Can you be "pro" whatever your race is, and not be racist?

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_Gunnar
_Emeritus
Posts: 6315
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 6:17 am

Re: Can you be "pro" whatever your race is, and not be racis

Post by _Gunnar »

Maxine Waters wrote:
Irrelevant and stupid question, as the descendants of the French and Anglo Saxons they ravaged long ago are now doing very well, and are not in any way inconvenienced by or discriminated against by me or my fellow descendants of the Viking terrors. Any debt incurred by the previous behavior of those Vikings has long ago been paid off with interest by contributions to the world and society in general by their descendants.


Were the Viking people required to pay restitution with the first 100-200 years after their raiding and pillaging? How did the descendants of the French and Anglo Saxons start doing well again without big government social welfare programs to lift them back up?

They were going through climate change problems in those days too. The medieval warming period was ending and the Vikings were being frozen out of their settlements in Greenland and the Scandinavian peninsula.

Yet more stupid and irrelevant questions.

As for their climate change problems, unlike the present case, they could not have been caused by human activity, though they may have helped motivate them to engage them to desperate piratical behavior to acquire the means to survive. There is no longer any room for reasonable doubt that today's climate change is human caused. Denying that, given the overwhelming evidence, is every bit as unreasonable as insisting that the world is flat.
No precept or claim is more likely to be false than one that can only be supported by invoking the claim of Divine authority for it--no matter who or what claims such authority.

“If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; but if you really make them think, they'll hate you.”
― Harlan Ellison
_subgenius
_Emeritus
Posts: 13326
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 12:50 pm

Re: Can you be "pro" whatever your race is, and not be racis

Post by _subgenius »

canpakes wrote:
subgenius wrote:Yeah, I found nothing scientific that supports rabbits thinking as it pertains to this context....or any context really.

Yes, it would appear correct that rabbits do not think about political issues.

However, research does indeed suggest that something is happening inside of their furry little craniums beyond merely being instinctively reactive.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/do ... 1&type=pdf

this link is dead or mis-referenced....nothing would load on my cpu, perhaps you could dumb it down for me...i mean i get what "suggest" means, but that is not really a conclusion....its a suggestion...and stills says nothing about rabbits actually thinking. I mean sometimes the universe seems to be suggesting that i stay in bed all day....


canpakes wrote:
subgenius wrote:Maybe you just have a much more loosely defined notion of thinking....less vacuous maybe

Maybe you might revisit your criteria for 'thinking'.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015 ... n-science/

Nah my criteria is pretty spot on and consistent with modern times....but this link does not support that rabbits actually think, the only mention of rabbits is with regards to them being able to "remember". Still, have not been able to see any science that supports the notion that rabbits can actively form connected ideas, etc.
Seek freedom and become captive of your desires...seek discipline and find your liberty
I can tell if a person is judgmental just by looking at them
what is chaos to the fly is normal to the spider - morticia addams
If you're not upsetting idiots, you might be an idiot. - Ted Nugent
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Can you be "pro" whatever your race is, and not be racis

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

From the article since I doubt anyone will read it without it being spoonfed to them:

Trump either won, or closely contested all the traditional manufacturing states -- Ohio, Wisconsin, Indiana, Iowa and even Michigan, where union voters did not support Clinton as they had Obama and where trade was also a big issue. Trump did consistently better than Romney in all these states, even though Romney was a native of Michigan. Perhaps the most significant turnaround was in Ohio, which Obama won with barely 51% of the vote in 2012. This year Trump reversed this loss and won by over seven points.

Agricultural states, reeling from the decline of commodity prices, not surprisingly, also went for the New Yorker.

Premature Epitaphs For The White Voter

Race, as is often the case, played a major role in the election. For much of the election, commentators, particularly in the dominant Eastern media, seemed to be openly celebrating what CNN heralded as “the decline of the white voter.” The “new America,” they suggested, would be a coalition of minorities, educated workers and millennials.

