pitfall, which is not to buy or let someone force upon you a premade set of generalizations that you have no factual backup for - then you are a racist, or at least lazy.
if 10 others tell you they have had the same experience with border collies, then you have to consider that, but you should still come to your own conclusions. it all takes a lot of mental work.
if your generalizations come from real experiences and you are ready to abandon them the instant they don't apply, then you aren't doing anything wrong and who cares what others say about you!
i doubt most people have even tried to sort out the truth - even attempting to find it gives you an advantage.
i've seen you consider sidewalk dynamics for cryin out loud, so you get credit for at least considering the topic- heheh good show.
<S>
:)
-
Hangtime, I tried to chill down.
I am calm. My hands and feet are getting warm... I am calm...
Please, expain me why you use "communist" as a negative epithet?
Nice topic for discussion for Friday night. I am sitting at work drinking beautiful Crimean (sorry to use a toponimus that you don't know) porto with my friends.
Waiting for your answer as nightingale waits for the summer. :)
-
Oh God please speed up the great intergalactic meeting of peoples from different worlds......then Black and White can live together in peace......and gang up on Green.
(http://www.swoop.com/images/logo_small.jpg)
-
Boroda, I am a victim of history.
So are you.
Tell me.. who was Stalin (please include the number of SOVIETS killed by his decrees) ... and was he a communist?
My commentary for Santa above was delivered tounge-in-cheek, as I am certain all here (except apparently you) are aware.
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
EX: almost every border collie i have ever met since i was a kid has tried to bite me (true story)
...
hell no - it's the fault of the countless friggin mean-ass border collies who have attacked me in the past, THEY determined our relationship through their actions damnit.
And of course you are not a racist, as long as you keep talking about border collies, fishes and flowers.
It is common knowlege that agression, intelligence, stability of temperament, etc. are genetic traits of the dog breeds. So your statement "hell no - it's the fault of the countless friggin mean-ass border collies who have attacked me in the past, THEY determined our relationship through their actions damnit" is technically not correct - it is the fault of the people who selectively bred that specific kind of a dog.
And of course your ignorance (excusable by your young age at the time) is partly to blame for your bites. You did not have to personally accumulate the experience - you could read in any dog encyclopedia which dog breed was more aggressive as easy as you could read which level of voltage is dengerous.
Incidentally, the boxer is probably the best dog breed to have around children - very stable, patient, smart and with high pain tolerance theshhold.
But as soon as you apply the same concepts to races - that is when you are sure to be called a racist.
StSanta: I am not saying that people of a specific race are lazy.
Some genetic traits are linked with activity/motivation, like level of uric acid in blood, which causes caffeine-like stimulating effects - and causes gout (which is why disproportionate number of outstanding people suffer from gout). But there is no strong evidence that races differ in that respect.
There is strong evidence that races differ significantly in genetically inheritable level of intelligence, so high level of unemployment is much easier explained by that.
If you are being called racist (and you will be anyway), at least try to be right about your facts. Ask me for the short list of books on the subject if you are interested.
miko
-
Originally posted by miko2d:
And of course you are not a racist, as long as you keep talking about border collies, fishes and flowers.
oh that's right, we are humans not animals! god made us special, i keep forgetting...
:rolleyes:
-
The term racist itself has always kind of irritated me. How can anyone use that term without first defining "race"? How can you define "race" without being a racist?
Another observation from my perch: The number of people willing to place others in stereotypes is only surpassed by the number of people attempting to put themselves into certain stereotypes. Be yourself... don't try to be the same or different than others. In either case, you are letting others dictate your actions.
Also, physical appearance does make a difference. If anyone says otherwise, they are in complete denial. Its a matter of what kind of difference you let it make that matters most.
AKDejaVu
-
Born and raised in Washington, DC.
If you believe that people are or can be blind to color, then you are just as much a fool as someone who thinks they can breath under water.
-SW
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
Please, expain me why you use "communist" as a negative epithet?
Could I try?
The ownership of property and freedom of individual are the founations of western society.
It is considered that most property legally, rightfully and deservedly belongs to it's owners - few exceptions of property aquired through crime is not specific to capitalism.
According to communist ideology, owning of the property - specifically means of production - and hiring other people to do work - is not a natural state of things but a crime.
Property can only be held in common - which means the state can be the sole owner, which makes the strong and all-controlling state a neccesity.
Such views are not bad by themselves and quite a few people choose communal lifestyles for themselves - kibutsim in Israel, various communes in other countries - including USA. They live the way they want to and can (even though it is usually not their goal) attract other people to their lifestyle through example.
Real communists usually try to impose such lifestyle on other people. Usually by force.
Of course we may be wrong in our terminology - "Der Kapital" is well over a century old. What do you think communists are?
Incidentally, manufacturers use of the name "Porto" for Crimean wines (no matter how close they resemble the real Portugese wines") is as illegal as stealing designs, movies of faking trademarks. I believe that is another communist legacy.
miko
-
An exercise in semantics, santa.
The real issue is generalisation. By saying 'all Somalis are lazy' you tar a whole ethnic group with the same brush. You make no account for individuality. Once this step is taken it is much easier to mistreat anyone from that background. Deny employment or housing for instance.
The Nazis used this idea to great effect. So did the Bosnian Serbs. And both the Rwandan tribes. It really is a great motivational tool for whatever purpose you have in mind.
Sure, the term 'racism' is often misused and damage is caused. But it is nothing compared to the damage caused by ethnic generalisation.
-
"So this is how it is to be a republican"
LOL
just the beginning ...
welcome to the party StSanta :)
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
oh that's right, we are humans not animals! god made us special, i keep forgetting...
:rolleyes:
Unless you're Jewish right? ;)
-
Originally posted by AKDejaVu:
How can you define "race" without being a racist?
That is easy. There are hundreds of phenotypic traits (those that can be objectively measured from the body) and genetic features that are highly correlated within certain groups of people.
On a blind test a lab analysis will accurately determine the race of the person.
The differences include common genetic markers, metabolic differences, suseptibility to certain deseases and lot of other objectively measured differences.
You can pick up any medical reference book to see that racial differences are covered in description of many deseases.
Height, weight, hair color and shape, skin color, facial features are the least of traits we can use now to determine someone's race. Of course when walking on the street we have no choice but to use those.
Personally, I had very high success rate of telling a person of african decent from anglo-saxon just from appearance. :)
I can mostly tell apart chinese from koreans from vietnamese, let alone japanese - those 500 pound guys in diapers are hard to confuse with anyone :).
