It's been more conservatarian than really libertarian in my tenure here. If it weren't for the interesting sub-forums this place would be useless to libertarians and would've died long ago-as far as the libertarian contingent goes, at least.Originally Posted by ProIndividual
I will never watch such a boring game, unless they raise the hoop by 2 feet. Soccer is worse, need to allow more frequent substitutions and increase the net size.Even , I was smart enough to play basketball , before I attended schoolin'
Pfizer Macht Frei!
Openly Straight Man, Danke, Awarded Top Rated Influencer. Community Standards Enforcer.
Quiz: Test Your "Income" Tax IQ!
Short Income Tax Video
The Income Tax Is An Excise, And Excise Taxes Are Privilege Taxes
The Federalist Papers, No. 15:
Except as to the rule of appointment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulations extending to the individual citizens of America.
therefore ban acptulsa
'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988
Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation
'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3
Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.
...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...
I was best at Football & Soccer , I agree that Soccer could be better . I would start with eliminating the Offside penalty , lazy defense is rewarded through that and speed and skill are penalized. The substitutions may be an idea.
The whole problem with "racism" is everyone has a different definition. I personally think it's only "racism" if you are trying to harm or "handicap" some group of people because of their "race" (not even accurate since we are all of one "race"). I don't think it's wrong to have "preferences". I have a "preference" for Asian chicks so I married one (call me a racist - I don't care). What about another "race" like the dog "race"? All are dogs but some prefer labs, some poodles. Some prefer pit bulls and some hounds. If I really don't want to have poodles around me am I a "poodle racist"??
It's really all about free association as long as I'm not infringing on the rights of others to associate and live their lives it's really "no foul". No one is hurt.
BEWARE THE CULT OF "GOVERNMENT"
Christian Anarchy - Our Only Hope For Liberty In Our Lifetime!
Sonmi 451: Truth is singular. Its "versions" are mistruths.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChristianAnarchist
Use an internet archive site like THIS ONE
to archive the article and create the link to the article content instead.
“I don’t think that there will be any curtailing of Donald Trump as president,” he said. "He controls the media, he controls the sentiment [and] he controls everybody. He’s the one who will resort to executive orders more so than [President] Obama ever used them." - Ron Paul
I figured as much when they refused to do anything about the promotion of white supremacy from a particular poster.
One problem people have is that they don't view racism as the spectrum that it is. They'll hear the word "racist" and immediately recoil because they obviously don't want to be labeled as such, and they don't personally think they've done or said anything racist, let alone being one. Everyone has implicit biases, and it happens that a lot of these biases are racist, even on a smaller scale. These are not the explicit biases you see from white supremacists or outwardly violent racists, which I believe, is what a lot of people think of when they hear the word "racist." As mentioned, it's a lack of understanding that a spectrum exists.
A lot of progressives will shout "racist!" and quickly label individuals who don't understand the varying degrees of racism, which is why many on the "right" will say that "everything's racist nowadays to those progressives!" I think there's a difference between someone who is racist, and someone who may do or say racist things due to their implicit biases. I wouldn't call someone with these subconscious biases a racist—I would merely point out that they're doing/saying racist things, and why it's flawed. Just calling them racist ignores any sort of nuance and immediately puts people on the defensive, which is why progressives typically fail. Someone who refuses to change or act against these biases when possible after being made aware of them and how they may be hurting others, however, is a racist. And again, as a spectrum, it may be that they're on the very low end of that scale, but it doesn't absolve them of these racist tendencies. Someone who clutches their purse or crosses the street when minorities are approaching for example, doesn't exhibit the same level of racism as an individual who openly calls them derogatory terms or works politically towards implementing laws that target them.
For individuals who constantly scrutinize the mainstream media, it's a little ironic when they don't also understand how that very same media may have shaped their own subconscious biases, especially racist ones. While I would want nothing to do with outwardly racist pricks, I do have some empathy for people with these implicit biases because I know at least the majority of it stems from their upbringing and media consumption. However, I have even more empathy for all people who have to struggle against both implicit and explicit racism, especially on a systemic level. A lot of these officers who gun down minorities and specifically target them on drug charges for example, are often way more cavalier about the way they handle "suspects" and make arrests. Their subconscious racism will make them pull that trigger with certain speed.