To be sure, the minority share of the electorate is only going to grow -- from less than 30% today to over 40% in 2032 -- as more white Americans continue to die than be born. Just between 2012 and 2016, the Latino and Asian electorate grew 17% and 16%, respectively; the white electorate expanded barely 2%.

In Colorado the new minority math was seen, with a strong showing among Latinos, the educated suburbs around Denver and millennials.

That may be the future, but now is now. Exit polling nationwide showed Trump won two-to-one among people without a college degree, matched Clinton among college graduates, losing only those with graduate degrees, a group that has voted for the Democrats since 1988.

But there’s simply more high school graduates than those with graduate degrees. And for now there are a lot more whites than minorities. As we look into the future, these groups will fade somewhat but right now they can still determine elections. Nowhere is this clearer than in Trump’s decisive win in Florida, a state that is home to many white retirees, including from the old industrial states.

Latinos may be the one group in the “new America” that made a difference for Clinton, not only in Colorado, but also in Nevada. Republicans paid a price for Trump’s intemperate comments on immigration and about Mexico.

They also made states like Texas and North Carolina closer, and may have helped secure Clinton’s win in Virginia. In contrast, neither African-Americans or millennials seem to have turned out as heavily, both in numbers and percentage terms, as they did for President Obama. Trump appears to have made some modest gains with both groups, contrary to the conventional wisdom.

Class Warrior

Class has been a bigger factor in this election than in any election since the New Deal era. Trump’s insurgency rode largely on middle- and working-class fears about globalization, immigration and the cultural arrogance of the “progressive” cultural elite. This is something Bill Clinton understands better than his wife.

Trump owes his election to what one writer has called “the leftover people.” These may be “deplorables” to the pundits but their grievances are real – their incomes and their lifespans have been decreasing. They have noticed, as Thomas Frank has written, that the Democrats have gone “from being the party of Decatur to the party of Martha’s Vineyard.

Many of these voters were once Democrats, and feel they have been betrayed. And they include a large swath of the middle class, whose fury explains much of what happened tonight. Trump has connected better with these voters than Romney, who won those making between $50,000 and $90,000 by a narrow 52 percent margin. Early analysis of this year’s election shows Trump doing better among these kind of voters.

At the same time, however, affluent voters -- those making $100,000 and above -- seem to have tilted over to the Democrats this year. This is the first time the “rich” have gone against the GOP since the 1964 Goldwater debacle. Obama did better among the wealthy, winning eight of the 10 richest counties in 2012. In virtually all these counties, Clinton did even better.

What does this mean for America’s traditional middle class, whose numbers have been fading for a generation? Long the majority, notes Pew, they are no longer, outnumbered by the lower and upper classes combined. Yet like the Anglo population, in this election what’s left of America’s middle class has shown itself not ready to face the sunset.

Now What?

Given the unpredictable nature of Trump, it’s hard to see what he will do. Although himself a businessman, he was opposed overwhelmingly by his own class. Clinton won more support from big business and the business elite. If you had a billionaire primary, Clinton would have won by as much as 20 to 1.

Initially many of those business interests closest to both Obama and Clinton -- Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Hollywood -- will be on the outside looking in. Their advantages from tax avoidance could be lessened. Merger-mania, yet another form of asset inflation, will continue unabated, particularly in the tech and media space.

The clear challenge for (I can’t believe I am writing these words) President Trump will not be so much to punish these enemies, but to embrace those people -- largely middle class, suburban, small town and white -- who are not part of his world, but made him President. If he embraces his role as a radical reformer, he could do much good, for example with a flatter tax system, restoring federalism, seizing the advantage of the energy revolution and reviving military preparedness.

The question is whether he will, or is capable, of doing these things. A Hillary Clinton administration would have been safer, and predictable, but it would not have addressed the very things that made Americans turn to this bizarre political poseur. Now it’s up to Trump to live up to his promise to restore the country’s self-confidence, and, for the rest of us, to make sure he does it in accordance with the Constitution and basic decency.