For most current races their genetic origin can be traced back few hundred thousand years to a relatively small group of common ancestors. Of course those groups should be traced even futher back to the ancestors common to all races.
Linguistic research helps a lot in this kind of tracing - it allows to confirm the genetic findings or fill some gaps.
The issue of racism is when someone says that one race is not as good as another.
Now we have to define what "not as good" means. If someone says some race is inherently evil or dishonest - that is racism.
If someone quotes the studies showing that black people are 6 times more succeptible to hypertension - that is not racism.
If you read a study that average intelligence of some races differ by over one standard deviation from other races, which makes them less successfull socially (not from inherent laziness, evilness, etc.) - and you did not burn the book - then you are most likely a racist, or may as well be - as you would hardly ever be able to disprove it...
miko
-
Hangtime, how many people did American "democratic" (or "republican" if you think in terms of your "parties") chiefs kill? I mean AMERICAN people?
Did Stalin do any harm to you? He was a POLITICIAN, and a whoopee successfull one. In fact he was more successfull then any other European politician in the last 100 years.
He was much more Imperial politician then a communist.
My family suffered during his regin. But I still think that he saved Russia from "left" trend in communism. I could ask you to compare USSR and Maoist China, but you don't see any difference. Both countries refused from Coca-Cola, that's probably enough for you.
Another question: please, define "communism".
Miko, please, don't interfere. It's my PERSONAL questions to Hangtime. I have told you many times that I don't like modern commies. But this is a topic called "racism", and I don't want this bloody racist to call my Grandfather "commie". He was a man who believed in Communism, and I have all respect for his views. He was a Ukrainian peasant who became an artillerry officer, and was one of the first Guards Mortar troops. Probably the first teacher for Katyusha in Krasin artillery school.
-
Boroda.. Thanks for the 'racist' name tag.
You wanna fight?
Stick yer head up yer ass; and fight fer air.
Or stop by my place; and I'll gladly do it for yah.
Oh, and have a nice day. :)
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
An exercise in semantics, santa.
The real issue is generalisation. By saying 'all Somalis are lazy' you tar a whole ethnic group with the same brush. You make no account for individuality
I have nothing to do against Somalis but want to clarify the methodology you are implying.
If a representative sample of certain people are measured and the average (Mu) is found "pretty lazy" with reasonably tight standard deviation (Sigma), provided that laziness measurements conform to standard normal distribution (most natural processes do and easy to verify), would not it consistantly prove the statement?
It would not rule out that some individuals may be exceptionally energetic - in fact knowing Mu and Sigma we can accurately predict how many such individuals we are likely to encounter our 1,000 or 100,000 people who are lazy on average.
Of course if Mu of somalis or whoever is not "real lazy" we can say righ away that StSanta is not correct. If Mu is "real lazy" but standard deviation is too wide, we can say that the Mu has no meaning and cannot be used to characterise the group.
miko
-
Stalin was a butcher, period. Succesful he was due to his terror tactics and constant purges. Your nation almost was over run by Germany in WW2 due to his purges... your lucky he left a couple of brilliant indiv's around ie Zukov (? spelling).
xBAT
-
mrfish, what you are skirting around here is the idea of judging people as individuals, and not as ethnic groups. Then you say some confusing and generally contradictory things about being able to judge them by groups, but only till you are proved wrong, where you lose me, but the essential bit I picked out, I agree with wholeheartedly - people are individuals, and their worth is based on their character and actions as individuals.
Of course, this opens another bag of worms, that of 'good' people as part of a bad regime.
Since we're all WWII buffs here, take for example Germany in the 30s and 40s. As a 'group', Germans as the population of an aggressive and undeniably evil Nazi state were the enemies of the free world. However, in retrospect we know that everyone in Germany wasn't evil, and in fact the tangible enemies of our armies, the German soldiers, sailors, and airmen, are identified as being very much like the Allied troops opposing them - wanting to serve their country because it was their country. Can we say that all of the soldiers who fought against and killed Allied soldiers were evil? No, no more than we can say that the Allied soldiers who fought and killed German soldiers were evil. Were there evil people among the Allies? Hell yes - look at Stalin. Were there evil people among the Axis? Undoubtedly.
The hatred towards the Germans as a group, though strong, was quickly lost at war end, and the Germans were identified as being 'like us' as the Allied armies moved into Germany even before the end of the war. While the Nazis were rightfully forever demonized, there was a distinction recognized between the Nazis and the general German population, which resulted in Germany being welcomed back into the fold of the respected nations of the world in relatively short order, as is evidenced today by the strong ties between Germany and the countries formerly Allied against it.
Take the view towards the Japanese during that same time period, or towards Arabs in the current climate. The tone of the anger towards these groups takes on a VERY different tone than that against the Germans - and what is the difference? Race. It can be attempted to say that this is not the case, but such arguments fall flat. Because these groups are different than 'us', they are demonized, and referred to with racial terms "Japs", "slopes", "towel heads", "sand cupcakes". By contrast, who were the Germans? "Jerry". Like the guy on TV. Like your buddy at the bar. Americans were "Yanks", British were "Tommy". None of that sounds too bad... 'Tommy' and 'Jerry' could get in a fight at the bar over a girl. But G.I. Joe had to go and kill those 'Nips', and 'yellow bastards'... I think you see the point.
This doesn't mean that I think we shouldn't treat the Taleban with anger, and that we shouldn't go after and kill the people who are responsible for the deaths of thousands of our countrymen and women.
The point is that the color of their skin, and their different upbringing has NOTHING to do with the reasons they should be destroyed, and for the millions of Arabs and Muslims who didn't have anything to do with this, and who are as hurt by violence as much as you or I, they should not have to suffer the hatred of the world based on their physical and cultural similarities to the people who ARE responsible.
I don't feel any reservation for the fate of people who propogate violence against my country, they should be dealt with swiftly and harshly, with no quarter given. Doing this isn't wrong, but attempting to associate race with the reasons for our action, or as a focus of our anger isn't going to make things better when the guilty have been brought to justice.
-
Miko, nice to hear an opinion from an educated person.
You point the drawbacks of "communist" (in fact - socialist) regimes.
I have to agree with Lenin (the worst vampire in history) - any state has only one purpose: to supress a personality.
But Communism has nothing to do with this "social experiments". I wish I could live in a "Midday world", if you read Strugatsky brothers. "Polden'. XXII vek (Vozvraschenie)". Utopic. But very nice.
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
My family suffered during his regin. But I still think that he saved Russia from "left" trend in communism..
