Column: Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy.

Page 34 of 41 [ 647 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 41 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

30 Sep 2021, 6:49 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

[ I can't speak for Australia, but here high school is a grind, all directed towards gaining acceptance at a decent university. It's get more and more competitive each year, and there is a lot of intense focus on how to play the game and get noticed enough to "win." Students are overworked, overbooked, and overly anxious. They aren't feeling free to really follow the leads growing in their minds. The change in my son two months into university was incredible. I'd never seen him feel so free to be who he was. A lot of suppressed energy couldn't wait to escape and make its mark.

Historically there have been relatively few institutions of higher learning in Australia. In my grandfather's time it was still an aspiration for the upper middle class to send their children to England to attend University. From the 1960s every state had at least two universities and one institute of technology. Getting into university wasn't a problem in those days and higher education was free (covered by the taxpayer).

from the 1980s when fees were introduced and the job market became more competitive with the arrival millions of immigrants the climate in highschool began to resemble the US and you had the introduction of selective highschools dominated by east Asian kids and their tiger moms.

Still, I don't think its as bad as the US but we have our own version of Ivy league Universities (the Go8) but our culture is still not so obsessed with higher learning, again it seems to be dominated by immigrants (particularly east Asians) who are disproportionally represented in the university population.

Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

30 Sep 2021, 6:58 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

^^^ Could you have intentionally made that more confusing? I don't have time to follow your little maze out, figure out whose quote was whose, and I'm not convinced that all of it comes from discussions I was personally involved in (I recognize very little). You can't hold me to something you were discussing with someone else; I don't read every post in every thread.

If our conversations were unintentionally entirely different, so be it. Read accordingly and don't pretend I'm on the same street. Keep track of who is writing what. You mix your posters too often.

I tried to make it as clear as possible - the posts start at the same origin (the inner-most post) and work out, post-by-post to allow a side-by-side comparrison with the quotes at the start of the post being sumarized in the corresponding quote in the bottom portion of the post.

The reason there is no "name" against each quote is that they are not "quotes", but instead a simplification of each participant's words, and I didn't want to be accused of attributing to another person specific phrases which they did not specifically use\type.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

30 Sep 2021, 7:07 pm

Brictoria wrote:

The reason there is no "name" against each quote is that they are not "quotes", but instead a simplification of each participant's words, and I didn't want to be accused of attributing to another person specific phrases which they did not specifically use\type.

I don't consider this to be a trustworthy method to back up your position. I would never trust any other poster to "simplify" my words, and especially not someone who is debating me.

You just built a house on toothpicks.

I know the one sentence that framed the conversation for me:

Brictoria wrote:

The problem is that portion of time before\leading up to "getting out of college and living in the real world" - What is it that causes people to believe something so strongly during that time period which is so quickly shown to be incorrect on leaving it, and why is this happening?

Clearly an open question, not a stated theory.

For you a different sentence framed the conversation. So be it.

Let's just forget about who is right about the trail and who isn't. We can figure it out going forward now that we know.

And, by the way, it is NOT an agreed fact that most people DO change their opinions drastically after college. Most people do NOT flip, in my experience; they mellow and refine.

The whole luxury beliefs thing you quoted, by the way, isn't something I can address quickly, and I really need to pull myself off here. Maybe another day. We'll see.

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

Brictoria
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Aug 2013
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,998
Location: Melbourne, Australia

30 Sep 2021, 9:46 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

Brictoria wrote:

Anyone is free to clarify where my understanding of any part of this thread was incorrect. Perhaps I misunderstood the words used, but I was trying to find where the subject of "who planted the seed" for the belief came into the discussion, in order to determine if your long reply about "conservatives" on this was related to anything someone else had posted, or was a strawman arguement which was seperate\distracting from what had been discussed prior to that point.

Quote:

The typical straw man argument creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition through the covert replacement of it with a different proposition (i.e., "stand up a straw man") and the subsequent refutation of that false argument ("knock down a straw man") instead of the opponent's proposition

<...>

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.
Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.

This reasoning is a fallacy of relevance: it fails to address the proposition in question by misrepresenting the opposing position.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Unfortunately, I was unable to find any reference in earlier posts in the discussion to the origin of the belief before you brought up the "conservative's view" on this which you disagreed with and spent so many words refuting - There's nothing wrong with holding the view you presented on this, it was merely the manner in which this was introduced into a discussion regarding the retention of a belief at\after a certain point in time, in order to be "refuted" by yourself, that I was looking at.

DW_a_mom wrote:

I know the one sentence that framed the conversation for me:

Brictoria wrote:

Clearly an open question, not a stated theory.

For you a different sentence framed the conversation. So be it.

I generally consider the initial post in a discussion to be where it begins - in this case, you appear to have set a starting point as being a reply to this.

DW_a_mom wrote:

Let's just forget about who is right about the trail and who isn't. We can figure it out going forward now that we know.

And, by the way, it is NOT an agreed fact that most people DO change their opinions drastically after college. Most people do NOT flip, in my experience; they mellow and refine.