The minority will be less trustworthy to the general public and they'll be character assassinated to give cops the benefit of the doubt, no empathy or understanding of the circumstances. The white kid will typically be seen as a tragic case or a good kid gone wrong due to mental health issues, with some empathy expressed. This is why it's "Black Lives Matter" and not "All Lives Matter." The general public already knows all lives matter and expresses concern for white lives, but black people are often seen as dangerous, less deserving of empathy, and less human. That is essentially what it's about. It's not "ONLY US," it's "US TOO!" I find that many people don't understand this or choose not to for their own repugnant reasons.
To reiterate, we need to look at racism less rigidly and understand that even implicit biases can have a profound effect on others, especially when it's so large-scale. It can be as simple as employers subconsciously rejecting "minority-sounding" names on a resume or as dangerous as people/cops being more trigger happy when the dark skin they see triggers their subconscious racism. These things disproportionately affect minorities, and they are indeed racist—just not the stereotypical explicit type. This is why education and pushing back against all forms of racist beliefs are so crucial.
People like to say we should be "color blind" because there's only one race (human), and that's a nice sentiment, but it's not the reality we live in where people do get separated and treated differently for things that are out of their control and should have no bearing. Just because being outwardly racist is much less common now than in the "good ol' days," it doesn't mean we're in some post-racial world. The outward racists have simply learned to dog whistle and hide it better, even through policy. It's often this quiet racism and the subconscious form that are more insidious, though we can certainly do more to make people aware of their biases vis-à-vis the latter.
Last edited by Antischism; 04-05-2016 at 08:05 AM.
White supremacy, Black lives matter.....
All a bunch of BS promoted and nurtured by the MSM to keep the plebes infighting..
Much wiser to focus on why 'they' are promoting strife than to engage in it.......
I actually think the "Black Lives Matter" movement is pretty important since it's exposing and attempting to tackle police injustice which is absolutely a big issue. What some individuals who adopt the banner do or how it's presented in the media/all the in-fighting is trivial in relation to making people aware of the corrupt police system and how they abuse their state-granted power. It may seem like things are getting worse regarding police brutality and how above the law they are, but that's only because we have the technology now to see it. You can only imagine what was going on when things weren't as transparent.
Whites are subject to police abuse too.
The idea that blacks are somehow oppressed to a greater degree or that their oppression deserves more attention because they're black is nuts.
More manipulation, don't fall for it.
While I'm typing, browns, reds and yellows are oppressed too.
Blacks aren't special.
Of course, but I don't agree with you that minorities aren't disproportionately targeted. Stop and frisk laws alone refute your claim. This doesn't even address implicit biases.
Here's a good article that cites interesting studies to back up what I've said.
For example:
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/29/26/8525.full
This shows how in-group/out-group biases can work and helps explain the lack of empathy.The study found that people who showed more implicit preferences for faces of their own race also showed less reactivity to pain in someone from another race
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...53811915005261
To dismiss these biases and their effects and say minorities aren't being disproportionately affected flies in the face of all evidence. This, for example, might explain why cops are more likely to target, assault, and shoot minorities disproportionately. Even minorities can be affected by these implicit racial biases.When white test subjects were primed with photos of five-year-old black boys, they were far more likely to mistake objects such as toys for guns – or even to see guns when there were none
Last edited by Antischism; 04-05-2016 at 05:12 AM.
"Disproportionately targeted", "oppressed to a greater degree", are not synonymous..
See my edit. They're both disproportionately targeted and oppressed to a greater degree. That doesn't mean that white people aren't also subjected the the state's odiousness, and I get the sense that you feel poor white people are being forgotten, but that would be pretty selfish. Why does the attention have to always be on white people? Where are the large demonstrations by white people against police brutality nationwide? Even still, the "Black Lives Matter" protests pushing back against police injustice are also a net benefit to whites, so I don't understand why a white person would be against it, unless they want to side with the police state.
Last edited by Antischism; 04-05-2016 at 05:28 AM.
Has anyone ever called that "racist?"
Stop believing stupid things
Yep!
It was actually only 100,006.
Last edited by Ronin Truth; 04-05-2016 at 08:09 AM.
Posting Permissions
Connect With Us