That I completely agree with you on. Most western people are not familiar with works of his opponents to realize how much more trouble Stalin saved the country from.
[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]
-
Originally posted by miko2d:
who doesn't admire brave (if misguided) liftwaffe pilots.
miko
Hey now!
;)
-
Originally posted by batdog:
Stalin was a butcher, period. Succesful he was due to his terror tactics and constant purges. Your nation almost was over run by Germany in WW2 due to his purges... your lucky he left a couple of brilliant indiv's around ie Zukov (? spelling).
xBAT
Not true.
Because.
Picturing Stalin as a "butcher" is a great advantage of propaganda.
Go read some books.
FDR was a butcher.
Truman was a butcher many times worse.
Period.
-
The only thing I have to say about Communism is this:
It's just like my golf swing, works in theory, but not in practice. :D
-
Miko - Salute.
Sorry, have to go home now.
About Porto - how do you expect me to call "Portwein"? ;)
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
About Porto - how do you expect me to call "Portwein"? ;)
Well, I think 'piss' would fit the bill.
:D
-
Originally posted by batdog:
Stalin was a butcher, period. Succesful he was due to his terror tactics and constant purges. Your nation almost was over run by Germany in WW2 due to his purges... your lucky he left a couple of brilliant indiv's around ie Zukov
That is not correct.
In fact Stalin's purges of vicious but talantless criminals who were instrumental in bolshevic's coup and subsequent terror but then mostly squabbled among themselves opened positions for many young, capable and educated professionals like Zhukov etc.
Russia's initial defeat in 1941 had nothing to do with country's alleged unpreparedness. The Red Army was in a vulnerable position grouped for attack withing 1-2 weeks (intent on "liberating" Europe from Hitler whom he equipped and set to start a world war). The devastating preemptive strikes on preparing attacker are common in history - 1967 war the best modern example.
With most of it's aviation destroyed on teh ground, most of 25,000 tanks and 5 million front line troups lost Ssoviet Union did have problems for a few months. Of course Hitler never had a chance to defeat Russia, but he had no choice but strike preemptively.
Stalin was a bucher but much less of a bucher then Trotsky, Lenin, Bukharin and others.
miko
-
Firstly, Miko2d, you can drop the scientific notation for statistical analysis. It doesn't add any weight to your argument for me. I have a Bachelor and a Masters degree in Applied Physics - I can do maths (or Math as Americans call it).
I'd like to see this 'laziness measurement' you're talking about. What are your standards? What is the size of the control group?
The fact that you can statistically say what proportion of people from a particular ethnic group are lazy is not very useful. How would you use this information? How would you control how this information is used?
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
About Porto - how do you expect me to call "Portwein"? ;)
I am not saying you've stolen the name. The manufacturer did. So you have no choice, unless you start saying "crimean wine strongly resembling port" - which is not easy to say, let alone type, after a few glasses of it... :)
You know, of course, that your "cognac" is referred to here using generic term "brandy" and your "champaigne" as "sparkling wine".
miko
[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
I'd like to see this 'laziness measurement' you're talking about. What are your standards? What is the size of the control group
I used "lazyness" just as an example - because it is obviously nonsencical trait to measure - as I said in my previous post in this thread.
My point was that statistical measurements of the differences yield quite real information.
You know very well that size of the group required to get meaningfull statistics (small predicted standard error) can be determined by the statistics.
I would be more interested not in lazyness but intelligence or athletic performance statistics.
I would use that information any damn way I see fit.
I would control this information only to the extent that it is available to anyone to use or verify.
miko
-
Red Army was in a vulnerable position grouped for attack withing 1-2 weeks (intent on "liberating" Europe from Hitler whom he equipped and set to start a world war).
Most historians who subscribe to the view that Stalin was planning to attack Hitler, put the offensive beginning in 1942 i.e. not 1-2 weeks from Barbarossa.
As for saying Stalin was less of a butcher than Trotsky et al, well, your beloved statistics would disagree. The number killed under the Soviet regime from 1917-1987 is put at 61,000,000. Stalin accounts for 43,000,000 of these deaths. Most died under forced labour or democidal famine.
-
I would be more interested not in lazyness but intelligence or athletic performance statistics.
There isn't an intelligence test in the world that has been accepted by the scientific community as a benchmark. Not even IQ tests. Mainly because of the poorly understood science of psychology (if it can be considered a science).
Physiology is a far better understood. Your racial studies in this area would be quite valid; muscle mass and aerobic function can be readily measured.
I would use that information any damn way I see fit.
The crux of the matter. How would you use your indisputable, scientifically proven information when recruiting for a vacancy at work, for instance?
-
Stalin scored Fourty Three MILLION deaths?
My god.. thats almost double the number I had on his slate.
Incredible.
Heluva hero.
Fine communist, no doubt.
-
Originally posted by Udie:
Unless you're Jewish right? ;)
see here's a perfect example of one of those people i described in my post.
totally misses the point. read the inuendo of his retort and you'll see it doesn't even fit- his implication, obviously, is that i think jews are animals-(it's a lingering artifact from some dead thread in caseyou missed that)
now, that would be a fitting jab if and only if, my point was that we are better than animals and that animals are bad - it fails in a post where i imply we should not forget that we are animals! i mean i would have to state animals in the figurative not literal sense as stated here and i'd have to establish thatas a negative for the retort to even make sense.
lolol that's just embarassing and exhaustingly stupid, but examples of the absurb are always a fun break so thanks for the diversion.
anyway...
kratzer:
"people are individuals, and their worth is based on their character and actions as individuals."
that sums it up pretty well actually. my point is that: if you think you don't make generalizations you are stroking yourself.
you make them every day, we all do. instead of pretending we don't do it, or trying to suppress what is an evolutionary survival tool, we should learn to do it right.
how quickly can you lose that reactive generalization when the person doesn't fit it?
the current model holds that we can't generalize at all, about anything or any group and i don't feel that fits examples from nature or real world experience.
if you dont like that it's fine, that's just my opinion anyway, the important thing is that most people who set out to do the right thing and have a more realistic worldview will come up with something that works well enough either way, whatever that philosophy may be, so long as they try. :)
-
Wow...way too many words in this thread. It's pretty simple. Are we all prejudiced? Hell yes. If you think you aren't then you are kidding yourself. Are we all racists or bigots? No, thank goodness. Everyone has preconceived notions about a stranger or group of people based on our upbringing. It's up to the individual to work through those.