I mean, god forbid someone running for President would actually court, I dunno, the largest voting demographic in the United States....

And you know what? Unless Democrats get their acts together I bet we see Asian and Latino voters, as their cumulative net worth increases, and their personal investment into the economy grows, shift to the Right, as it always does when people don't feel like their personal interests are being represented by whatever political party.

The Dems would be better off getting off the race card, trans this or that, homosexual grievances, and come up with solid economic plans that are easily digestible, and make sense in the long-run.

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
_canpakes
_Emeritus
Posts: 8541
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 6:54 am

Re: Can you be "pro" whatever your race is, and not be racis

Post by _canpakes »

subgenius wrote:

this link is dead or mis-referenced....nothing would load on my cpu, perhaps you could dumb it down for me...i mean i get what "suggest" means, but that is not really a conclusion....its a suggestion...and stills says nothing about rabbits actually thinking. I mean sometimes the universe seems to be suggesting that i stay in bed all day....

A-ha. The rabbits are on to us, lol.

This is an interesting paper from around 2006 or so, about how rabbits seem to be able to selectively forage for higher-nutrition food in the wild when other environmental factors are equalized. A more recent paper that also examines their preferential or rejection tendencies can be found at:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4093528/

These are not offered as evidence that a rabbit is someday going to challenge your job of inserting COB-approved Sacrament building planograms into new ward construction proposals. But it does raise an interesting question about how far along the 'thinking' criteria a rabbit is beginning to intrude, when it selectively cycles rejection/acceptance of particular feed sources for seemingly indiscriminate reasons outside of merely satisfying an instinctual hunger urge.


subgenius wrote:
canpakes wrote:Maybe you might revisit your criteria for 'thinking'.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015 ... n-science/

Nah my criteria is pretty spot on and consistent with modern times....but this link does not support that rabbits actually think, the only mention of rabbits is with regards to them being able to "remember".

The link above isn't offered for rabbits in particular; it's about animals in general. There are still a number of folks who believe that no animals 'think' in the same ways that a human is capable, but contemporary evidence easily challenges this. Certainly they're not running the range of thought processing with the same degree of complexity between each other or as compared to humans, but the evidence points to a similar or same root mechanisms nonetheless, including preference-interests and “breaches of rationality”.

Regardless, this has no bearing on Jersey Girl's question. She asked, "Explain how racism makes logical sense, please". You've provided evidence for an instinctual brain response that folks seem to possess when confronted with differing racial types; this stops short of an answer to the question.

Can you explain how the conversion of that response into the idea that one's own species is superior to the other ('racism', by definition) is logical?
Last edited by Guest on Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
_Doctor CamNC4Me
_Emeritus
Posts: 21663
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:02 am

Re: Can you be "pro" whatever your race is, and not be racis

Post by _Doctor CamNC4Me »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:They have noticed, as Thomas Frank has written, that the Democrats have gone “from being the party of Decatur to the party of Martha’s Vineyard.


Ha. In an oddly seredipitous coincident Yahoo News is on point with:

https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/jfk-gra ... 32634.html

JFK’s Granddaughter Tatiana Schlossberg Marries in Martha’s Vineyard Ceremony

The New York Times first reported the story; The bride, 27, is a former reporter with the paper who covered climate change and the environment. The groom, 28, is a fourth-year medical student at Columbia University in NYC.

The couple first met as undergrads at Yale. Former governor of Massachusetts, Deval L. Patrick, officiated the ceremony, held at the home of the bride’s family on Saturday, September 9.


Something is missing from their photos. I can't really put my finger on it... Hrm...

- Doc
In the face of madness, rationality has no power - Xiao Wang, US historiographer, 2287 AD.

Every record...falsified, every book rewritten...every statue...has been renamed or torn down, every date...altered...the process is continuing...minute by minute. History has stopped. Nothing exists except an endless present in which the Ideology is always right.
Post Reply