As above - I was responding to another's post (which I quoted), using that as the basis for my future responces... If you feel that this point is worthy of debate, feel free to make your view and reasoning on this known, so those interested in debating you on it may feel free to do so.

DW_a_mom wrote:

The whole luxury beliefs thing you quoted, by the way, isn't something I can address quickly, and I really need to pull myself off here. Maybe another day. We'll see.

We'll see... :mrgreen:

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

30 Sep 2021, 11:14 pm

^^^ You make no allowances for the fact that sometimes people simply misread intentions in a post. It really is unbecoming when you act as if the people around you don't understand the words, instead of assuming there might have been miscommunication.

My very first point was to say that I considered it a mistake to assume that most young adults turn a 180 after college, because you were already gearing up to move forward with the assumption that they do turn a 180. To me, that would have been a false conversation. I see no evidence of that being a significant reality, but I was trying to be tactful. I also don't agree with this in your summary, I honestly can't see how you get there at all, but if it is what you inferred, that explains a lot:

Quote:

(implicitly acknowledging that the belief must have been planted, else how would they have come to believe it, and why believe it so strongly).

There was a lot of tone an language in your posts that seemed to reflect an American conservative talking point. American conservatives regularly complain of "liberal" education, and are basically on a warpath to discredit our hard working public school and higher learning educators as partisan hacks. I felt you were echoing some of their language and claims, and saw where you would eventually go with it (which you did). I could only assume that you had picked up your tone from media, since I am not aware of any first hand knowledge you might have about education in the US.

(Please don't use the unattributed quote of an unattributed quote of an unattributed quote of an unattributed quote of an unattributed quote method again. We aren't on this board for you to find new ways to use up OUR time in order to support YOUR point. )

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Sep 2021, 11:55 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Pepe wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Pepe wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

cyberdad wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

So you think the BBC is more informed about the Klan than the people who live in the same state with them?

It may surprise you but the BBC and Al Jezeera and even our own Australian ABC have journalists who have been stationed in the US who have deep knowledge of the politics/culture in America.

Another advantage of foreign news services is that they are not subject to government pressure on their editorial team

This certainly happened during the Covington schoolboy legal case against the Washington post where the then POTUS interfered in two legal cases by supporting Nicholas Sandmann's parent's claims and secondly in the murder trial of Kyle Rittenhouse where again the POTUS threw his support behind the murder accused and against the families of the victims.

Both of these were major conflicts of interest given the legal team supporting Sandmann and Rittenhouse was pro-Trump, Pro-QAnon, Following Sandmann's successful out-of court settlement the events leading up to that particular story has been cancelled from media (as if it never existed) in fear of legal repercussion, These are examples of interference in the operation of the free press in the US.

The Sandmann incident was a media hoax. The video was edited to create the racist narrative. So I guess these foreign media outlets were ahead of the curve in pointing out the ill intent of the US media?
They just did this again days ago with the debunked claim that the US border patrol were using whips against Haitian refugees. The media can't be trusted.

Whips or not, guys on horses trying to roundup people looks more than a little dehumanizing. Kinda like hunting humans in the original Planet Of The Apes.

The optics may be bad but the job of the border patrol is to keep the border secure. That may not look pretty at times but the job must be done. If we have no border we have no country.

Until the Trump years, refugees were supposed to be able to apply for asylum. That changed when Trump decided to keep out black and brown people from what he called $hithole countries, like these people.
If someone gallantly makes a dangerous journey to escape poverty and violence in order to become Americans, then that's courage that should be rewarded.[/quote
Being a refugee is not a permanent status. They can apply in any country so why must it be the United States?
If they are suffering persecution and/or abuse in their own country refugees should apply in the nearest country to their own. The US has a lot of house keeping to do in regards to the entire immigrant/refugee system.

These particular refugees weren't even allowed to apply, but were charged by border patrol agents who destroyed their camp.
Why must they apply for refugee status in the US? The fact that we Americans regard our country as the greatest country on earth should answer why. We should proud that people the world over want to be Americans.

"Oh, ok."
So, do you believe there should be *no* vetting process?

Watch out, this is a "leading question". :mrgreen:

When did I ever say there should be no vetting process???

It was a question, not a statement.
It was asked for clarification.
We have established what you are, now. :mrgreen:

Which reminds me of a joke I have mentioned elsewhere, recently:

A man approaches a beautiful woman on the street and askes her if she would sleep with him for $1,000,000.
She excitedly agreed to the proposition.
The man then asked if she would do it for $50.
The woman was indignant and asked him what he thought she was.
The man replied: "We have established what you are. We are simply haggling over the price." :mrgreen:

The notion that America isn't vetting immigrants - particularly non-white immigrants - is a falsehood promoted by the right. More and more people on the right promoting such thought are revealing their support for the obscene, racist conspiracy theory known as the Great Replacement. That is, the notion that brown and black immigrants are being brought in to replace white Americans. And who is supposedly behind this? Well, at the Unite the Right rally at Charlottesville, the torch bearing racist fanatics chanted: "Jews will not replace us." Since then, liberals and Democrats have taken the place of Jews as the dastardly plotters against the white race. Whether it's Jews or liberals, it's still completely false and based on the fevered dreams of hateful white nationalists.
Sound insane? Well, it's apparently acceptable to more mainstream Republicans, as the so called Great Replacement has been advocated by the likes of Tucker Carlson, and Matt Gaetz. And it's not just them.