I keep my personal philosophy pretty cut and dried. There are amazinhunks in every size, shape, and color. If I don't like someone, it's not because of how they look, it's because they're just an amazinhunk.
-
Originally posted by mrfish:
see here's a perfect example of one of those people i described in my post.
totally misses the point. read the inuendo of his retort and you'll see it doesn't even fit- his implication, obviously, is that i think jews are animals-(it's a lingering artifact from some dead thread in caseyou missed that)
now, that would be a fitting jab if and only if, my point was that we are better than animals and that animals are bad - it fails in a post where i imply we should not forget that we are animals! i mean i would have to state animals in the figurative not literal sense as stated here and i'd have to establish thatas a negative for the retort to even make sense.
lolol that's just embarassing and exhaustingly stupid, but examples of the absurb are always a fun break so thanks for the diversion.
anyway...
Actually it was to remind people that you're a racist Jew hater, but please feel free to read into it what ever you want.
-
Originally posted by Raubvogel:
If I don't like someone, it's not because of how they look, it's because they're just an amazinhunk.
Well put, amazinhunk.
;)
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
Most historians who subscribe to the view that Stalin was planning to attack Hitler, put the offensive beginning in 1942 i.e. not 1-2 weeks from Barbarossa.
Considering that it is hard to completely hide a military buildup for the war intended to occupy the whole Europe, wouldn't it be surprising that russians spread those rumors themselves - with a date safely a year in the future.
A lot of hard evidence (mass production of gliders which cannot possibly survive winter on the ground, timed release of enormous numbers of pilots from flight schools - wasted as infantry later, etc.) indicate summer of 41 as strategic time. Moving aviation and suppies withing machinegun range of the enemy and troops into tents in the forest is not done a year in advance too. July 6th is more reasonable date to me.
Stalin accounts for 43,000,000 of these deaths.
How do you know what would have Trotsky's toll been? From reading his works I gather that he was more radical and less pragmatic.
Stalin's collective farms are nothing compared to Trotsky's "work armies" and sacrificing russia for "permanent revolution".
I dislike them both but I think Stalin was a better choice.
miko
[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]
-
Originally posted by Udie:
Actually it was to remind people that you're a racist Jew hater, but please feel free to read into it what ever you want.
my views on every race, religion, ethnic and socio-economic group will always be based on the sum of my experiences with them - not what society tells me i should think or what's nice to think.
you can put whatever label you want on that. whatever's easiest for you to understand.
-
It's simple Miko2d. Assuming the figures are correct (and they are statistics, so they must be right ;)), Stalin killed 43,000,000 with his purges, ethnic relocation, famine and work camps. The Soviet union killed 61,000,000. Take 43 from 61 and you get 18,000,000 down to the people in charge before Stalin came to power.
Trotsky fell out of favour with Stalin (he had an icepick buried in his head), remember, and it was Stalin pulling all the strings from 1922 when he was elected General Secretary.
The early years were brutal, the Stalinist years were unimaginable.
-
Dowding: There isn't an intelligence test in the world that has been accepted by the scientific community as a benchmark. Not even IQ tests. Mainly because of the poorly understood science of psychology (if it can be considered a science).
Unless you care to stroll to the nearest bookstore and pick up a few 600+ page volumes. And they all have hundreds of references - to studies, tests, research, ets.
Psychometry and differential psychology are well over 100 years old and while they had spectacular flops in the beginning (just like physicists and astronomers), they are real sciences now.
The performance tests involving mental activities highly correlate with objective measurements obtained with EEG, MRI and PET scans.
And they did extensive studies on siblings to eliminate factors external to families (Socio-economic status, etc). Those are the guys who invented statistical analysis in the first place.
Need book references?
Originally posted by Dowding:
The crux of the matter. How would you use your indisputable, scientifically proven information when recruiting for a vacancy at work, for instance?
If a guy comes for an interview in and scores well on a test, where does statistics even come into play? You know very well that stastistics cannot be used to predict outcomes of individual cases.
But if I were given $1 billion and asked to set up research facility for processor design - by taking very young children, educating them in a company school and then employing them - I would set up my shop in Israel or Korea, not Somali - even though expences in Somali would have been much smaller.
That would have been the most efficient use of company money.
16% of askenasi jews and ~5% of asians have IQ of 130 or higher vs 2.3% of anglo-saxons or 0.13% of Somaleans (still respectable 9700 somaleans of "very bright" level).
BTW, if you deny the scientific claim to this effect, then what you left is mrfish' claim that jews are so successfull because they sold their soul to the devil or something...
And other peoples' claims that blacks are lazy and prone to violence...
So denying inherent genetic differences between races in mental abilities is more racist point of view, or at least can be used by racists more effectively.
miko
[ 11-02-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]
-
Originally posted by miko2d:
BTW, if you deny the scientific claim to this effect, then what you left is mrfish' claim that jews are so successfull because they sold their soul to the devil or something...
[/QB]
that's not my view. my opinion on why the jews are disporportionately successful has to do with an emphasis on the importance of education and a heavy involvement by jewish parents. most of the jews i have met have a superior intellect when compared to the street level gentile.
in business it is partially due to the fact that the jews i have worked with put more time into the job. all-nighters are extremely common. they typically know the job better and make it more of a priority on average than others. at least in the industries i have experience in.
it's the clannish exclusionary moves, nepotism and no-holds barred and often destructive business deals that have no mercy and no consideration of people's lives, coupled with the jewish tenent that gentiles are inferior that earned my dislike. there's no metaphysical component, i don't even have a religion!
being smart or successful is only part of the equation - you have to judge people by how they live and regard others also.
-
That makes very little sense. I work for a company that develops assessments/tests, and there are many factors that will affect performance on these assessments that have nothing to do with intelligence. You can't give a westernized IQ test to someone from Somalia and expect them to perform well on it. By the same mark, doing the same in reverse will yeild the same result. Lack of education doesn't reflect lack of intelligence, and possesion of intelligence doesn't reflect possession of common sense. There are too many factors that make up human behaviour and aptitudes to simply pick one as the measure of the man, especially when your definition is simply a measure of specific cultural aptitude.
Genetically, we are all the same aside from VERY minor details. Saying that the color of someone's skin places them in a group that can be categorized as having lesser intelligence/aptitude is as ridiculous as saying that the color of someone's hair allows them to be categorized the same way.
What I think it comes down to is the analogy about pretty girls:
Pretty girls surround themselves with ugly friends to make themselves stand out.
The idea is to create something unsavory (or different) to juxtapose yourself against, thereby making yourself look good.