You seem to have some insight into the vetting situation since any other view is some crazy conspiracy theory.

No, I'm just expressing the nativist poison against wrong colored immigrants.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

30 Sep 2021, 11:57 pm

Pepe wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Well, I have heard left-wing virtue-signallers say they want no borders/vetting at all.
It isn't just the right extremists promoting this impractical concept, and blaming the left.

And here in Australia, we used to have a similar problem with "people trafficking" into Australia, causing many deaths at sea.
Illegal entrants even went so far as to destroy their paperwork causing an inordinate amount of wasted time validating their actual status.
People were talking "no borders" nonsense here, also, and they were serious, even if they couldn't be taken seriously.
If you are suggesting the irrational thinking in America is only the result of the right, we will have to agree to disagree, my fiend friend. :mrgreen:

Bottom line is, there needs to be a vetting process and a no border policy is a nonsense.
Germany tried it recently and it caused a lot of social conflict as a result of the rape gangs that were let in.
Do you want someone to find the news clips? :scratch:

Also, there may be a political aspect to who is allowed in.
I heard not that long ago that some ethnic groups had preferential treatment because of their political leaning.
The same has been suggested here in Australia.

Dirty political games never end on either side.
Surely we can both agree with that statement?
Or are you back to saying:
All Democrats are good.
All Republicans are bad? :scratch:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

01 Oct 2021, 2:04 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Pepe wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

I agree this is true, but I'm going to throw something out there.

There is actually some solid history behind the idea of a more open border. For decades citizens of Mexico used to float over the border to work during harvest and tourist seasons, and then return home to Mexico. They didn't move their families. They came to work, and took the money home when the season was over. The illegal immigrant population in the US actually swelled when we closed the borders, since it was no longer feasible for migrant workers to float back and forth over the border. Instead, they started moving permanently to the US with their families. When borders were open they didn't do that; their families stayed behind. In trying to enforce stricter border control, we actually made the illegal immigration problem MUCH worse.

Be clear, I do NOT think we should have open borders. I'm talking about one specific way closing the borders worked opposite as intended. It isn't the only situation we have borders to address.

A more robust guest worker program could be a reasonable compromise: the borders aren't open, but migrants are able to move freely between homes they keep in Mexico, and work opportunities in the US.

Just something to think about.

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 58
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,036

01 Oct 2021, 2:32 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

Does any liberal actually want teeming masses to enter without any form of border control?? Sounds like the usual bollocks

Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 26,635
Location: Australia

01 Oct 2021, 4:48 am

Kraichgauer wrote:

Pepe wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

I believe we are making progress.

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

01 Oct 2021, 8:49 am

DW_a_mom wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Pepe wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

That is very true.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,363
Location: Tulsa, OK

06 Oct 2021, 8:29 am

cyberdad wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

Does any liberal actually want teeming masses to enter without any form of border control?? Sounds like the usual bollocks

Apparently the US government does.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

06 Oct 2021, 8:43 am

Mr Reynholm wrote:

cyberdad wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

Does any liberal actually want teeming masses to enter without any form of border control?? Sounds like the usual bollocks

Apparently the US government does.

Then why are they deporting so many?

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,363
Location: Tulsa, OK

06 Oct 2021, 11:26 am

DW_a_mom wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

cyberdad wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

Does any liberal actually want teeming masses to enter without any form of border control?? Sounds like the usual bollocks

Apparently the US government does.

Then why are they deporting so many?

They probably have their reasons. But leaving the boarder wide open to anyone is a terrible risk. We don't know who is crossing or what they may be bringing with them.

DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,689
Location: Northern California

06 Oct 2021, 2:45 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:

DW_a_mom wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

cyberdad wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

Does any liberal actually want teeming masses to enter without any form of border control?? Sounds like the usual bollocks

Apparently the US government does.

Then why are they deporting so many?

They probably have their reasons. But leaving the boarder wide open to anyone is a terrible risk. We don't know who is crossing or what they may be bringing with them.

I think it is incorrect to believe the border has suddenly been left wide open.

_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

06 Oct 2021, 7:55 pm

DW_a_mom wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

DW_a_mom wrote:

Mr Reynholm wrote:

cyberdad wrote:

Kraichgauer wrote:

Most liberals reject such a notion as open borders.

Does any liberal actually want teeming masses to enter without any form of border control?? Sounds like the usual bollocks

Apparently the US government does.

Then why are they deporting so many?

They probably have their reasons. But leaving the boarder wide open to anyone is a terrible risk. We don't know who is crossing or what they may be bringing with them.

I think it is incorrect to believe the border has suddenly been left wide open.

I'm absolutely certain you're correct.

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Page 34 of 41 [ 647 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 ... 41 Next

Jump to:

Column: Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy. Post Reply New Topic

Column: Larry Elder is the Black face of white supremacy.