In the case of race, a difference is noticed, and because of this difference is physical, it is easy for people to identify the group, label them as 'unsavory', and appoint themselves 'better'. People crave power, and belonging, and race easily allows people to separate into 'us' and 'them'. They then can effortlessly make the jump to the thought that the group they belong to must be better, because they have assured themselves that they themselves are intelligent, and right, so if they are a part of a group like themselves, it must be a right and intelligent group.
It is a trap for people who have difficulty feeling worthwhile on their own merits... I see among my co-workers a desire to 'win' (Who is making more money? Who will be promoted?) as if life is a contest. Making the realization that life is in fact NOT a contest, and you don't have to 'beat' anyone to 'win' will result in having a less stressful, happier life without the need to put someone else down to hold yourself up.
I apologize for being over-long... I'm bored as hell at work today.
-
Thanks for all the responses everyone.
I should explain: the eample with the Somalis was my attempt at showing that a generalization that is obviously way to sweeping and downright wrong, regarding a group coming from a specific geographica area isn't a racist one - it can be a bigotted one however. But racism is a subset of bigotry, not the other way around.
Miko, you said something about I should be sure that I get my facts straight - I am not complete sure I understand what you're referring to. The Somali comment wasn't meant as a factual one. And, I'd very much like references to the works you've suggested would be interested to peruse.
I wrote the first post in a state of slight irritation - I definitely felt that it was wrong to call me a racist when I commented o behavior of a person - not behaviour of a race. Not even behaviour of a group from a specific region of the world. I was tired of hearing the word "racist" being overused - in a cry wolf fashion. It dilutes the importance of the word, something I find is a bit dangerous.
Interesting discussion this, and civil too. Thanks.
-
Aww! Man. I saw the title "racism" I thought there was a new NASCAR sim out.
-
ROTFLMAO Easymo!!! :)
BTW, miko, I want to understand your position:
Q: You are saying that some ethnic group is genetically less intelligent of some other?
If the answer is yes, what weight you put on social structure, educational system, in a word, the environment they use to live?
-
:confused: ....anybody want a donut?
Tumor
-
and here I thought racism was when 2 cars started revving at a red light...
Tronsky
-
I had a different opinion before, but I see Mr. Fish is a old "oven runner" NAZI!
His statements lack any purpose, point, or intellect at all. Plus he goes with the crowd, never having anything to say individually. Wait…he’s a COMMUNIST too!
Im with Undies here, burn Mr. Fish! It’s a new racists movement I enjoy.
(Although his Gook (that’s “G”word for the politically sappy) wife IS hot, and looks fun to boot, that won’t sway my opinion)
Oh, and he likes toejam music.
Burn Baby Burn! (add 70’s disco music here)
TARDS
-
mrfish wrote
almost every border collie i have ever met since i was a kid has tried to bite me (true story)
They're herding dogs. Some of the sheep smell is probably rubbing off on you.
myelo
[ 11-03-2001: Message edited by: myelo ]
-
she's not a gook creamo, she's a chink. there's a difference. :D
-
Short People got no reason
Short People got no reason
Short People got no reason
To live
They got little hands
And little eyes
And they walk around
Tellin' great big lies
They got little noses
And tiny little teeth
They wear platform shoes
On their nasty little feet
Well, I don't want no Short People
Don't want no Short People
Don't want no Short People
Round here
Short People are just the same
As you and I
(A Fool Such As I)
All men are brothers
Until the day they die
(It's A Wonderful World)
Short People got nobody
Short People got nobody
Short People got nobody
To love
They got little baby legs
And they stand so low
You got to pick 'em up
Just to say hello
They got little cars
That got beep, beep, beep
They got little voices
Goin' peep, peep, peep
They got grubby little fingers
And dirty little minds
They're gonna get you every time
Well, I don't want no Short People
Don't want no Short People
Don't want no Short People
'Round here
P.S. My wife is also Chinese.
Ta ma, MrFish, ya jew-hating bastage :(
-
43 millions...
Aaah.
I wonder how anyone survived here.
Rewriting history is a good business in the West. If you'll look at the sources (but who cares if we have popular history that explains who was the bad guy), yoll find different numbers. 900 thousand in 1937-53. It is a very big number. But all the tales about umpteen millions are only the cold-war propaganda, invented in the West to justify ideological "superiority" over USSR, adopted by post-communist Russian regime in the times of "perestroyka". The number of prisoners in famous "GULAG" was comparable with the number of ethnic Japanese in concentration camps in USA.
Beautiful arguments. Hangtime and people like him were told to hate communists, because they are evil. That's all.
It's probably the main difference between Eastern and Western ideology: we were never taught to hate anyone. When movies like "Rambo" or others of that kind appeared here - people were stunned by that concentrated hatred.
I don't think that communist regimes like USSR, China or Albania are nice and encouraging, but USSR was a good place to live, and it was not an "evil empire".
Miko, I don't care who owns the trademark on "Porto" :) I just want my good "Chervoniy Krymskiy". And I will call Armenian brandy "konyak". And Moldavian sparkling vine - "Shampanskoye". :) BTW, how should I call vobla in English? ;)
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
It's probably the main difference between Eastern and Western ideology: we were never taught to hate anyone. When movies like "Rambo" or others of that kind appeared here - people were stunned by that concentrated hatred.
I don't think that communist regimes like USSR, China or Albania are nice and encouraging, but USSR was a good place to live, and it was not an "evil empire".
No we werent taught to hate anyone, we were taught to hate EVERYONE :)
Pasha - you're kidding, right? 3.5 million in the Gulag prior to '41, 2.5 during and 5.5 in 1945-53. These numbers arent from "sources", they are from official NKVD/MVD/KGB RECORDS.
As for the USSR being a good place to live and not an "evil empire" - seems like we grew up in different countries. Even when i DID live there, and at a young age at that, i always KNEW i lived in a regime of evil. This is long before any perestroika - i left in '79. As far as I'm concerned, russian "Communism" was THE great evil of the 20th century, alongside Hitler's Germany. Mind you, these opinions were formed IN the USSR, before i was ever exposed to any "Western Propaganda". I find it very difficult to believe anyone who grew up in the USSR would come to different conlcusions, unless they grew up as part of the "Soviet Elite", and even then while they might have had a "nice life", anyone with eyes and a brain could tell that the whole thing was VERY WRONG.
[ 11-03-2001: Message edited by: Red Ant ]
-
Red Ant.. can you put up a link to that old song? I've been lookin for that... :D
Boroda,
You labor under misconceptions inherent with language difficulties. Since I have no understanding of Russian beyond a few choice curses, I must bow to your superior linguistic skills in determining the meaning of my posts.. interpetation is your problem.
That being said; allow me to further enlighten you on my opinion of Russia, and Russians as a people. I'm amazed that considering the amount of propoganda and the incredible destruction wrought upon the Russian people by its Government, both under the Czars as well as the Soviet Union it's amazing that you folks are not the most xneophobic folks on the planet.
My expericence with folks of Russian descent in this country has always; without expection, been postive. I harbor no ill will or 'racist' views towards any people populating this planet; including Moslems, Jews, Christians, Communists without portfolio or paginsts or owners of BMW's or Toyotas.
The jurys out on Mets fans.
If you happen to think that communisim is kewl; well; wonderful for you. Be advised, that should you or a group of you get together and attempt to impose that system of beliefs on me by force you'll catch a bullet.
If yer great grandpappy's uncle's sister was a commie potato, and that makes yah proud, well again; kewl on you. Same goes fer yer daddy or his uncle targeting US Air Pirates in the Vietnam War. If I ran into his bellybutton in the bush over there 35 years agao; I woulda plugged his bellybutton with a bullet too. No hard feelings... War is hell.
The deal now is, if I ran into the guy on the street today, I'd probably be intrested to hear of his achievements, listen politely to the anecdotes of his carreer, much the same as I'd do with a WWII German or Japenses vet.... war's over.
So.. I guess the point here is, I don't give a damn what you think of Capitalists, but the fact is; we won; the commies lost; and what you were then has no bearing on what we are now.
So.. what I do have to go on in formulating an opinion on you is your current views regarding me; America, and history. I may remind you again at this point that those three things are entirely diffrent from each other and require three seperate answers..
Regarding you views on America... yer entitled to view us as idiots; woefully ambigious in foreign policy and currently carrying out an unjust war for all the wrong reasons. I'm also entitled to think yer an underinformed commie propaganda brainwashed puppet of a dead regime, but hey; thats just my opinion; I could be wrong.
Regarding History and Communisim; pal; you are freakin trapped hopelessly in the wrong decade. Psssssst... news flash for yah; Stalin was this centurys biggest Butcher, Trotsky was an affront on humanity and communisim was a freakin horrible stain on civilization.
Regarding your opinion of me... hell; I don't give a damn what you think. In fact I don't give a damn what you EVER will think. Or ever DID think. Or even if you CAN think.
Yeb Vas. :D
I do however get a kick outta your 'Checkov' from star trek personality.. that toejam is priceless.
As always... have a nice day. :)
-
Anton, the top number of GULAG population was reached in 1940. A little over one million. No kidding. NKVD statistics. About the same number of prisoners that we have in Russia now... I think this number is a fake, but it looks more reasonable.
You left USSR because your family felt certain political pressure.
I was a son of the officer, and didn't feel any pressure at all. You can all me "soviet elite", I studied in a "special" school, etc. But I think you have to admit that majority of the Soviet people were absolutely satisfied with their life. The same "быдло" that waves red flags in the streets now and still remembers sausage for two twenty. Sausage for two twenty is their real banner.
There are unsatisfied people in every country.
As for me - I think I could live under Soviet power as good as I live now. Sorry. Now I have no guaranteed future, while in Soviet times I should have became a top-grade ITR (after MVTU), engineering elite, while now I am only a minor Academy of Science empoyee and an IT freelancer. Any position has it's benefits.
Russia is just different form the West.
BTW, did you finish reading Pelevin's book?
-
Originally posted by Hangtime:
[QB]Yeb Vas. :D
I thank you for showing respect for me by adressing me in multiple, "na vy", but I have to say that your sentence is not true.
An interesting post, I'll answer it tomorrow, sorry, have to go now.
I am happy I made you finaly quit playing "dumb yankee".
-
Originally posted by Red Ant:
P.S. My wife is also Chinese.
Ta ma, MrFish, ya jew-hating bastage :(
congratulations - except the difference is that you had to break one of the laws of your people to do it and i didn't.
"A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."
Talmud, Gad. Shas. 2:2
of course some argue that passage, but it if that wasn't clear engough for you then i think the law of Sanhedrin 82a and Avoda Zarah 36b E.S which forbid any sexual contact with a nonjewish woman would apply wouldn't you?
my people don't have such laws -
juc lei ho wan bac tse -
:cool:
-
Boroda: You are either more willfully blind than I imagined, or your provocation skills are honed to a fine razor-sharp edge :)
The true horror of Russian Communism can not be expressed in the numbers of deaths & misfortune, although there are examples aplenty. Btw, Boroda, in assesing Stalin's "death toll" did you include the Ukraininan Famine of the 20s? The one that Comrade Koba intentionally created and sustained, to the point of cordoning off the entire Ukraine to prevent food from coming in? Or how about the mass deportations of entire populations, packed into cattle cars with no food or sanitation, the dead tossed out at every stop? How do you think the Volga Germans feel, or the Crimean Tatars? Never mind the Chechens, we KNOW how they feel ;)Face it Pasha, the USSR was, at best, the 2d most brutal regime of the century. But that still is not the whole story.
The real lasting effect is the creation of "Homo Sovieticus", an indifferent, apathetic burocrat who is highly immoral, willing to denounce his neighbor and has forgotten what honest work means. "Sausage for 2.20" is HIS slogan, but only a part of it. His slogan is "Sausage for 2.50 at ANY price." You can't tell me you haven't seen the type every day.
In my opinion Pasha, yours is the FIRST generation in about 50 years that even has a chance to recover and make progress. I sincerely wish you luck.
Mind you, this is not about East vs West for me. Forget about the West and its problems for a minute - lets not make a moral comparison. I'm strictly talking about Russian communism being a plague on the russian (and other soviet) people, In more than one way. I would describe it as "Complete Bancrupcy" - material, moral and social. How ANYONE can see positivity in it is simply beyond me.
BTW, my family didnt leave because of "political pressure" per se. Both my parents were engineers, we were very well off by Soviet standards. My parents left because they (and I - it was my decision too) saw the HOPELESSNESS of Russian Communism, and sought to create a life of POSSIBILITY for ourselves elsewhere.
to conclude, i will quote a russian joke (анекдот ;)popular in the '70.
Brezhnev is visiting a group of Young Communists, and accidentally drops his eye-glasses. A young girl finds them and hands them to him.
"Thank you young comrade, I am indebted to you. Ask me any one favor and I will grant it!"
"Comrade Brezhnev, could you open the border for just one day?"
"Ahh you sly litte girl, you want to be alone with me!" :)
Tell me, does a population happy with their life make, spread and laugh at jokes like these?
-
MrFish, I think I stated clearly in another thread that I'm not a religious man, and have no more love for Judaism than any other organized religion. For those of us from the old USSR (and many other jews besides) being Jewish is a cutural/racial/heritage thing, and has nothing to do with religion. In my old Soviet passport, paragraph 5 clearly stated:
5)Nationality: Jewish
Regardless, I find your hatred of a whole racial group of people on the basis your experience with some individuals as distasteful as a person hating all black people because a black person had done them wrong at one point. Either example is generalization and stereotyping of the worst kind :(
-
FDR and Truman are worse then stalin..
And the guy has to ask what is wrong with communism..
sad
sad
sad.
-
"Now I have no guaranteed future"
Now you sound like an American. Although the true translation into American would be. " Now I have no limit on my future. I can make of it what I will".
-
MrFish, again, Judeism is a religion not a race or nationality.
If you believe the latter, then all i can say is "good luck".
Red Ant, I think you're judging russia using American standards. While polish communism wasn't as bad as Russian, I've experianced it first hand, and i can't agree with your blanket statements.
Just as you can't say that all Jews are evil, by the same token you can't say that all communists are murderous bastards.
The statement above will offcourse get me branded as an anti-semite and Commie, which in US is about as bad as it can get :D, but it is true.
Communism had good and bad sides. Maybe more of bad then good, depends on the person making a distinction. If you believe in a democracy you'll find interesting that ex-communist are in power in virutally every eastern block country now, only short 12 years after "liberation". Those are same people who enjoy free press and speach as we do.
You might say that they were brain washed, but if so, what guarantee do we have that we haven't been ? We're all watching the same CNN.
Another thing Anton, what are your thoughts on russia as far as you go ? Do you consider yourself Russian ? American ? Isreali ?
Reason i ask is because i feel that mine and Boroda's patriotism might be putting us in different point of view therefore accounting for the different perspective.
-
Originally posted by fd ski:
MrFish, again, Judeism is a religion not a race or nationality.
If you believe the latter, then all i can say is "good luck".
you are very naive.
[ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: mrfish ]
-
Might as well define the term racism.
"1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others."
Are there racists here? Duh. Absolutely... without question. The only thing more suprising to me than seeing a sort of easy and care-free expression of it here on this board is watching these same people try and deny it. Why?
Come on... if ya got no shame about it... then why run from the term? You have your beliefs... and racism is what it is. That's why they made a word for it. And there's a concrete definition to go along with that word. It means something. Either you are it or you aren't. And some of you are. You are. So if you gotta problem with that word, that's yer own issue. The definition aint gonna change in order to comfort your conscience. And these semantic gymnastics about it may fool some folks... but... they aint fooling everyone. :)
[ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: Nash ]
-
I’m prejudice, does that count as racism?
So be it.
Saw a black guy wearing obvious colors on my way to work sitting at the bus stop, and I thought “What in the fuk is he doing 2 miles from my house? Get out gangbanging piece of toejam. Live in someone else’s neighborhood, and shoot someone that looks just like you without hitting our neighborhoods little kids.
Never mind, yup, I’m definitely racist.
You all can live with them and paint rainbows on your windows.
Good for you.
---
[ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: Creamo ]
-
I thought a "Racist" was anyone who doesn't swallow the Leftist/Liberal/Socialist political view.........
Cabby
-
"my mom says there's a lot of black people in china."
-
Nice you can wear your prejudice on your sleeve, creamo. Honesty really is a virtue.
And yet another rabid, ultra-right wing one-liner from cabby! Consistency is such an admirable quality, and you have it in spades.
-
I'm always amazed at how many people are so eager to label people because they labeled people.
Seems bigotry and racism stem more from the inabillity to avoid placing a label on someone no matter how much they deserve it... or how much you can scientifically prove its accuracy.
:rolleyes:
AKDejaVu
[ 11-04-2001: Message edited by: AKDejaVu ]
-
Dowding said "spades".
-
Consistency is easy when you don't have to make things up as you go along. Thanks for proving my "Ultra-Right Wing" point, Dowding......
Cabby
-
Thanks Dowding.
Coming from a man that "has a Bachelor and a Masters degree in Applied Physics" I can see being your friend will really pay off.
Loan me a theory, I need credit. :rolleyes:
Tool.
-
To paraphrase a popular song:
"Commies to the left of me, Racists to the right, here I am
Stuck in the middle with you"
:eek:
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
Nice you can wear your prejudice on your sleeve, creamo. Honesty really is a virtue.
would it have been more socially palatable if he had seen an italian gangster?
is it ok to be angry that guys in leisure suits and tacky camaros are in your hood, or maybe dudes with pinstripes and tommy guns or does that just apply to black, misunderstood gangsters?
come ride the bus in my town - you can preach tolerance to the gangsters that are holding you upside down shaking shillings outta you. or perhaps you can avoid them altogether by learning to recognize them?
it shouldn't be a crime to recognize them - if they are wearing a social uniform then why deny them the reconition they seek?
those clothes aren't chosen for no reason, their mom didn't take the to mervyns back to school shopping and say "here tyreese, wear this jersey that says -you my squeak, squeak- it'd look super on you!"
those duds have every bit the validity of a badge or a flag - they mean to tell a story. it is not wrong to listen. if the story is misunderstood then maybe you arent telling it good enough.
slinging your pants around your ankles, limping, scowling and wearing a little do-rag are clear symbols, creamo'd be pretty clueless not to know that. naivity is rewarded in this culture, i swear.
even if the kid isn't a gangster he's trying to say "look at me, i am a hard gangster and believe in that lifestyle watch your step because i'm baaaaad, i'm bad, sha-mon oh!"
my boss is black. he takes no guff from anyone because he created himself. i respect his unwillingness to be what the world expects him to be "either a ghetto ganster or a sell ou uncle tom" he is neither and it shows. i respect him immensely.
he doesnt look like a gangster, he looks like an average joe, not a white wanna be just neutral. no one is going to see him in a neighborhood and recoil in horror because they know better. give people a little credit for having common sense!
good grief, i mean maybe people were that unjust in alabama 1949, but in this modern era and no one is flipping out because they see some harmless black guy... but most people know a ganster/gangster wannabe when they see one.
that tired old after school special is getting old - "oh he looked like a gangster but he was really a future nobel laureate and nobody would give him a chance"....."oh it's ok mrs. dawson, i'll just go work hard at mcdonalds and try not to sling caine...sniiff cry cry"
lol come on, use your head man.it is a new era and those old cop outs are no less valid than the stereotypes they were meant to usurp. the world didnt stop evolving in 1969 it's time to reintroduce common sense.
;)
-
lol Creamo - how could me having a degree in physics have anything to do with your particular prejudice?
As far as I know, my statement in relation to you was stating fact. You said as much in your preceeding post. And honesty remains a virtue.
I am distraught you won't be my friend, by the way.
Consistency is easy when you don't have to make things up as you go along. Thanks for proving my "Ultra-Right Wing" point, Dowding......
You're a one track record, cabby. I'm sorry to say that - but it's true. Every post you make is the same; any problem/conflict must be the fault of some mythical pinko/socialistic/commie/liberal conspiracy. There's no variation to what you say. And what you say generally amounts to very little.
In your eyes, the world was a perfect place before Das Kapital.
-
Quote:
"In your eyes, the world was a perfect place before Das Kapital. "
The world has never been a perfect place and never will be. To borrow Red Ant's tack:
"Talking 'bout a world where all is free, it just couldn't be, only a fool would say that..."
Or some cockeyed Liberal/Socialist weenie......
Cabby
-
Given that socialism is a recent development, don't you think many of the world's problems are just old issues with a modern spin on them? To blame them on a modern political ideology rather than their true origins is a bit short sighted.
What amazes me is your ability to link everything to left wing politics, like some characature of a right wing nutter.
-
Well.... this thread reminds me of CNN... over and over and over and over and over and over... so I'm gonna go pee.
xBAT
-
Originally posted by easymo:
"Now I have no guaranteed future"
Now you sound like an American. Although the true translation into American would be. " Now I have no limit on my future. I can make of it what I will".
Easymo, you are absolutely right. At least that's how I try to look at the things, and it's an argument I usually say to communists who miss the sausage for 2.20.
Anton, I don't advocate Soviet regime, but I see many positive sides of what happened here before 1991. Like really good education, scientific programs, etc.
And I get absolutely mad when the cold-war propaganda picturing us as a nation of slaves and concentration camps is the ONLY thing people know about my country. All this "gulag" roadkill, "evil Stalin", etc. We were people, not the stupid creatures in fur hats from Hollywood movies. People lived according to some rules that were different from Western. You know - like comparing Moslims with Christians. "Communism is evil, period". And noone ever wants to understand WHY it was evil! OTOH - what we have now is veery far from the happy view onto "capitalism" that we had in late-80s, in times of "destroyka".
Let me finish with another joke from the 70s:
Americans: "You don't have butter in stores!"
Russians: "And you opress blacks!" (хотел написать "негров", но меня тут с говном съедят :))
Americans: "And you don't have meat in your food-stores too!"
Russians: "And you keep Indians in resrvations!"
Americans: "And we, we... We'll kidnap your Brezhnev!"
Russians: "OK, you're welcome! Then you'll never see meat and butter in foodstores too!"
;)
To Hangtime: I didn't think you were in Vietnam. Sorry. I am the last person who'll blame you for what you did there: you served your country. My hat off for you and your comrades (I mean the real meaning of this word).
I was in the US 12 years ago, and believe me - I really liked your country and people. Attitude to Soviet students was as friendly as it could be.
And I don't think that America is "currently carrying out an unjust war for all the wrong reasons". I never said it. I only hate double-standards. We are in this war for almost ten years now. I wish it could like this again, and I still think it's possible:
(http://mina.ru/posters/soviet2/63.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Kratzer:
and there are many factors that will affect performance on these assessments that have nothing to do with intelligence. You can't give a westernized IQ test to someone from Somalia and expect them to perform well on it.
Have you stopped reading books before or after the phlogiston theory was disspelled? :)
Not all the progress of the last 130 years was in astronomy and physics.
There are myriads of tests that do not involve culture-related knowlege or, in fact, concious decision that are highly corellated with IQ level.
StSanta - in "getting the facts straigh" I ment which traits are proven to be genetically inheritable and which were not.
For all practical purposes lazyness is not inheritable while temperament and especially intelligence is. So there are no "lazy" nations though there are "smart".
I suggest you read "The g Factor" by Arthus Jensen and "The Bell Curve - intelligence and class structure in American society" by Herrnstein and Murray.
Also try "The Mismeasure of Man" by S. Gould for a bit of opposing view.
It is a good two thousand pages total and about a hundred dollars worth (get the latest editions - they are updated in view of the ongoing polemics).
Definitely a must read for a person who wants to go through life with open eyes.
Lots of practical implications if you plan to have family/children.
I will post an overview of Jensen's book in a separate post in a few days.
miko
[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]
-
Originally posted by Naso:
BTW, miko, I want to understand your position:
Q: You are saying that some ethnic group is genetically less intelligent of some other?
If the answer is yes, what weight you put on social structure, educational system, in a word, the environment they use to live?
The answer is unfortunately YES. The difference is large, especially in the upper and lower expremes of distribution.
Intelligence is 60-80% inheritable, most of the rest is determined by random environmental factors.
The effectiveness of the social programs directed towards raising the IQ or academic achievemant is practically nill despite huge expences. The Head Start programs do give a considerable boost to IQ measured of the children but the effect can be considered an acceleration, not true gain - all the differences disappear by the time children reach 16-17.
This data can be used by racists as well as the opposite view. For example:
If Hitler had modern hard data that some race is 1.3 standard deviations below average IQ for white people, he might have used it as an excuse to treat them as sub-humans.
On the other hand, if he had the modern hard data that ashkenasi Jews are 1+ standard deviations above average, he might have hated jews less.
Simple calculation shows that in a country of ~55 million germans and ~2 million jews there would be equal number of jews and germans with IQ 135+ (approximately - try it yourself).
So equal number of jews and germans in the key positions of economy, science, culture and media in germany did not require conspiracy or some character feature to explain - it was just the natural phenomenon of difference in intelligence.
miko
[ 11-05-2001: Message edited by: miko2d ]
-
Originally posted by Boroda:
Rewriting history is a good business in the West.
Don't blame them. They are copying soviet histories. Which we then copied back to show as western sources.
Stalinists had more reasons to obscure history. Western historians were just stupid and gullible.
BTW, how should I call vobla in English?
Beats me. Have to find out. Of course vobla is moskal word. The name I grew up with was "taranka".
miko